Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

What do you think of Jacob Rees-Mogg? Watch

    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    While Trump certainly led a campaign based on nationalism, law and order, it was his economic populism that won the key rust belt states.
    Proof?

    The Tories are doing appallingly with young people, who tend to be more liberal. Promising to cut foreign aid is not going to go down well nor would it be anywhere near sufficient to fund a huge housebuilding programme.
    No, but it would be a start.


    Mogg is not going to win over traditional labour voters. Although the media likes to paint traditional labour voters as backwards, they're not a bunch of nationalists. They do support high levels of spending and unions, they oppose austerity and they hate the Tories
    That doesn’t preclude them from being nationalists eg

    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbo...-by-j-a-smith/
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    Nothing wrong with being elitist. But there is a particular leftist ideology which now permeates the upper-echelons of society, who regard it as unquestionable. Rees-Mogg is one of those who does dare to question, and I think that gains much more traction in the wider country than many would like to admit.

    And the lesson I drew from the 2017 election is that May and her advisors are hubristic idiots who betrayed their base and should never have been left in charge of anything.
    The notion that Jacob Rees Mogg, an Etonian Thatcherite, is this plucky little figure taking on the establishment in favour of the ordinary man, is pretty absurd, even by current standards of political discourse.

    As for this 'left wing conspiracy'. Well the Tories have been in power for the last seven years, and for the last 30-40 years, the dominant ideology has been Thatcherism and anyone who's dared to question unrestrained free-market capitalism as the ruling ideology, has not been given a hearing by the press.

    Indeed the terms of the debate have been closed shut for several decades. Unions are bad, privatisation is good, the public sector is bad, big corporations are good, tax avoidance is good, people on benefits are bad, investing is bad, etc etc. In fact the one opening up the debate again, is Corbyn, not Rees Mogg.

    Hardly seems like that's the left wing dominating the upper echelons of society, but maybe that's just me.
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    The notion that Jacob Rees Mogg, an Etonian Thatcherite, is this plucky little figure taking on the establishment in favour of the ordinary man, is pretty absurd, even by current standards of political discourse.
    Why is politics being about values rather than backgrounds such a difficult concept for you?

    As for this 'left wing conspiracy'. Well the Tories have been in power for the last seven years, and for the last 30-40 years, the dominant ideology has been Thatcherism and anyone who's dared to question unrestrained free-market capitalism as the ruling ideology, has not been given a hearing by the press.

    Indeed the terms of the debate have been closed shut for several decades. Unions are bad, privatisation is good, the public sector is bad, big corporations are good, tax avoidance is good, people on benefits are bad, investing is bad, etc etc. In fact the one opening up the debate again, is Corbyn, not Rees Mogg.

    Hardly seems like that's the left wing dominating the upper echelons of society, but maybe that's just me.
    I don't understand why you have inserted words in 'quote marks' which I never said.

    The dominant economic philosophy amongst the 'elites' has been vaguely right for a while now, no doubt. But on social issues they definitely swing way left of the rest of the country, and I don't see how you can really dispute this...

    I am not saying Rees-Mogg is some plucky champion of the underdog. I'm saying he is saying things which, though they piss off a lot of a certain type of people, are not without support in this country.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    Proof?
    My opinion on this is based on how he went to the Rust Belt states, areas which have been left behind by globalisation and told business owners that if they moved their jobs and factories to Mexico, that he'd slap a 35% tariff on any imports back into the USA. To people who've seen their jobs go and states turned into barren lands, this was music to their ears.

    There was also a program on a while back with Sanders and Trump voters and quite a few of them said that they would have voted for Sanders if he stood. Sure, Trump's hardline law and order and even outright sexism/bigotry appealed to some. However, a lot of his voters were not racist/sexist/bigoted, they were attracted by his economic populism.

    That's just my opinion of course, but I think he won the left behind rust belt states because of economic populism, rather than law and order.


    No, but it would be a start.
    It wouldn't. Young professionals and graduates (the class which Tories need to do much better with) support foreign aid in general. They don't want to see a reduction in it.

    Foreign aid is becoming the new 'EU' to the hard right. Just blame all our problems on it. The money we spend on foreign aid is pittance compared to what we need to spend on house-building.


    That doesn’t preclude them from being nationalists eg

    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbo...-by-j-a-smith/
    They're not Tories though. Many people in the north were very avid Brexiteers but they'd rather boil in oil than vote for the Tories.

    Economic populism will resonate more with these people than nationalism.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    Why is politics being about values rather than backgrounds such a difficult concept for you?
    Because Rees Mogg most certainly is part of the establishment. You don't get much more 'establishment' than being an Etonian Oxbridge Tory MP who previously worked for the Rothschild Investment Bank.

    His values are rather establishment too. He's a free-market capitalist, which has been the dominant ideology for decades, as discussed.

    The dominant economic philosophy amongst the 'elites' has been vaguely right for a while now, no doubt. But on social issues they definitely swing way left of the rest of the country, and I don't see how you can really dispute this...

    I am not saying Rees-Mogg is some plucky champion of the underdog. I'm saying he is saying things which, though they piss off a lot of a certain type of people, are not without support in this country.
    On social issues they haven't 'swung left' particularly, unless you think it was left wing to invade Iraq, or that it was left wing to join in Bush's 'war on terror'.

    What would actually change with Rees Mogg on social issues that would be so wonderful? Enlighten me.

    People aren't opposed to gay marriage in the main. They aren't yearning for social conservatism. Rees Mogg is a dry Thatcherite who's economic views go hand in hand with the prevailing views since the 70s.
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Because Rees Mogg most certainly is part of the establishment. You don't get much more 'establishment' than being an Etonian Oxbridge Tory MP who previously worked for the Rothschild Investment Bank.

    His values are rather establishment too. He's a free-market capitalist, which has been the dominant ideology for decades, as discussed.

    On social issues they haven't 'swung left' particularly, unless you think it was left wing to invade Iraq, or that it was left wing to join in Bush's 'war on terror'.

    What would actually change with Rees Mogg on social issues that would be so wonderful? Enlighten me.

    People aren't opposed to gay marriage in the main. They aren't yearning for social conservatism. Rees Mogg is a dry Thatcherite who's economic views go hand in hand with the prevailing views since the 70s.
    God, you really love your straw men don't you?

    His views on gay marriage or abortion, say, may not be held by the majority of the country. But the proportion who do agree or at least have sympathy is far from insignificant.

    On issues like immigration, sovereignty, the EU, et cetera, I'd say he's more in tune with the country than most MPs.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    God, you really love your straw men don't you?

    His views on gay marriage or abortion, say, may not be held by the majority of the country. But the proportion who do agree or at least have sympathy is far from insignificant.

    On issues like immigration, sovereignty, the EU, et cetera, I'd say he's more in tune with the country than most MPs.
    He opposes the EU for right wing reasons. Not because people have been left behind, as many who were persuaded by the leave campaign were. Much of the north opposed the EU for anti-globalisation and anti-free market capitalist reasons. Ideologies which Mogg subscribes to.

    On immigration, his stance is no different to his party's. As for soverignty? Where was his opposition to the power grab bill by the tories, giving power to the executive rather then Parliament?


    Give me some specifics, what do you think Rees Mogg would change socially that would be so wonderful? What are these social reforms he would make that the public is yearning for?

    You accept that Mogg is a free-market capitalist and you accept that it has been the dominant ideology for decades, yet then bizarrely you claim Mogg is sticking it to the establishment/elites.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    My opinion on this is based on how he went to the Rust Belt states, areas which have been left behind by globalisation and told business owners that if they moved their jobs and factories to Mexico, that he'd slap a 35% tariff on any imports back into the USA. To people who've seen their jobs go and states turned into barren lands, this was music to their ears.

    There was also a program on a while back with Sanders and Trump voters and quite a few of them said that they would have voted for Sanders if he stood. Sure, Trump's hardline law and order and even outright sexism/bigotry appealed to some. However, a lot of his voters were not racist/sexist/bigoted, they were attracted by his economic populism.

    That's just my opinion of course, but I think he won the left behind rust belt states because of economic populism, rather than law and order.




    It wouldn't. Young professionals and graduates (the class which Tories need to do much better with) support foreign aid in general. They don't want to see a reduction in it.

    Foreign aid is becoming the new 'EU' to the hard right. Just blame all our problems on it. The money we spend on foreign aid is pittance compared to what we need to spend on house-building.

    They're not Tories though. Many people in the north were very avid Brexiteers but they'd rather boil in oil than vote for the Tories.

    Economic populism will resonate more with these people than nationalism.
    There’s a very fine line between the two. Protectionism of any sort (includeing cutting immigration) is basically nationalistic. Both probably contributed to Trump winning.

    The best way of distinguishing Blue and Red labour is perhaps through opppsing notions of fairness and equality. For instance, to plenty of ‘blue’ or traditional labour voters benefits have been paid in through generations and being handed out to new arrivals isn’t fair whereas red or cosmopolitan labour people think that such distinctions do not matter as people should be treated equally.
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    He opposes the EU for right wing reasons. Not because people have been left behind, as many who were persuaded by the leave campaign were. Much of the north opposed the EU for anti-globalisation and anti-free market capitalist reasons. Ideologies which Mogg subscribes to.

    On immigration, his stance is no different to his party's. As for soverignty? Where was his opposition to the power grab bill by the tories, giving power to the executive rather then Parliament?

    Give me some specifics, what do you think Rees Mogg would change socially that would be so wonderful? What are these social reforms he would make that the public is yearning for?

    You accept that Mogg is a free-market capitalist and you accept that it has been the dominant ideology for decades, yet then bizarrely you claim Mogg is sticking it to the establishment/elites.
    You seem to be under the illusion that I have, at any point, said that Jacob Rees-Mogg is our saviour and all across the land the people are crying out his name.

    All I've said is that people on this forum are using 'out of touch' as a shorthand for 'I do not agree with this person and it makes me more comfortable to think no one else does either', when actually a good number of people across the country do.

    It is absolutely inarguable that Rees-Mogg holds certain opinions which are anathema in polite circles, but on which a good proportion of the country agrees with him. This does not mean on every issue he is in the majority, and people who agree with him on an issue may disagree on another, but the idea that he is so much more 'out of touch' than the rest of our politicians if facile. I don't think people expect to agree with any politician on every issue, but people do seem to like that at least Rees-Mogg speaks his mind, as opposed to the self-serving, patronising cant which passes for normal political discourse.

    However, I will give you one example: abortion. While most people wouldn't want to ban abortion, a good majority would like to see the time limit reduced substantially. Jacob Rees-Mogg's position that, though he wouldn't ban abortion, he finds it to be immoral was portrayed as beyond the pale in a way it simply isn't.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    You seem to be under the illusion that I have, at any point, said that Jacob Rees-Mogg is our saviour and all across the land the people are crying out his name.

    All I've said is that people on this forum are using 'out of touch' as a shorthand for 'I do not agree with this person and it makes me more comfortable to think no one else does either', when actually a good number of people across the country do.

    It is absolutely inarguable that Rees-Mogg holds certain opinions which are anathema in polite circles, but on which a good proportion of the country agrees with him. This does not mean on every issue he is in the majority, and people who agree with him on an issue may disagree on another, but the idea that he is so much more 'out of touch' than the rest of our politicians if facile. I don't think people expect to agree with any politician on every issue, but people do seem to like that at least Rees-Mogg speaks his mind, as opposed to the self-serving, patronising cant which passes for normal political discourse.

    However, I will give you one example: abortion. While most people wouldn't want to ban abortion, a good majority would like to see the time limit reduced substantially. Jacob Rees-Mogg's position that, though he wouldn't ban abortion, he finds it to be immoral was portrayed as beyond the pale in a way it simply isn't.
    When discussing if a politician is out of tough, their background and backstory can be relevant. If a person was born into wealth, went to Eton, went to Oxbridge and then worked for an Investment bank before becoming an MP for one of the wealthiest constituencies in the country, it is rather unlikely that he has been surrounded by anything other than wealth.

    Does he know what it's like for people who do struggle? Has he ever been in the situation where he couldn't be sure of having enough food to feed his family? Does he know what it's like to live in private rented accommodation or to have your wages stagnate as the cost of living rises and rises?

    And you can tell by what he says, that he has no idea. How he's voted through cuts to tax credits and benefits which people rely on to live. How he's argued consistently for lower spending on public services which are of upmost importance to much of the population. How he's keen to tell people of the same sex that he doesn't think they should be allowed to get married or to a woman who's been raped, that she should have to give birth. Of course he is entitled to such views, but they hardly make him in touch.

    None of that strikes me as a politician in touch. Yes he was on the same side as many regarding the EU, but as mentioned, for very different reasons. And this whole support about people swooning over someone for 'speaking their mind' is rather selective. I take it you must really like and respect Corbyn too? After all he speaks his mind. Caroline Lucas too, she speaks her mind. Or does it not count if the person who so wonderfully speaks their mind, is of the wrong stripes?


    Do the population at large want much stricter limits on abortions? Where is your evidence for this?
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    When discussing if a politician is out of tough, their background and backstory can be relevant. If a person was born into wealth, went to Eton, went to Oxbridge and then worked for an Investment bank before becoming an MP for one of the wealthiest constituencies in the country, it is rather unlikely that he has been surrounded by anything other than wealth.

    Does he know what it's like for people who do struggle? Has he ever been in the situation where he couldn't be sure of having enough food to feed his family? Does he know what it's like to live in private rented accommodation or to have your wages stagnate as the cost of living rises and rises?

    And you can tell by what he says, that he has no idea. How he's voted through cuts to tax credits and benefits which people rely on to live. How he's argued consistently for lower spending on public services which are of upmost importance to much of the population. How he's keen to tell people of the same sex that he doesn't think they should be allowed to get married or to a woman who's been raped, that she should have to give birth. Of course he is entitled to such views, but they hardly make him in touch.

    None of that strikes me as a politician in touch. Yes he was on the same side as many regarding the EU, but as mentioned, for very different reasons. And this whole support about people swooning over someone for 'speaking their mind' is rather selective. I take it you must really like and respect Corbyn too? After all he speaks his mind. Caroline Lucas too, she speaks her mind. Or does it not count if the person who so wonderfully speaks their mind, is of the wrong stripes?


    Do the population at large want much stricter limits on abortions? Where is your evidence for this?
    Whether someone 'strikes you as out of touch' is an absolute irrelevance. He is obviously not one of the common people, but that is not sufficient to ignore his views, some of which are commonplace.

    I don't think I have ever claimed there aren't any left wingers who do speak their mind, so I'm not sure what I'm being selective about... On the other hand, does Corbyn speak his mind? We know he has opposed the EU, we know he has supported Irish unification, we know he has supported the abolition of the monarchy, we know he has opposed the state of Israel, and we have seen him subsequently deny all of those positions.

    Also, polling on this moves around a lot but:
    http://www.comresglobal.com/polls/wh...ortion-survey/
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    He’s in the fairly exclusive ‘would not piss on if they were on fire’ club of Tories for me. He’s morally bankrupt.
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wattsy)
    He’s in the fairly exclusive ‘would not piss on if they were on fire’ club of Tories for me. He’s morally bankrupt.
    No, he holds a rather strict morality. You may not agree with a Christian world-view, but he's hardly bankrupt in that department.

    By contrast, is watching someone burn without helping a moral act, in your opinion?
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    Whether someone 'strikes you as out of touch' is an absolute irrelevance. He is obviously not one of the common people, but that is not sufficient to ignore his views, some of which are commonplace.

    I don't think I have ever claimed there aren't any left wingers who do speak their mind, so I'm not sure what I'm being selective about... On the other hand, does Corbyn speak his mind? We know he has opposed the EU, we know he has supported Irish unification, we know he has supported the abolition of the monarchy, we know he has opposed the state of Israel, and we have seen him subsequently deny all of those positions.

    Also, polling on this moves around a lot but:
    http://www.comresglobal.com/polls/wh...ortion-survey/
    Almost any politician will have some views that resonate with a majority of people.

    I don't think Corbyn's positions have shifted on many of those. He's always been sceptical of the EU, but believed on balance, reluctantly that we were better off in. He's never pretended to be a big supporter of the current state of Israel. He has never claimed that he is now a monarchist or that he wished there was one, just that he wasn't going to do anything about it were he elected.

    A common thing people seem to like about JRM is 'he speaks his mind', as if that were more important than what you are actually speaking about. The amount of times i've seen those on the right go 'I don't agree with him on this but i like that he speaks his mind'.

    Yet when Corbyn for example says honestly that he thinks we should scrap trident, they don't go 'ah well I don't agree with him but I like that he speaks his mind'. Rather they accuse him of being a terrorist sympathiser who hates Britain. They don't seem to respect someone on the left 'speaking their mind'.

    What is your overall point anyway? That JRM should be Tory leader and PM because he 'speaks his mind'?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Of course its relevant to being out of touch. How can someone who's never encountered or surrounded himself with anything other than wealth or riches, know what it's like to be without?

    I don't think his positions have shifted on many of those. He's always been sceptical of the EU, but believed on balance, reluctantly that we were better off in. He's never pretended to be a big supporter of the current state of Israel. He has never claimed that he is now a monarchist or that he wished there was one, just that he wasn't going to do anything about it were he elected.

    A common thing people seem to like about JRM is 'he speaks his mind', as if that were more important than what you are actually speaking about. The amount of times i've seen those on the right go 'I don't agree with him on this but i like that he speaks his mind'.

    Yet when Corbyn for example says honestly that he thinks we should scrap trident, they don't go 'ah well I don't agree with him but I like that he speaks his mind'. Rather they accuse him of being a terrorist sympathiser who hates Britain. They don't seem to respect someone on the left 'speaking their mind'.

    What is your overall point anyway? That JRM should be Tory leader and PM because he 'speaks his mind'?
    Tbh I've always said about corbyn that while I hate his policies, I do respect his honesty and principles.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bones-mccoy)
    I don't know why I'm still wasting my time replying to you but I am nowhere near narrow minded, thanks
    Of course you say that. Think that. Who admits to being narrow minded, even to themselves?

    This is hardly complicated stuff. No-one has to agree with you (or me, or anyone else) on everything, and if they don't it doesn't make them a piece of sh it.

    Who earth are you to think you know all the answers?? To judge others?
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Almost any politician will have some views that resonate with a majority of people.

    I don't think Corbyn's positions have shifted on many of those. He's always been sceptical of the EU, but believed on balance, reluctantly that we were better off in. He's never pretended to be a big supporter of the current state of Israel. He has never claimed that he is now a monarchist or that he wished there was one, just that he wasn't going to do anything about it were he elected.

    A common thing people seem to like about JRM is 'he speaks his mind', as if that were more important than what you are actually speaking about. The amount of times i've seen those on the right go 'I don't agree with him on this but i like that he speaks his mind'.

    Yet when Corbyn for example says honestly that he thinks we should scrap trident, they don't go 'ah well I don't agree with him but I like that he speaks his mind'. Rather they accuse him of being a terrorist sympathiser who hates Britain. They don't seem to respect someone on the left 'speaking their mind'.

    What is your overall point anyway? That JRM should be Tory leader and PM because he 'speaks his mind'?
    I've explained my overall point several times. People keep saying things like "he's out of touch", largely because he has a plummy accent and says things they dislike. There have always been Labour politicians who are just as posh, by the way, but they do not get this allegation thrown at them. But, he has had cut-through because there is a decently-sized constituency in the country which likes many of the things he says, and because he comes across as sincere.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    I've explained my overall point several times. People keep saying things like "he's out of touch", largely because he has a plummy accent and says things they dislike. There have always been Labour politicians who are just as posh, by the way, but they do not get this allegation thrown at them. But, he has had cut-through because there is a decently-sized constituency in the country which likes many of the things he says, and because he comes across as sincere.
    Someone's background and backstory can clearly make someone out of touch though, especially if their actions as a politician serve almost exclusively to preserve the wealth and status of those at the top. Atlee was just as posh, yet he created the welfare state. I don't think he's that much more out of touch than say, Cameron, if that helps.

    I don't think he has cut through. He's just attracting the support of lots of desperate Tory members and those on the right already. Rather than supporting social liberalism, bizarrely a group of Tories have a yearning for some good-old fashioned social conservatism.

    Again, Corbyn is sincere, so why do you and other tories not like and respect his sincerity? Why is 'sincerity' only a good thing if it comes from the right?

    Do you want JRM to be Prime Minister?
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Someone's background and backstory can clearly make someone out of touch though, especially if their actions as a politician serve almost exclusively to preserve the wealth and status of those at the top. Atlee was just as push, yet he created the welfare state. I don't think he's that much more out of touch than say, Cameron, if that helps.

    I don't think he has cut through. He's just attracting the support of lots of desperate Tory members and those on the right already. Rather than supporting social liberalism, bizarrely a group of Tories have a yearning for some good-old fashioned social conservatism.

    Again, Corbyn is sincere, so why do you and other tories not like and respect his sincerity? Why is 'sincerity' only a good thing if it comes from the right?

    Do you want JRM to be Prime Minister?
    I've sort of let these points from you fly because I regarded them as tangential to the main point, but can you disavow yourself of your lefty fantasy that Conservative politicians go into politics to screw the poor and maintain their own wealth. It is a perfectly reasonable position to hold (and not without evidence) that right-wing, free-market economics is to the benefit of the poor as much as the rich.

    Secondly, I let your Corbyn comments fly because they are also pretty tangential, but he is a man who repeatedly, on the record, called for the UK to leave the EU. He and McDonnell were best mates with Dennis Skinner (Vote Leave) and fully paid up members of the Tony Benn fan club, one of Britain's strongest eurosceptics. It is widely accepted in the parliamentary Labour party that he has recanted only out of political expediency. The main reason for the Owen Smith attempted coup was because some felt he'd acted like a Vote Leave sleeper agent!

    Finally, as a man who supported the IRA's armed struggle in Northern Ireland, who has given succour to terrorist groups in Palestine, who was a supporter of the Soviet Union (the world's most murderous regime) and who has completely failed to deal with the antisemitism in the Labour party which his rule ushered in, I believe him to be a man without moral compunction.

    Personally, Rees-Mogg would not be my first choice for PM, but neither would he be my last. I'd have him over May any day of the week.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    I've sort of let these points from you fly because I regarded them as tangential to the main point, but can you disavow yourself of your lefty fantasy that Conservative politicians go into politics to screw the poor and maintain their own wealth. It is a perfectly reasonable position to hold (and not without evidence) that right-wing, free-market economics is to the benefit of the poor as much as the rich.
    Can you disavow yourself of your right wing fantasy that cutting people's benefits, and tax credits helps get them out of poverty? Can you stop pretending that the rise in use of food banks in the UK isn't a non-issue?

    Does cutting a lowly paid person's tax credits, that they use to live on, make them better off?

    Secondly, I let your Corbyn comments fly because they are also pretty tangential, but he is a man who repeatedly, on the record, called for the UK to leave the EU. He and McDonnell were best mates with Dennis Skinner (Vote Leave) and fully paid up members of the Tony Benn fan club, one of Britain's strongest eurosceptics. It is widely accepted in the parliamentary Labour party that he has recanted only out of political expediency. The main reason for the Owen Smith attempted coup was because some felt he'd acted like a Vote Leave sleeper agent!
    The EU has quite clearly changed from inception. It became less of the 'capitalists club' (though still strongly had elements of it) and did some good things on worker rights and the environment. Begrudging remain probably did reflect his position in the end.

    He didn't campaign hard on it because he wasn't that enthusiastic about it.

    Finally, as a man who supported the IRA's armed struggle in Northern Ireland, who has given succour to terrorist groups in Palestine, who was a supporter of the Soviet Union (the world's most murderous regime) and who has completely failed to deal with the antisemitism in the Labour party which his rule ushered in, I believe him to be a man without moral compunction.
    Oh come on...
    It's rather strange that you moan about people going OTT and scaremongering about JRM and then you unleash this BS about Corbyn. Again the Tories seem to have no answer to any of his actual policies and have instead gone for the 'he's a terrorist sympathiser' approach.

    Corbyn is most certainly sincere and honest about his views, however much you may disagree with them. So if sincerity impresses you, why are you not impressed by him?


    Personally, Rees-Mogg would not be my first choice for PM, but neither would he be my last. I'd have him over May any day of the week.
    How does he actually differ from May policy wise? What policies would he introduce that May hasn't? Or that Cameron didn't? Be specific.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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