Yes, and the element of hypocrisy when it comes from a party that is supposedly anti-racist. Everyone expects the Tory Party to have racist elements in their mix so it's less newsworthy. I mean, the leader of the conservative party has made obviously racist comments on numerous occasions.
You may be right. Unfortunately a side effect of Brexit has been the enabling of all kinds of overt racism that I thought we'd put to bed in this country. I think everyone expects the Tories to be - putting it kindly - ambivalent about racism. I think the appearance that Labour might also be ambivalent, given its history but also its self image, has been the real surprise and is possibly another reason why it's been more newsworthy.
Is Cummings. Civil servant... He's not employed by the civil service to the best of my knowledge he is a freelance spad (special adviser) to Boris Johnson so I don't think the civil service code would apply to him would it?
Do you have a document where they reference the examples .... As I say last I can see they have not updated things to reflect it as evidenced in the post.... Do you have a link to something that shows it?
The soft bigotry of low expectations
Yeah, he's that guy who wasn't as famous as Peter Sissons - a guy who managed at best to be the second headline on the day his death was announced.
They don't count the opinions of anyone under 93.
Yes, no doubt. But, in the interests of balance, if you think about the old received wisdom that “Tories are heartless but competent” while “Labour have their heart in the right place but will crash the economy”, it’s telling that Johnson’s “F*ck business” remark is largely ignored. Man bites dog doesn’t always get coverage when most of the old print media is pro-Conservative.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
There is also this:
So you're saying we have two levels of racism? It's all the same to me.
Posted at the same time. I assume he has resigned to work on the campaign to avoid code of conduct rules.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I am not seeking to justify either - I am just saying that there is currently more anti-Muslim sentiment around than anti-Jewish, certainly in those battlegrounds in the Midlands and the North.
There is plenty of anti-jewish sentiment in the North, this isn't a geography issue. They're both a problem, and both parties are failing at tackling the problems head on.
He did stand down temporarily didn't he to go and have his operation... Spads have in the past stood down... Campaigned then retaken the role
We’ll agree to disagree on that point. Anti-muslim immigation sentiment drove the Brexit vote over the line. Farage’s poster, 80m Turks. Those points hit home. Anti-Jewish (even anti-Israel) is more of a niche interest. Your average white voter in somewhere like Bolton could not give two fecks about Jews. Get him started about “Bangladeane” however (it’s an area called Deane), and it’s a vote for Farage/Johnson.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
With the IHRA and Williamson, massive resistance was put up by the Corbynite wing of the party. Here’s what Corbyn was saying about Williamson in February, not long after Williamson had posted a petition in support of Gilad Atzmon:
I praised the Rothschilds video the Momentum people made a while back. Which is why I was genuinely surprised to see Corbyn so reluctant last night to concede (in the very first question he faced) that the Rothschild conspiracy is antisemitic (I think it took him four responses to grudgingly admit it is an "antisemitic trope"). I doubt if Corbyn really understands the problem at all. Again, this was pretty good, although parts of it could be seen as critiquing Corbyn himself (especially the opening paragraph on conspiracy theories and the opening two paragraphs of the section on Zionism), and of course it makes no mention of the Islamist antisemitism which Corbyn has dismissed or explained away throughout his career. And by the time the video and statement above came out, it was probably seen as too little too late by many. Certainly a section of the party gets some credit from me for those efforts, but the leadership doesn't.
I understand this is all very irritating for those who have placed all their hopes for the future in Corbyn's hands. For those of us who just see Corbyn as another politician, however, it's all absolutely fair game. I have little doubt in my mind that if a politician whose politics you vehemently opposed invited a far-right proponent of the Blood Libel to Westminster for tea, described him as an "honored citizen", and claimed that criticism of him was a product of the "Zionist Lobby", you would have no hesitation in describing him as an anti-semite, and you probably wouldn't think too highly of anyone who defended him on the matter.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Prorogued Parliament
Updated what exactly? When it reads anti-semtism it now reads the IHRA definition.
Do you really think the BBC calling him out whilst they’re negotiating with him is going to get him to come on the show? He’d just claim it as obvious bias and use it as a reason not to go on.
That’s so shit but it’s undeniably true. I think the same applies to Johnson himself...people just expect him to come out with all kinds of airy bullshit, whereas when it’s Corbyn, it’s different
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Not suggesting they explicitly call him out but certainly refrain from putting out this sort of puff piece. There's an argument that they shouldn't be engaging in this sort of "journalism" at all let alone while he's still not agreed to do an interview.
but I thought Labour were closing the gap?
It's been said for years: Corbyn is unelectable. Labour have missed an open-goal by sticking with him.
I thought survation?... Was one of the MRP models though
Spot on.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
