Rachel Reeves

I'm not usually the one to cry 'misogyny' but it feels pretty unfair/dismissive to be suggesting she isn't qualified for a post that was occupied for 6 years by Osborne, who scraped a 2:1 in history after his parents spent about what a house costs on his education.

As for criticising her for expenses in a private sector job, I don't think it's relevant or uncommon. Lying on her linkedin? Did she also photograph herself in front of someone else's lambo for her tinder profile as well?

I don't think she is radical or brave enough economically to fix anything but this is a hit piece and the same people getting excited about this nothingburger spent the last 14 years telling anyone who raised dirt on a Tory to play the ball not the man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

I'm not usually the one to cry 'misogyny' but it feels pretty unfair/dismissive to be suggesting she isn't qualified for a post that was occupied for 6 years by Osborne, who scraped a 2:1 in history after his parents spent about what a house costs on his education.

As for criticising her for expenses in a private sector job, I don't think it's relevant or uncommon. Lying on her linkedin? Did she also photograph herself in front of someone else's lambo for her tinder profile as well?

I don't think she is radical or brave enough economically to fix anything but this is a hit piece and the same people getting excited about this nothingburger spent the last 14 years telling anyone who raised dirt on a Tory to play the ball not the man.

---

I think it's definitely amusing to see the right wing tory types shout " sleaze " regarding RR

The problem though is Starmer talked big about 14 years of this sort of thing and it's come back to slap him in the face

I think both he and she are very poor as the strike force for a new government and I want to see the back of them to prevent a horror of a tory or reform tory government at the next election

That being said if she's done nothing wrong then there is no reason to see her dropped just because she seems cack handed , like her boss

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

I too was shocked to check her linkedin, she has absolutely no towel folding experience, how can she possibly be qualified to be UK chancellor?

---

Not into money laundering then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

I'm not usually the one to cry 'misogyny' but it feels pretty unfair/dismissive to be suggesting she isn't qualified for a post that was occupied for 6 years by Osborne, who scraped a 2:1 in history after his parents spent about what a house costs on his education.

As for criticising her for expenses in a private sector job, I don't think it's relevant or uncommon. Lying on her linkedin? Did she also photograph herself in front of someone else's lambo for her tinder profile as well?

I don't think she is radical or brave enough economically to fix anything but this is a hit piece and the same people getting excited about this nothingburger spent the last 14 years telling anyone who raised dirt on a Tory to play the ball not the man.

---

I bet you're views were different when Boris had a Sausage roll on the way to his flat?

But you are correct storm in a teacup. But after all the fuss over the last few years from Boris onwards it will now continue forever, and people will lose their jobs over trivial issues, like calling someone an oaf on WhatsApp on a private chat with their mates :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by North Cardiff Blue

I bet you're views were different when Boris had a Sausage roll on the way to his flat?

But you are correct storm in a teacup. But after all the fuss over the last few years from Boris onwards it will now continue forever, and people will lose their jobs over trivial issues, like calling someone an oaf on WhatsApp on a private chat with their mates :hehe:

---

I think if the government are going to bring in laws and then prosecute people for breaking them, they should make really sure they follow them themselves. You can keep saying sausage roll to minimise it if you like but that is what the Boris/Number 10 scandal was really about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by North Cardiff Blue

I bet you're views were different when Boris had a Sausage roll on the way to his flat?

But you are correct storm in a teacup. But after all the fuss over the last few years from Boris onwards it will now continue forever, and people will lose their jobs over trivial issues, like calling someone an oaf on WhatsApp on a private chat with their mates :hehe:

---

Didn't Boris Johnston get the heave-ho because he appointed Chris Pincher s a chief whip despite knowing that he was accused of groping men?

If anything the Johnson tory government had a much higher degree of brass neck than any of their predecessors - things that would have caused a resignation in the past were just ignored routinely by the that government.

I'm no fan of Reeves anyway, particularly after the unscrupulous slander job her and her ilk performed on Jeremy!

It's seems that all the solid radical lefties on here don't like their representative party 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heathblue

It's seems that all the solid radical lefties on here don't like their representative party 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣.

---

It's not our representative party that's why! It's been foisted on us by a right wing cabal! Very clever mind, how they manage to manipulate democracy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heathblue

It's seems that all the solid radical lefties on here don't like their representative party 藍藍藍藍藍.

---

Implosion demolitions have always been fun to watch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heathblue

It's seems that all the solid radical lefties on here don't like their representative party ����������.

---

still vastly preferable to the Tories or reform

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

still vastly preferable to the Tories or reform

---

Just out of interest, how are things better now than under the Tories? And I do understand they deserved to be kicked out, but im not sure anything has improved and some things have got worse,no?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heathblue

It's seems that all the solid radical lefties on here don't like their representative party ����������.

---

That’s the difference though between the left and right on this message board. The lefties are happy to call out anyone when they see wrong but the right-wingers seems to defend their political heroes no matter what they do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevo

That’s the difference though between the left and right on this message board. The lefties are happy to call out anyone when they see wrong but the right-wingers seems to defend their political heroes no matter what they do.

---

I think the biggest difference is that some will only like or dislike something based on who the story is associated with.

A Tory Chancellor lying about working for the Bank of England would absolutely be a raging thread on here. Obama talking about peace in Ukraine would also be a very different story.

That's my observation anyway!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

I think the biggest difference is that some will only like or dislike something based on who the story is associated with.

A Tory Chancellor lying about working for the Bank of England would absolutely be a raging thread on here. Obama talking about peace in Ukraine would also be a very different story.

That's my observation anyway!

---

It would be a potentially valid observation if your posting history wasn't littered with examples of you deflecting and whatabouting every time a new Tory scandal hit during their time in government.

Here is one about another former chancellor, slightly worse than reeves stretching the truth on social media imo, but maybe not in your estimation..

https://www.ccmb.co.uk/showthread.ph...ghlight=Zahawi

The evidence seems to suggest:

Tory scandal - deflect, 'they are all at it'

Labour scandal - 'why would she lie, does she think lying as the chancellor is okay??'

People in glass houses and all that. Also just to preempt your 'its flattering that you would trawl through my post history teehee' response, it's like shooting fish in a barrel, took about 2 mins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

It would be a potentially valid observation if your posting history wasn't littered with examples of you deflecting and whatabouting every time a new Tory scandal hit during their time in government.

Here is one about another former chancellor, slightly worse than reeves stretching the truth on social media imo, but maybe not in your estimation..

https://www.ccmb.co.uk/showthread.ph...ghlight=Zahawi

The evidence seems to suggest:

Tory scandal - deflect, 'they are all at it'

Labour scandal - 'why would she lie, does she think lying as the chancellor is okay??'

People in glass houses and all that. Also just to preempt your 'its flattering that you would trawl through my post history teehee' response, it's like shooting fish in a barrel, took about 2 mins.

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

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

---

It's incredibly surprising to see a right wing reform voter like you having a history of defending , making excuses for and propping up ......right wing politicians? 🤔

This has all come as an incredible shock 😲

What's happened ? !

It's so unlike you as I thought you were always so moderate , middle of the road ?

But all along ....

Well I never

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taunton Blue Genie

Not into money laundering then.

---

That's very sharp

She needs to pledge and provide some conditioner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

It's incredibly surprising to see a right wing reform voter like you having a history of defending , making excuses for and propping up ......right wing politicians? 🤔

This has all come as an incredible shock 😲

What's happened ? !

It's so unlike you as I thought you were always so moderate , middle of the road ?

But all along ....

Well I never

---

You should try reading threads before you post on them!

I did look for another thread to consider the way different people speak about different parties and that was the one where you said Esther Mcvey should be shot. Definitely one of the good guys!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

You should try reading threads before you post on them!

I did look for another thread to consider the way different people speak about different parties and that was the one where you said Esther Mcvey should be shot. Definitely one of the good guys!

---

Yes , or sent to Greenland

Dreadful woman

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

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.