Rachel Reeves

[Eric Cartman]

Re: Rachel Reeves

I'm not sure your example really backs your point up and you didn't seem to take from it the thrust of what I was saying. From the first two pages of the same thread:

"This bunch really are the dregs of society." - Ninian Opinion

"Tosspots" -Sludge

"Tosspots" - Dorcus

"Parasite" - Ninian Opinion

"Pack of miscreants" - Claude Blue

"Duplicitous tosspots - AZ City

Note how common the insults are plural; using one person to damn a group of people. And note how abusive they are, which certainly included calls to resign.

There is no comparison with people's comments on Rachel Reeves, and as I say..if it was a story about a Tory chancellor lying about their role at the Bank of England we would be seeing the exact same language as above

Yep I agree, people act differently depending on the party. In a sense, it's justified as we saw politics descend into an episode of EastEnders under the last government with precedent basically going out the window and ministerial standards ripped up. The weekly scandal felt like 'here we go again'.

But my point is pretty simple, you like to call people out for overt political bias, but comparing these two threads and many other examples, you consistently do exactly what you are calling others out for. On the second page you throw out the completely committal 'any politician who does xyz..' line, it's like you are a politician yourself.

And addressing the part about me missing the point, that thread proves my point pretty perfectly because you jumped in that thread and tried the direct the discussion to anything other than Zahawi's tax affairs.

[JamesWales]

Re: Rachel Reeves

Yep I agree, people act differently depending on the party. In a sense, it's justified as we saw politics descend into an episode of EastEnders under the last government with precedent basically going out the window and ministerial standards ripped up. The weekly scandal felt like 'here we go again'.

But my point is pretty simple, you like to call people out for overt political bias, but comparing these two threads and many other examples, you consistently do exactly what you are calling others out for. On the second page you throw out the completely committal 'any politician who does xyz..' line, it's like you are a politician yourself.

And addressing the part about me missing the point, that thread proves my point pretty perfectly because you jumped in that thread and tried the direct the discussion to anything other than Zahawi's tax affairs.

Sure, everyone has a degree of confirmation bias, but as you will see, my criticism there is in how people speak, which basically wasn't about Nadhim Zahawi at all, he was just a proxy for the kind of language that I have examples of, and which make a sensible discission on that topic impossible.

The same cannot be said in this thread. For Stevos assertion to be true, then we would be seeing right-wing people on here calling Labour tosspots, parasites, miscreants etc. And we don't see that. We do regularly read about vermin and scum and the like and it's nearly always in one direction.

It's the language I objected to on that Nadhim Zahawi thread.

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Re: Rachel Reeves

Yep I agree, people act differently depending on the party. In a sense, it's justified as we saw politics descend into an episode of EastEnders under the last government with precedent basically going out the window and ministerial standards ripped up. The weekly scandal felt like 'here we go again'.

But my point is pretty simple, you like to call people out for overt political bias, but comparing these two threads and many other examples, you consistently do exactly what you are calling others out for. On the second page you throw out the completely committal 'any politician who does xyz..' line, it's like you are a politician yourself.

And addressing the part about me missing the point, that thread proves my point pretty perfectly because you jumped in that thread and tried the direct the discussion to anything other than Zahawi's tax affairs.

You are wasting your time , he's just going to say yeah but no but yeah and refuse to accept he's a hypocrite

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Re: Rachel Reeves

Sure, everyone has a degree of confirmation bias, but as you will see, my criticism there is in how people speak, which basically wasn't about Nadhim Zahawi at all, he was just a proxy for the kind of language that I have examples of, and which make a sensible discission on that topic impossible.

The same cannot be said in this thread. For Stevos assertion to be true, then we would be seeing right-wing people on here calling Labour tosspots, parasites, miscreants etc. And we don't see that. We do regularly read about vermin and scum and the like and it's nearly always in one direction.

It's the language I objected to on that Nadhim Zahawi thread.

And here he is , twisting and squirming , yeah but no but yeah etc etc

Groundhog day

Ad infinitum

In some way I am glad politics is now a lot more regimented and tge reform idiots are out in the open

It's pointless debating with dyed in the wool Tories who pretend to be open minded and fluid in their voting

But reform supporters ?

Absolutely deluded , best to let them argue with each other on gb news

Maybe give them their own immigration night special on question time once a month

A sort of relaxation or detox massage therapy for them

Possibly free on the nhs

[JamesWales]

Re: Rachel Reeves

You are wasting your time , he's just going to say yeah but no but yeah and refuse to accept he's a hypocrite

It is a waste of time. Because I was criticising the kind of language used and the fact it was plural and thus aimed at an entire group, and not the individual in question and I was responding to Stevo's point.

[JamesWales]

Re: Rachel Reeves

And here he is , twisting and squirming , yeah but no but yeah etc etc

Groundhog day

Ad infinitum

In some way I am glad politics is now a lot more regimented and tge reform idiots are out in the open

It's pointless debating with dyed in the wool Tories who pretend to be open minded and fluid in their voting

But reform supporters ?

Absolutely deluded , best to let them argue with each other on gb news

Maybe give them their own immigration night special on question time once a month

A sort of relaxation or detox massage therapy for them

Possibly free on the nhs

Please try reading threads before vomiting on them Sludge.

I was pretty clear in illustrating the inconsistency between how people respond to a Tory chancellor scandal and a Labour one.

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Re: Rachel Reeves

It is a waste of time. Because I was criticising the kind of language used and the fact it was plural and thus aimed at an entire group, and not the individual in question and I was responding to Stevo's point.

On and on he goes , never admitting defeat

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Re: Rachel Reeves

Please try reading threads before vomiting on them Sludge.

I was pretty clear in illustrating the inconsistency between how people respond to a Tory chancellor scandal and a Labour one.

Slippery eel

You will be like this on your deathbed

This why it's a waste of time