The Conservative Party

Henkeman said:
Except that you can apply the same thing to the other side. Corbyn has never done a real job in his life, he's hardly about the common people. Blair went to public school and had nothing to do with the ordinary working man. I can recall Michael Howard telling him that this grammar school boy wasn't going to take lectures from that public schoolboy.

The assumption that being Tory equals toffs is drivel. The background of the two main parties is not that dissimilar. And what happens? David Davis gets decried as a rich old white man by the left, apparently oblivious of his background.

Of the four senior offices of state, three of them are held by state school educated people. Want to compare that to their equivalents in the Labour Party? Actually it's four out of four. That is, four public school educated politicians.

So no one is going to accept being lectured on behalf of the Labour Party as though they are in touch with the working man. They are silver spooned career politicians who have done fuck all else in their lives.
Click to expand...

why do you vote against your own self interest?
 
Henkeman said:
I've been perfectly civil to you. Do me the courtesy of the same.
Click to expand...

Then reply to the post.

Here's the thing, I draw your attention to the fact that Thatcher was the first post war Prime Minister not involved in either the 1st or 2nd World War and therefore never served with the "common folk" in a national endeavour, such moments bind people together so that afterwards it's difficult to shaft them.

You bang on about....
Corbyn has never done a real job in his life, he's hardly about the common people
Click to expand...

Apart from the two not being remotely related, I know people who've had "proper jobs" and are complete shits, happy to shaft little old ladies and fluffy kittens.

More to the point, your reply was not related to my post in any meaningful way.
 
blueinsa said:
speamy-an-uncomfortable-truth-and-be-labeled-a-bad-guy-15229160.png
Click to expand...

Class envy is what the class obsessed believes drives those they hate.
 
The perfect fumble said:
Then reply to the post.

Here's the thing, I draw your attention to the fact that Thatcher was the first post war Prime Minister not involved in either the 1st or 2nd World War and therefore never served with the "common folk" in a national endeavour, such moments bind people together so that afterwards it's difficult to shaft them.

You bang on about....


Apart from the two not being remotely related, I know people who've had "proper jobs" and are complete shits, happy to shaft little old ladies and fluffy kittens.

More to the point, your reply was not related to my post in any meaningful way.
Click to expand...

Because it isn't particularly relevant. The passage of time means that all the generation who fought in the wars were passing. What else do you expect? It doesn't mean any more than saying Tony Blair was the first Prime Minister who didn't remember the empire.

Your point was about the common folk, which I answered. You might not want to agree, and you don't have to, but it was answered.
 
Henkeman said:
Because it isn't particularly relevant. The passage of time means that all the generation who fought in the wars were passing. What else do you expect? It doesn't mean any more than saying Tony Blair was the first Prime Minister who didn't remember the empire.

Your point was about the common folk, which I answered. You might not want to agree, and you don't have to, but it was answered.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, genuine question and it's not prep for a sucker punch, I'm 61 years old, how old are you?
 
Henkeman said:
The trouble is that your nastiness is selective. Someone on the other side could equally point out that Labour's record of consistently crashing the economy and putting people out work, losing their homes and so forth in the name of spending is equally nasty, evil and wicked. The Tories are known as the nasty party to people who don't like them - I'd suggest Labour are known by some pretty vile terms by those who don't like them too. Now, you can pick on one element, and weirdly enough I don't disagree with you that it isn't good enough, but someone of a different view can pick on other things too. There are an awful lot of people still seething at what happened to them after the crash a decade ago who would be pretty determined to call Labour a lot worse than nasty.

You can pay your money and take your choice.
Click to expand...

People can call Labour the nasty party if they want but in defence of Labour (although I’m not sure why you keep bringing them up on the Tory thread unless the Tory criticism is a bit too close to the bone), they have a far better record in terms of homelessness and rough sleeping (as discussed) but also a better record generally helping the worse off in society too. So it’s not just ‘one thing’ as you put it hence why they are rarely called the nasty party so if people are being selective, it is probably for a reason. As to the insinuation that Labour crashed the global economy, well that really is partisan bollocks. I would say that even 99% of the Conservative Party don’t believe that.
 
Fame Monster said:
People can call Labour the nasty party if they want but in defence of Labour (although I’m not sure why you keep bringing them up on the Tory thread unless the Tory criticism is a bit too close to the bone), they have a far better record in terms of homelessness and rough sleeping (as discussed) but also a better record generally helping the worse off in society too. So it’s not just ‘one thing’ as you put it hence why they are rarely called the nasty party so if people are being selective, it is probably for a reason. As to the insinuation that Labour crashed the global economy, well that really is partisan bollocks. I would say that even 99% of the Conservative Party don’t believe that.
Click to expand...

It's a political discussion. By definition it involves both parties. If you can't cope with that, it's best not to participate. And once again, you have no idea whatever how I vote and have voted - don't assume.

And lastly, since I didn't actually say that they crashed the global economy, it's either that you misread and will correct yourself, or you're deliberately lying and creating a straw man argument. I'm sure it's the former.
 
Henkeman said:
It's a political discussion. By definition it involves both parties. If you can't cope with that, it's best not to participate. And once again, you have no idea whatever how I vote and have voted - don't assume.

And lastly, since I didn't actually say that they crashed the global economy, it's either that you misread and will correct yourself, or you're deliberately lying and creating a straw man argument. I'm sure it's the former.
Click to expand...

‘Someone on the other side could equally point out that Labour's record of consistently crashing the economy...’

That’s what you wrote. You can redefine what you meant if you want but there is a definite insinuation that you’re blaming Labour for crashing the economy so there’s no straw man there. In fact, the only consistent logical fallacy on this topic is you constantly deflecting to Labour’s policies (amongst other things) as a defence to the Conservative Party’s record on homelessness.
 
Fame Monster said:
‘Someone on the other side could equally point out that Labour's record of consistently crashing the economy...’

That’s what you wrote. You can redefine what you meant if you want but there is a definite insinuation that you’re blaming Labour for crashing the economy so there’s no straw man there. In fact, the only consistent logical fallacy on this topic is you constantly deflecting to Labour’s policies (amongst other things) as a defence to the Conservative Party’s record on homelessness.
Click to expand...

I know what I wrote. And I know you also wrote

"As to the insinuation that Labour crashed the global economy," which is not what I said, and since you apparently stand by it, I can only conclude you are deliberately lying.

Don't be so childish.
 
Henkeman said:
You seriously can't see the difference between what you claimed and what I wrote? Jesus.
Click to expand...

You stated someone might blame Labour for consistently crashing the economy. Which economic crash are you referring to? Or are you saying that someone who’s a complete idiot might say that given the fact that the vast majority of economic crashes have occurred under Tory governments?
 
Fame Monster said:
You stated someone might blame Labour for consistently crashing the economy. Which economic crash are you referring to? Or are you saying that someone who’s a complete idiot might say that given the fact that the vast majority of economic crashes have occurred under Tory governments?
Click to expand...

Ok, I'm done with you. First you lie and make up a quote (hint: global), and then when you get called out on it you have a strop. Some people on this thread can debate. You aren't one of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top