Turn on thread page Beta

Hysterical Tory attacks are not a sign of weakness. watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    Please. They are attacking a political opponent. That's what parties do. It's what Corbyn will do to the Tories; it's what the Tories did to Miliband; and it's what Blair and Brown did to Hague, IDS and Howard. Why coat this in anything unique?
    Because the attacks have never been so ridiculous and silly
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Have I made you cross? :console:

    There is no way about it. The Tory attacks are hysterical and nonsense, they are just deploying standard propaganda and I;m sure Osbourne knows that. He knows that you need to define your opponents before they can define themselves. They sound like a dictator about to imprison the opposition for being a 'threat to national security', like it's standard dictator stuff lol.

    As to how I feel. Glad that I have a hope of not falling into the dregs of society that will be ****ed over most? Although I doubt I will own a house any time soon and to even get a small one will be a massive ordeal most likely and result in me being a mortgage slave for most of my life. It's not hysterical, it;s depressing. You do realize are going to be living under Tory rule as well you know? If I;m correct and you are on the same side if teh evr increasing inequality as me then you are equally screwed over, only difference is you are willingly bending over
    I don't even vote Tories ironically, but their economic and welfare policy is top notch if I'm honest. You are right that a Corbyn administration would serve the likes of me (poorer demographic) marginally better, but only in the short term, and In fact that government would limit my opportunity to my financial status. While increasing benefits (via borrowing might I add)(and plus I refuse to claim out of pride, I choose a job between uni hours than expect an entitlement like these lefty brats) and housing ownership they will make it so I only go so far.

    A Tory government on the other hand will reward what is most likely harder work and determination with greater rewards. The ladder of opportunity is endless. I want a stable economy, a sustainable one too and not an economy dependent on borrowing and printing money. So yes life isn't great but if I play my cards right I can get somewhere, unlike Labour who would bring the economy to the abyss with its wave of socialism that is yet to yield any results in the real world. Sounds great on paper but lacks practicality.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by democracyforum)
    Because the attacks have never been so ridiculous and silly
    Bacon sandwich.

    Banana.

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gears265)
    I don't even vote Tories ironically, but their economic and welfare policy is top notch if I'm honest. You are right that a Corbyn administration would serve the likes of me (poorer demographic) marginally better, but only in the short term, and In fact that government would limit my opportunity to my financial status. While increasing benefits (via borrowing might I add)(and plus I refuse to claim out of pride, I choose a job between uni hours than expect an entitlement like these lefty brats) and housing ownership they will make it so I only go so far.

    A Tory government on the other hand will reward what is most likely harder work and determination with greater rewards. The ladder of opportunity is endless. I want a stable economy, a sustainable one too and not an economy dependent on borrowing and printing money. So yes life isn't great but if I play my cards right I can get somewhere, unlike Labour who would bring the economy to the abyss with its wave of socialism that is yet to yield any results in the real world. Sounds great on paper but lacks practicality.
    You sound eloquent which will no doubt be sufficient to convince some of the less nuanced thinkers here, but there are some serious intellectual errors here.

    1. I deny your claim that Labour are economically incompetent. You made the first claim: please provide evidence that Labour bring 'economies to the abyss'.
    2. QE is not just 'printing money', and it doesn't inevitably lead to hyperinflation. It is possible to employ controlled QE - as we did in 2008 when bailing out the banks.
    3. The colossal majority of benefit goes to people in work. This happens because wages are frequently insufficient to cover basic living costs. This is the result of pandering to businesses, which the Tories are responsible for. They do not make work pay.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-10501596.html

    'Among the 8.4 million working age households who are currently eligible for benefits or tax credits who do contain someone in paid work the average loss from the cuts to benefits and tax credits is £750 per year,” the IFS said in a research publication.'

    'Among this same group the average gain from the new NLW, is estimated at £200 per year (in a “better case” scenario). This suggests that those in paid work and eligible for benefits or tax credits are, on average, being compensated for 26 per cent of their losses from changes to taxes, tax credits and benefits through the new NLW.'
    Online

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    They are part of the plan. This is an example of why Tories are so confident with a Corbyn win. It's incredibly easy to throw a load of mud and make it stick. They are defining Corbyn as a threat to the country before he can define himself. I don't think it is a case of they are scared of him and are panicking. This is all planned and they love it.

    I hope I am wrong at it backfires on them but I don't think it will.
    Oh no it's better than that: their aim to paint Corbyn as indicative of the entire Labour Party, they don't think he'll last but they'll try and use him as a bogeyman at the heart of the party .
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I think you're right tbh, I'm hoping people see through it though tbh. It's only been a few days and I'm already sick of the word 'security', something they'll most likely be playing on all the way up to the election. If that video was put into context of what Jeremy was saying, I wouldn't mind, but it wasn't. All the conservatives care about is staying in power, they seem to completely neglect any real issue that isn't artificial.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    Please. They are attacking a political opponent. That's what parties do. It's what Corbyn will do to the Tories; it's what the Tories did to Miliband; and it's what Blair and Brown did to Hague, IDS and Howard. Why coat this in anything unique?
    They've very rarely been as hysterical as this. And, it's not just the Conservatives, but the entire media - across the political spectrum.

    It's a textbook example of the propaganda model, outlined in Noam Chomsky's co-authored book, Manufacturing Consent.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viddy9)
    They've very rarely been as hysterical as this. And, it's not just the Conservatives, but the entire media - across the political spectrum.

    It's a textbook example of the propaganda model, outlined in Noam Chomsky's co-authored book, Manufacturing Consent.
    Skys agenda is ridiculous

    the whole corbyn talk was negative. The hate for him from the Murdoch is group is actually frightening
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xxvine)
    Skys agenda is ridiculous

    the whole corbyn talk was negative. The hate for him from the Murdoch is group is actually frightening
    Murdoch supports the lunatic Tony Abbott in Australia and has done everything he can to undermine Obama in the United States.

    If Obama was more radical, we'd have seen Fox News's propaganda against him being repeated on all the news channels there.

    As it happens, we're now witnessing Fox News-equivalent coverage of Jeremy Corbyn right here in Britain, but repeated ad nauseam in every media outlet.

    If people haven't read Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent, they should get it now. This is a textbook example of his propaganda model in action.

    It's not an exaggeration to call the coverage propaganda, because this is the very definition of it: distortion of facts, selectively quoting out of context, and so on, in order to pursue an agenda.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Corbyn will personally come to your front door, harm your family, whilst saying Bin Laden's death was a tragedy.

    #hystericalnonsense
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viddy9)
    Murdoch supports the lunatic Tony Abbott in Australia and has done everything he can to undermine Obama in the United States.

    If Obama was more radical, we'd have seen Fox News's propaganda against him being repeated on all the news channels there.

    As it happens, we're now witnessing Fox News-equivalent coverage of Jeremy Corbyn right here in Britain, but repeated ad nauseam in every media outlet.

    If people haven't read Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent, they should get it now. This is a textbook example of his propaganda model in action.

    It's not an exaggeration to call the coverage propaganda, because this is the very definition of it: distortion of facts, selectively quoting out of context, and so on, in order to pursue an agenda.
    i can't believe he was actually a labour supporter once

    i am guessing because of blair being in the centre.

    If Dan Jarvis becomes labour leader after Corbyn It will be interesting to see what stance they take with him because he isn't an easy egg to crack with his background in the military.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChickenMadness)
    It's the Tory way. They have all the money and control the media
    The day after Corbyn was elected Labour leader, the headlines of the Sun, Mail, Times and Telegraph were scaremongering and doom and gloom. I think they do so knowing full well that there is no alternative to voting Labour or UKIP now- and unless the Conservatives can become truly conservative, the papers will lose influence.

    Those are the only anti-Corbyn papers as far as I could see. The Mirror was delighted and The Guardian were still pondering last I checked. The Independent papers jst reported the victory without a clear bias.

    My point is this: this evil right wing media- I don't see it. In fact, if you go to a YouTube channel named Thorium, you will find the latest video is about the BBC's contempt for their right wing audience. Like I said before, those papers are populist and the Telegraph has been noted by a few ex-Telegraph bloggers as going downhill and betraying its readers.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rad-Reloaded)
    Corbyn is like Galloway, but less well dressed, less intelligent and less charismatic.


    Tfw the Respect Party is less of a joke than the Labour Party.
    Let's not say things we can't take back.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gears265)
    What is more hysterical is you will have to live under the Tories for 5 years and then most likely another 5 years. And even more hysterical there is nothing you can do about it. How does that feel?
    Why do you find it funny? Do you think the Tories are on your side? Why?

    One gets the sense that Tory voters are rather like the weaselly kid at school who sides with the bullies.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mister Morality)
    The day after Corbyn was elected Labour leader, the headlines of the Sun, Mail, Times and Telegraph were scaremongering and doom and gloom. I think they do so knowing full well that there is no alternative to voting Labour or UKIP now- and unless the Conservatives can become truly conservative, the papers will lose influence.

    Those are the only anti-Corbyn papers as far as I could see. The Mirror was delighted and The Guardian were still pondering last I checked. The Independent papers jst reported the victory without a clear bias.

    My point is this: this evil right wing media- I don't see it. In fact, if you go to a YouTube channel named Thorium, you will find the latest video is about the BBC's contempt for their right wing audience. Like I said before, those papers are populist and the Telegraph has been noted by a few ex-Telegraph bloggers as going downhill and betraying its readers.
    That's because the kind of peoppe who think the BBC Cameron and Telegraph etc are left wing biased are either:
    - inveterate whingers
    - near conspiracy theorists
    - UKIP supporters
    - think left-wing means PC and being nice to people
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    That's because the kind of peoppe who think the BBC Cameron and Telegraph etc are left wing biased are
    Are you responding to something I said? Your post doesn't follow anything I have said. Are you trying to claim thst our media is evil rightwing deathnazi media? I can assure you it is not. However, left vs. Right terminology is tricky, so let's go with conservative vs. Progressive vs. Liberal.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mister Morality)
    Are you responding to something I said? Your post doesn't follow anything I have said. Are you trying to claim thst our media is evil rightwing deathnazi media? I can assure you it is not. However, left vs. Right terminology is tricky, so let's go with conservative vs. Progressive vs. Liberal.
    No it's just normal right wing which is why all the deathnazis think it's left wing

    Conservative progressive and liberal are tricky enough
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    No it's just normal right wing which is why all the deathnazis think it's left wing

    Conservative progressive and liberal are tricky enough
    Can you guve some examples so I can tske your argument seriously?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    The Tories don't control the media, it's just the media tends to back whoever it thinks will win. That's why the Indie backed the coalition despite parroting Owen Jones for half the term.
    The media backs whoever it thinks is best placed to serve its interests. This is a combination of having power and being well disposed to the media.

    Most people on here are students and so too young to remember the 1990s, when the media turned against the Tories and particularly John Major.

    There had been a number of incidents back then where the press got out of control in a similar way to the phone hacking scandals in recent times. When Hillsborough happened the media made up stories of thieving from people caught up in the tragedy, that were unsubstantiated. When the Strangeways riots happened the media made up stories of prisoners murdering others in the cells which were unsubstantiated. There were a lot of intrusive and offensive media stories along the lines of "X celebrity is HIV positive" with a subtext of "gay sinner being punished". And then the Royal family was far more subject to intrusive reporting (particularly around Diana) than today.

    John Major's government decided to do something about this and David Mellor said the press was drinking in last chance saloon and it was time for government to take on the sacred cow of press freedom. I remember once having drinks with a retired civil servant who had been around at the time and he said the press then started to issue sinister warnings to Mellor that he was basically finished, for meddling with them. Sure enough they discovered he was having a rather exotic and fun sex life and started to splash that all over the front pages: Mellor resigned. Then they started to discover that a lot of other high profile Conservative MPs were involved with women other than their wives and they launched a vicious attack on the "hypocrisy of the party of the family".

    Whilst they may have been uncertain about John Smith as leader of the Labour Party, they soon found in Tony Blair a leader who knew how to play the press and was interested in keeping the press onside so they realised Blair was the horse to back. Result: John Major was mercilessly attacked by the press, derided as a weak leader who couldn't stand up for Britain, and there were constant stories put out to undermine his leadership.

    Blair came in on a landslide but also Blair knew that taking on the media was a fight he didn't want to bother with.

    The media will see in Corbyn somebody who has no interest in doing any kind of favours for the media and is basically uncorruptible in terms of being bought off so they will relentlessly attack to ensure he does not get in. Their biggest fear is that Corbyn will start to connect to a lot of ordinary voters that realise he is raising issues that they think politicians don't care about and he gets a bandwagon of support (as he did in the Labour party election) so they will mercilessly attack to try and get Corbyn back in his box before he can build momentum.

    The risk for the media is that they are shooting their weapons too early. They may have been better leaving Corbyn alone for a while and then throwing mud in the year before an election to sow doubts in the public mind. The danger with a relentless attack is that after a while it loses its effect and people switch off or start to sympathise with the victim.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    The media very much have their own agenda and it's very right wing.
    Yes the like to back a winner but only when the result is obvious like Blair in 97.
    Whenever the Labour party aren't way out in front the media back the tories.


    Just look at the vicious attack Corbyn is already recieving.
    It's propaganda - pure and simple. You're trying to paint him as a threat to national security just like you painted Labour as causing the recession.
    This is being blown out of all proportion. Corbyn is not being smeared by everyone at every opportunity. He is having his own words repeated - this is not a smear tactic. Of course a lot of the opinion pages are anti-Corbyn and oppose his policy positions, but that's because a majority of the country (and certainly those who read the papers) oppose his policy positions. On the matter of reporting his personal life - this is always going to happen. As Leader of the Opposition, he is a celebrity and people want to know about his personal life. The same was done with David Cameron. Just as he was caricatured as a posh Etonion, Corbyn will be subjected to the same stuff.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.