https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-and-the-piccaninny-smearEvidently the line should've been drawn when Johnson referred to black people as 'piccaninnies'.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-and-the-piccaninny-smearEvidently the line should've been drawn when Johnson referred to black people as 'piccaninnies'.
Quelle surprise. Paper that Johnson is a prominent writer for, defends him.
It is a 'fact' because it shows up in the polls, that is what I was getting at. After Blair/Brown I will not give the Labour Party the time of day, so clearly I am not their target voter, but they can not even attract any voters, even the left leaning ones who voter for Blair and Brown, given the current shitshow that is a piss poor performance.What I said earlier...not a Corbyn fan before you jump in.
This seems to be one of those things repeated so enough, it’s become “fact” - the bollox that is “Imagine if Corbyn was in charge”.
It’s as if things aren’t shit enough as they are, but in order for people to convince themselves that it would be worse, they look for a reason.
There really is no evidence to say under Corbyn it would’ve been worse - the evidence is Johnson, & it’s been shit, corrupt, incompetent & full of continuous lies.
It's not a paper.Quelle surprise. Paper that Johnson is a prominent writer for, defends him.
One is a poll. The other is real & actually happened (i.e. Johnson’s shitshow of managing the last 18 months).It is a 'fact' because it shows up in the polls,
Seems the public think otherwise.One is a poll. The other is real & actually happened (i.e. Johnson’s shitshow of managing the last 18 months).
And The Spectator published it. O’Neill could’ve published it elsewhere (not a staffer, after all), but The Spectator is well aware it wouldn’t get as widely-read there.It's not a paper.
He doesn't write for it and hasn't for years
Brendan O'Niell isn't a staffer
Clearly you didn't read it.
Well that's some strange take on it seeing as Johnson used the word in the column, nobody else did. Maybe he was having a dig at Blair but it was him that used the word.It's not a paper.
He doesn't write for it and hasn't for years
Brendan O'Niell isn't a staffer
Clearly you didn't read it.
That’s been answered. Clearly you didn’t read it. Or ignored it. Whatever.Seems the public think otherwise.
As I have asked before - why are Labour failing?
Copy the link to the Post where your answered it or give me the thread title and a rough idea where you did so.That’s been answered. Clearly you didn’t read it. Or ignored it. Whatever.
Why does it have to be about my lifetime? Why is that relevant?And The Spectator published it. O’Neill could’ve published it elsewhere (not a staffer, after all), but The Spectator is well aware it wouldn’t get as widely-read there.
How about the greater challenge in your lifetime from earlier in this thread? You mentioned it, so would be good to hear your offering.
Messages 36 & 52, & 43 to some degree too. Lazy get.Copy the link to the Post where your answered it or give me the thread title and a rough idea where you did so.
Because otherwise you're reliant on other people's experience or perception, & it's something you personally never lived through. It's probably also something that cannot be compared because the circumstances behind each, & the way they were managed, are two totally different things.Why does it have to be about my lifetime? Why is that relevant?
So you didn’t vote Labour at the last election due to Corbyn yet you wouldn’t give Labour the time of day post Blair and Brown. Something doesn’t stack up.It is a 'fact' because it shows up in the polls, that is what I was getting at. After Blair/Brown I will not give the Labour Party the time of day, so clearly I am not their target voter, but they can not even attract any voters, even the left leaning ones who voter for Blair and Brown, given the current shitshow that is a piss poor performance.
No one 'knows' what labour would be like in government, they might be great but the polls show that no-one believes for one instant for that to be likely.
I will look at those and come back to you with my thoughts.Messages 36 & 52, & 43 to some degree too. Lazy get.
Because otherwise you're reliant on other people's experience or perception, & it's something you personally never lived through. It's probably also something that cannot be compared because the circumstances behind each, & the way they were managed, are two totally different things.
Hope so , they made me laughIn that respect, the working man/woman must be really pleased that Johnson’s taking us all back to the 70s.
Looking forward to “Love Thy Neighbour” & being recommissioned, & Bernard Manning repeats on BBC2.
Did you focus on the British suspect after Jo Cox?I'm just focusing on the alleged Somolian suspect ATM
Why’s that exactly ?I will look at those and come back to you with my thoughts.
I'm just focusing on the alleged Somolian suspect ATM