The most inept political interview ever?
Posted by: dayjay on 02 May 2017
Just watched an interview with Dianne Abbott re Labour's policing pledge which was without doubt the most incompetent performance I have ever seen from a senior politician. She started off saying that the 10,000 new officers they are proposing would cost £300,000, that's £30 a year which seems pretty poor for all that stress, then altered it to £80 million which is all of £8k per year. She also denied figures she's just quoted and bumbled her way through the whole interview. This is the lady who would be Home Secretary is Labour won. I can only assume that the Labour Party has either been infiltrated by Tory stooges or that they are deliberately trying to lose so that they can rebrand as the Corbyn communist party of Britain. We are truly all doomed.
SKDriver posted:fatcat posted:It doesn’t really show Labours financial ineptness, they knew how much it would cost, all that happened was somebody forgot the figures.
David Davis is about to give a speech, that’ll be a laugh. I wonder if he’ll explain why last week we owed the EU 50 billion, but since May met Juncker the bills gone up to 100 billion.
Now that that is inept.
Just listened to Angela Raynor being interviewed on 5Live...
She refused to cost Labours' education promises because she didn't know how much they were going to cost; or that Jeremy Corbin had apparently promised a proportion of the £2-3bn extra supposedly raised from capital gains tax towards education.
I'm not a labour supporter but I do feel that we need a strong alternative to the conservatives. Unfortunately Labour is not that since they are completely inept when it comes to any financial realism or planning. One arm literally doesn't know what the other is doing.
FACT
Still not enough to get Dianne Abbot a degree in Mathematics.
SKDriver posted:Just listened to Angela Raynor being interviewed on 5Live...
She refused to cost Labours' education promises because she didn't know how much they were going to cost; or that Jeremy Corbin had apparently promised a proportion of the £2-3bn extra supposedly raised from capital gains tax towards education.
I'm not a labour supporter but I do feel that we need a strong alternative to the conservatives. Unfortunately Labour is not that since they are completely inept when it comes to any financial realism or planning. One arm literally doesn't know what the other is doing.
FACT
The FACT is though that Conservatives don't know what they are doing either ... they are just better at pulling the wool over your eyes and performing a magic trick.
The FACT is that austerity has not reduced the national debt. It has taken money away from the poorest in society while also reducing the tax burden of the richest in society. Its failed to keep up with the requirements of the NHS. Its failed to offer improvement in education. Its failed to reduce the inequities between rich and poor. Its failed to reduce the housing crisis.
The FACT is that the Tories have failed.
Yet people will vote for them because Labour *might* be worse!
Davis gave his speech, stood in front of poster below.
The Tories have really gone for the jugular; Jeremy must be reeling, FROM LAUGHTER.
“No bombs for our army”, since when have the army been in the business of dropping bombs, don’t we have an air force for that.
“More debt higher taxes”. The fact this text is positioned on the bomb gives the message BOMBS = MORE DEBT HIGHER TAXES.
The overall message is Labour aren’t going to waste taxpayers money buying bombs. If Davis and Hammond weren’t stood in front of it you’d probable think it was a labour poster.
Eloise posted:The FACT is that austerity has not reduced the national debt. It has taken money away from the poorest in society while also reducing the tax burden of the richest in society. Its failed to keep up with the requirements of the NHS. Its failed to offer improvement in education. Its failed to reduce the inequities between rich and poor. Its failed to reduce the housing crisis.
The FACT is that the Tories have failed.
Yet people will vote for them because Labour *might* be worse!
Your right on one thing Eloise, Labour WOULD BE much, much worse! Just watching the oleaginous Barry Gardiner being crucified by Andrew Neil on The daily Politics and he, Barry Gardiner, is considered the acceptable face of Labour.
fatcat posted:Davis gave his speech, stood in front of poster below.
The Tories have really gone for the jugular; Jeremy must be reeling, FROM LAUGHTER.
“No bombs for our army”, since when have the army been in the business of dropping bombs, don’t we have an air force for that.
“More debt higher taxes”. The fact this text is positioned on the bomb gives the message BOMBS = MORE DEBT HIGHER TAXES.
The overall message is Labour aren’t going to waste taxpayers money buying bombs. If Davis and Hammond weren’t stood in front of it you’d probable think it was a labour poster.
Were the Tories facing in the right direction when making their speech, unlike Comrade Corbyn's first attempt?
Eloise posted:SKDriver posted:Just listened to Angela Raynor being interviewed on 5Live...
She refused to cost Labours' education promises because she didn't know how much they were going to cost; or that Jeremy Corbin had apparently promised a proportion of the £2-3bn extra supposedly raised from capital gains tax towards education.
I'm not a labour supporter but I do feel that we need a strong alternative to the conservatives. Unfortunately Labour is not that since they are completely inept when it comes to any financial realism or planning. One arm literally doesn't know what the other is doing.
FACT
The FACT is though that Conservatives don't know what they are doing either ... they are just better at pulling the wool over your eyes and performing a magic trick.
The FACT is that austerity has not reduced the national debt. It has taken money away from the poorest in society while also reducing the tax burden of the richest in society. Its failed to keep up with the requirements of the NHS. Its failed to offer improvement in education. Its failed to reduce the inequities between rich and poor. Its failed to reduce the housing crisis.
The FACT is that the Tories have failed.
Yet people will vote for them because Labour *might* be worse!
Taking the political argument away for minute; I'm always interested when the NHS funding argument rears its head.
With an ageing demographic requiring increasingly expensive drugs and treatments, just how much SHOULD we pay for our NHS? More importantly, when that money isn't enough; demand always outstrips supply in the NHS, how much extra tax are YOU prepared to pay and what other services are you prepared to see cut in order to fund the bottomless pit that is our health service?
NO politician will ever ask these questions; but unfortunately these are unpalatable truths.
Eloise posted:SKDriver posted:Just listened to Angela Raynor being interviewed on 5Live...
She refused to cost Labours' education promises because she didn't know how much they were going to cost; or that Jeremy Corbin had apparently promised a proportion of the £2-3bn extra supposedly raised from capital gains tax towards education.
I'm not a labour supporter but I do feel that we need a strong alternative to the conservatives. Unfortunately Labour is not that since they are completely inept when it comes to any financial realism or planning. One arm literally doesn't know what the other is doing.
FACT
The FACT is though that Conservatives don't know what they are doing either ... they are just better at pulling the wool over your eyes and performing a magic trick.
The FACT is that austerity has not reduced the national debt. It has taken money away from the poorest in society while also reducing the tax burden of the richest in society. Its failed to keep up with the requirements of the NHS. Its failed to offer improvement in education. Its failed to reduce the inequities between rich and poor. Its failed to reduce the housing crisis.
The FACT is that the Tories have failed.
Yet people will vote for them because Labour *might* be worse!
The only fact is that LOLabour are a total joke. They will never win an election with the terrorist lovers Corbyn and MaoDonnell running the show. Listening to that buffoon Abbott make a complete horlicks of a simple interview I almost felt sorry for her. However this is the shadow Home Secretary. Let that sink in for a minute. People will vote for the Conservatives not because LOLabour might be worse, that much is a given. They will vote for them because the alternatives are unelectable in a sane world.
I considered starting another thread called "The most blatantly and shamelessly opportunistic political speech ever?" to describe Theresa May's, but decided to post here instead.
It is very obviously in both Theresa May's and the Conservative party's interests, but hardly in the interests of the British people to ramp up conflict with the EU in advance of the forthcoming Brexit negotiations. A very clear example of May putting her own and her parties interests before the interests of the electorate, and hardly the posturing position you would expect to be adopted by someone who claimed originally to be in favour of remaining in the EU.
The saddest thing about Theresa May's posturing is that it is likely to win her quite a few votes. Not quite on the scale of Margaret Thatcher and the General Belgrano, but quite effective nonetheless.
Hmack posted:I considered starting another thread called "The most blatantly and shamelessly opportunistic political speech ever?" to describe Theresa May's, but decided to post here instead.
It is very obviously in both Theresa May's and the Conservative party's interests, but hardly in the interests of the British people to ramp up conflict with the EU in advance of the forthcoming Brexit negotiations. A very clear example of May putting her own and her parties interests before the interests of the electorate, and hardly the posturing position you would expect to be adopted by someone who claimed originally to be in favour of remaining in the EU.
The saddest thing about Theresa May's posturing is that it is likely to win her quite a few votes. Not quite on the scale of Margaret Thatcher and the General Belgrano, but quite effective nonetheless.
Yep, I hope Theresa May gets plenty votes for her alleged hardline stance against the EU. If I leave any club anywhere I may have to give a month or so notice of my departure, but I do not expect my exit to be blackballed or charged by the remaining members. I really do understand Remainers still smarting (nah, I don't really) about losing but it's done and we might as well get out as fast and, if necessary, as hard as possible. If countries want to trade with us then, hey, no problem, if not, then best to find that out soon.
The EU is a bureaucratic, political club with its own existence, expansion and wellbeing its primary concerns. Anything else is hugely secondary. The EEC was what we joined, the EU is its delinquent, illegitimate offspring.
andarkian posted:Yep, I hope Theresa May gets plenty votes for her alleged hardline stance against the EU. If I leave any club anywhere I may have to give a month or so notice of my departure, but I do not expect my exit to be blackballed or charged by the remaining members. I really do understand Remainers still smarting (nah, I don't really) about losing but it's done and we might as well get out as fast and, if necessary, as hard as possible. If countries want to trade with us then, hey, no problem, if not, then best to find that out soon.
The EU is a bureaucratic, political club with its own existence, expansion and wellbeing its primary concerns. Anything else is hugely secondary. The EEC was what we joined, the EU is its delinquent, illegitimate offspring.
The EU is NOT a club. Theresa May is not playing poker. There are no cards!
Leaving the EU is not the same as leading a club. It's more akin to you agreeing to a HP agreement and after six months you decide you don't want the car. You can't just hand the car back and expect no further payments. And you definitely can't stop paying and expect the keep the car!
The EU is a international organisation with its own rules and laws which the UK (government) agreed to be part of without any cohersion. Therefore to leave that organisation requires the UK to stick to the agreements it made.
Eloise but it's done and we might as well get out as fast and, if necessary, as hard as possible. If countries want to trade with us then, hey, no problem, if. They EEC was what we joined, the EU is its delinquent, illegitimate offspring.The EU is NOT a club. Theresa May is not playing poker. There are no cards!
Leaving the EU is not the same as leading a club. It's more akin to you agreeing to a HP agreement and after six months you decide you don't want the car. You can't just hand the car back and expect no further payments. And you definitely can't stop paying and expect the keep the car!
The EU is a international organisation with its own rules and laws which the UK (government) agreed to be part of without any cohersion. Therefore to leave that organisation requires the UK to stick to the agreements it made.
The whole HP car leasing scam has the smell of PPI claims about it, but that's for another argument.
I can't remember ever voting for signing any lease type agreement with the EU that would give them, the EU, the right to extort any more money from the UK than they have already thieved.
I truly cannot believe that Remainers care more for everyone in the EU than the nationals of their own country. Everyone elses' perceived entitlement, justified or otherwise, trumps those of UK citizens.
Sadly Andarkian there are far too many idiots baying for May's blood and are blinded by their prejudice of the Tories that they will not be satisfied unless and until the UK balls up the negotiations so that they can stand back with their arms folded with a great big smirk across their moronic faces and say "I told you so"! Cutting their noses off to spite theirs and everyone elses faces. Some people would rather accept Junckers word as to what was said at the meeting last week than anything said by the Government. Juncker of all people. A drunkard and buffoon.
Andarkan posted:
"I can't remember ever voting for signing any lease type agreement with the EU that would give them, the EU, the right to extort any more money from the UK than they have already thieved."
What an utterly ridiculous claim/statement! Please outline what you believe that the EU has"already thieved" from the UK, or is your choice of words just another convenient way of venting your intolerance of anything remotely associated with the EU?
Your assertion that 'Remainers' care more for everyone in the EU than the nationals of our own country is equally ridiculous and blatantly untrue. I think you will find that most remainers simply felt that it was in the interests of the UK and UK Nationals for us to remain in the EU. Most of us now want to make sure that the exit from the EU is as painless as possible (for everyone on both sides of the process), and in the interests of everyone in the UK, not just in the interests of the political and wealthy elite at the helm of Theresa May's Tory party.
And by the way, what on earth has HP Car Leasing (or as you put it "The whole HP leasing scam" ) got to do with PPI, and what makes you believe that car leasing is a scam anyway? Leasing a car is not something I have chosen to do personally, but I am at a loss as to how it could be construed to be a scam.
andarkian posted:EloiseThe EU is NOT a club. Theresa May is not playing poker. There are no cards!
Leaving the EU is not the same as lea[v]ing a club. It's more akin to you agreeing to a HP agreement and after six months you decide you don't want the car. You can't just hand the car back and expect no further payments. And you definitely can't stop paying and expect the keep the car!
The EU is a international organisation with its own rules and laws which the UK (government) agreed to be part of without any cohersion. Therefore to leave that organisation requires the UK to stick to the agreements it made.
The whole HP car leasing scam has the smell of PPI claims about it, but that's for another argument.
You really have never bought a car on HP (which is different from leasing)? Anyway it was an analogy!
I can't remember ever voting for signing any lease type agreement with the EU that would give them, the EU, the right to extort any more money from the UK than they have already thieved.
I'm ignoring your devisive language ... but yes you did, at every general election you (or specifically the UK population as a whole) voted for a governement to make decisions internationally on your behalf. You may not agree with them but you live in a representative democracy and that's how it works.
I truly cannot believe that Remainers care more for everyone in the EU than the nationals of their own country. Everyone elses' perceived entitlement, justified or otherwise, trumps those of UK citizens.
No, the rule of law and international agreements trump everything. Leaving the EU (as "project fear") repeatedly told you has consequences. Despite that you and just over 50% of those who voted in the referendum voted to leave the EU and the government are carrying that out damn the consequences. Now the consequences may be paying the Brexit bill to enable continued good relationships with and preferential trade with the EU, or it may be leaving hard and reverting to WTO trading relationship and that will have consequences too. So get your head out the sand and realise that... it's not them vs us, it's about what is best for the UK's ongoing relationship with the rest of Europe and with the world - or do you really want to pull up the drawbridge?
Going back to your earlier post you said "If I leave any club anywhere I may have to give a month or so notice of my departure, but I do not expect my exit to be blackballed or charged by the remaining members.". You are correct that if you leave the club (and remember I pointed out that the EU is not a "club") you wouldn't expect to be blackballed. That's true but equally you would expect to use the facilities! You would no longer be on the list of the committees prefered suppliers. No longer able to ring the chairman at 8pm and ask a favour.
Hmack posted:Andarkan posted:
"I can't remember ever voting for signing any lease type agreement with the EU that would give them, the EU, the right to extort any more money from the UK than they have already thieved."
What an utterly ridiculous claim/statement! Please outline what you believe that the EU has"already thieved" from the UK, or is your choice of words just another convenient way of venting your intolerance of anything remotely associated with the EU?
Your assertion that 'Remainers' care more for everyone in the EU than the nationals of our own country is equally ridiculous and blatantly untrue. I think you will find that most remainers simply felt that it was in the interests of the UK and UK Nationals for us to remain in the EU. Most of us now want to make sure that the exit from the EU is as painless as possible (for everyone on both sides of the process), and in the interests of everyone in the UK, not just in the interests of the political and wealthy elite at the helm of Theresa May's Tory party.
And by the way, what on earth has HP Car Leasing (or as you put it "The whole HP leasing scam" ) got to do with PPI, and what makes you believe that car leasing is a scam anyway? Leasing a car is not something I have chosen to do personally, but I am at a loss as to how it could be construed to be a scam.
Congratulations on tonight's most pompous piece of work so far. The EU thieves at least £8 billion per annum from this bankrupt country. You Remainers only care about Remaining and will take anyone and everyone else's interests to be superior to those of the British.
Your perception that only Remainers can ensure a 'decent' Brexit is hilarious if you weren't actually being serious. Just in case you did not understand the makeup of the Leave vote, I think you will find that it was not exclusive to the 'elite' of the Tory Party or perceived to be only of benefit to them; there are simply not enough of them no matter what you believe. If we have to leave as simply any other country in the World then it will still be better than being chained to the sclerotic, bureaucratic, extortionate monster that is the EU, which was definitely not what we agreed to when we joined the EEC. The smoke and mirrors deception of Major, Brown and Blair that got us to the current situation is again another argument itself.
The Times et al are already flagging up the risks entailed in the debt piling up under car leasing and are questioning its suitability and even legitimacy. PPI was never actually forced on anyone but the claims are still being paid by banks, the car HP schemes are now being looked at with the same potential outcome.
andarkian posted:The Times et al are already flagging up the risks entailed in the debt piling up under car leasing and are questioning its suitability and even legitimacy. PPI was never actually forced on anyone but the claims are still being paid by banks, the car HP schemes are now being looked at with the same potential outcome.
You mean the suggestion from the FCA that finance companies (which are different from leasing) should actually make sure that people can afford the finance. That's not the same as the whole scale investigation into PPI where people essentially were being forced on people as a condition of a loan, even when they were not even covered by the terms of the PPI cover.
Eloise posted:andarkian posted:The Times et al are already flagging up the risks entailed in the debt piling up under car leasing and are questioning its suitability and even legitimacy. PPI was never actually forced on anyone but the claims are still being paid by banks, the car HP schemes are now being looked at with the same potential outcome.
You mean the suggestion from the FCA that finance companies (which are different from leasing) should actually make sure that people can afford the finance. That's not the same as the whole scale investigation into PPI where people essentially were being forced on people as a condition of a loan, even when they were not even covered by the terms of the PPI cover.
I think your catch all is the word 'essentially'. I never had a PPI agreement forced on me and doubt in reality that anyone else did. The agreements being used to 'sell' cars are a hybrid between leasing and HP with potentially large end of term balloon payments. Still, it gets us off the subject of the venal EU. ��
Hmack posted:Andarkan posted:
"I can't remember ever voting for signing any lease type agreement with the EU that would give them, the EU, the right to extort any more money from the UK than they have already thieved."
What an utterly ridiculous claim/statement! Please outline what you believe that the EU has"already thieved" from the UK, or is your choice of words just another convenient way of venting your intolerance of anything remotely associated with the EU?
Your assertion that 'Remainers' care more for everyone in the EU than the nationals of our own country is equally ridiculous and blatantly untrue. I think you will find that most remainers simply felt that it was in the interests of the UK and UK Nationals for us to remain in the EU. Most of us now want to make sure that the exit from the EU is as painless as possible (for everyone on both sides of the process), and in the interests of everyone in the UK, not just in the interests of the political and wealthy elite at the helm of Theresa May's Tory party.
And by the way, what on earth has HP Car Leasing (or as you put it "The whole HP leasing scam" ) got to do with PPI, and what makes you believe that car leasing is a scam anyway? Leasing a car is not something I have chosen to do personally, but I am at a loss as to how it could be construed to be a scam.
Hmack, I think it's a loose reference to news today that most new cars are bought with some form of finance deal and that these deals were not fully explained to the buyer. Looks like there could be big payouts to hapless buyers ! Comparable to the PPI situation.
Andarkan posted:
A number of ludicrous and sweeping statements that bear no relation whatsoever to reality:
"You Remainers only care about Remaining and will take anyone and everyone else's interests to be superior to those of the British."
Do you actually really believe this? So, not only I, but my fellow 'Remain' campaigners by implication, including David Cameron, George Osborne and Stanley Johnson to name but a few, simply don't care about the interests of the British. I really don't think that you do believe this, despite the fact that you have repeated the accusation. It is simply a cheap way for you to vent your intolerance of all things associated with the EU. Perhaps I could state that your perception that Remainers only care about remaining and will take anyone and everyone else's interests to be superior to those of the British would be hilarious if you weren't actually being serious. But I can't state this, can I? That would be plagiarism, wouldn't it?
"Your perception that only Remainers can ensure a 'decent' Brexit is hilarious if you weren't actually being serious"
You are either not particularly astute (and I don't believe this to be the case for a minute), or you are deliberately misinterpreting my point about the political elite who are intent on negotiating our exit from the EU behind closed doors with little or no due governance of the end result. I am well aware (as I'm am sure are most others who voted to remain) that the 'Leave' campaign won because a significant number of people from the traditional left of centre demographic chose to vote to leave the EU. It was their right to do so, but whilst I do believe that Theresa May and the small group of Tories leading the Brexit negotiations will do so in their interests, and not in the interest of the British people as a whole, I certainly do not subscribe to a point of view that "only Remainers can ensure a 'decent' Brexit" . That is a figment of your imagination.
"The smoke and mirrors deception of Major, Brown and Blair that got us to the current situation is again another argument itself."
Yet another baseless and meaningless statement.
Finally, as you will see above, Don has explained to me the rather tenuous link between leasing cars and PPI in your post. Not so much about leasing per say, but the finance deals behind the purchase of new cars. Actually, I believe I did once purchase a car under an agreement of this type. However, when I did so, I was made well aware up front of the financial implications were I to return the car at the end of the lease period, or were I to decide to purchase the car at the end of the lease period. It was a win/win situation for me, and I certainly do not feel that I was scammed.
andarkian posted:I think your catch all is the word 'essentially'. I never had a PPI agreement forced on me and doubt in reality that anyone else did. The agreements being used to 'sell' cars are a hybrid between leasing and HP with potentially large end of term balloon payments. Still, it gets us off the subject of the venal EU. ��
Well bully for you you never has a PPI agreement forced on you ... but many people were. When its "take out PPI along with this loan or you don't get the loan" ... then yes it IS forced on you. As always it was those less able to pay who were taken advantage of. Those who were desperate and "only just managing".
My experience of finance for a large purchase (such as a car) is that you will get a much better deal if you want to get out of the finance when you approach the dealer / finance company with a smile and a kind word, than if you dump the car on the dealers forecourt and shout "I'M NOT PAYING ANYMORE". So again a good analogy to negotiating a complex future relationship with the EU.
Anyway, to bring the thread back on topic - as a bit of a connoisseur of car-crash interviews, Abbott's was riught up there with the best. However for me, the cream of the crop - in recent times at any rate - was Natalie Bennett's catastrophic interview - also with Nick "Fatty" Ferrari - at the time of the last GE. For sheer, bumbling, ill-briefed overload, it was the acme.
Kevin-W posted:Anyway, to bring the thread back on topic - as a bit of a connoisseur of car-crash interviews, Abbott's was riught up there with the best. However for me, the cream of the crop - in recent times at any rate - was Natalie Bennett's catastrophic interview - also with Nick "Fatty" Ferrari - at the time of the last GE. For sheer, bumbling, ill-briefed overload, it was the acme.
Yes, I was reminded of that catastrophe when cringing at Abbott. It's a close call as to which reaches the nadir for me. There's something about the way Abbott tries to exude confidence through the whole debacle that clinches it for me.
G
I heard the interview live and it left me, frankly, incredulous. The PLP will be so diminished at this rate that even they will be unable to bounce back after the GE. Although a life long conservative we do need an opposition with integrity to challenge TM if she gets it wrong.
That said, my perspective on recent events is that no deal is more likely now as the EU delegates can't keep their mouths shut. This leaves us and them with WTO tariffs. By exporting less we win the 'balance of tariffs ' do we not. Use this net win to subsidise our own exports to the EU.
Is there a flaw in this argument?
Stu
Yes that Natalie Bennett interview turned out as the end for her & probably the start of the demise of the Green party as I'm not expecting Caroline Lucas to retain Brighton Pav. & we will probably see them loose a lot of seats today (tomorrow).
I'm sure Diane Abbott will not be blamed for the final outcome in June, I'm not even sure Corbyn will get blamed by the grass roots party membership. However with 258 seats now, most are predicting they will loose 50, I'm predicting 70: question is will that kind of national car crash have Corbyn resigning.
Same question with UKIP, I'm expecting no seats for them & a lot of loses in the local/county elections.
Mike-B posted:Yes that Natalie Bennett interview turned out as the end for her & probably the start of the demise of the Green party as I'm not expecting Caroline Lucas to retain Brighton Pav. & we will probably see them loose a lot of seats today (tomorrow).
I'm sure Diane Abbott will not be blamed for the final outcome in June, I'm not even sure Corbyn will get blamed by the grass roots party membership. However with 258 seats now, most are predicting they will loose 50, I'm predicting 70: question is will that kind of national car crash have Corbyn resigning.
Same question with UKIP, I'm expecting no seats for them & a lot of loses in the local/county elections.
If there is any justice in the world I am hoping that Caroline Lucas does lose her seat. The politics of Brighton are quite strange so would not completely bank on that.
Elsewhere, I have predicted an 87 seat majority for the Conservatives. I'll stick to that.