| Brilliant article in the New York Times 16:40 - May 7 with 3025 views | Ryorry |
|  |
| |  |
| Brilliant article in the New York Times on 15:23 - May 8 with 552 views | Darth_Koont |
| Brilliant article in the New York Times on 15:17 - May 8 by Ryorry |
Well done on your hat-trick of swerves.
Your orignal answer said nothing whatsoever about the article (as I clearly pointed out in my 21.36 post) - you just used it as a platform for your approx 25,596th tedious bleat about how badly poor Corbyn was treated.
"Silly personal attack" - oh the irony  |
FFS.
I commented on the source of the article as that was the only thing relatively interesting about it. The article itself told me nothing I didn’t already know.
Yes, Boris is a lying shyster. But that’s common knowledge — and would have been to the journalist at any time in her career when it might have mattered. |  |
| |
| Brilliant article in the New York Times on 18:09 - May 8 with 478 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Brilliant article in the New York Times on 14:01 - May 8 by tractordownsouth |
As someone who has a lot of involvement with Welsh Labour, it's far more complicated than 'Mark Drakeford supported Corbyn and is therefore doing better' as some prominent Twitter accounts have been saying in the last few days. |
Starmer is an admirer of what Drakeford has done and has said lately he sees it sees as a potential blueprint for Labour in the rest of the UK. I think Drakeford also had a pretty public falling out with Corbyn over the EU and some internal Labour processes. Trying to co-opt him into their ridiculous internal squabbles is a daft thing to do if that’s what they’re trying to do. Drakeford won’t be interested in any of that rubbish, he’ll do his own thing. |  |
| |
| Brilliant article in the New York Times on 18:46 - May 8 with 456 views | HARRY10 |
| Brilliant article in the New York Times on 15:23 - May 8 by Darth_Koont |
FFS.
I commented on the source of the article as that was the only thing relatively interesting about it. The article itself told me nothing I didn’t already know.
Yes, Boris is a lying shyster. But that’s common knowledge — and would have been to the journalist at any time in her career when it might have mattered. |
Much as with Germans in 1945, we are seeing the numbers of those condemning Johnson increasing by the day.
Once fervent cheerleaders are now writing about how they were duped. How were they to know that a lying incompetent........would be, a lying incompetent once in Number 10 ?
Doubtlessly this will spill over into Brexit where the blame will be laid at the door of the walrus of waffle, rather than it being any culpability on their part.
Maybe, there might even be some sort of truth and reconciliation commission set up, though I suspect more work will be aimed at clearing up the mess caused. |  | | |
| Brilliant article in the New York Times on 21:50 - May 8 with 418 views | Darth_Koont |
| Brilliant article in the New York Times on 18:09 - May 8 by Swansea_Blue |
Starmer is an admirer of what Drakeford has done and has said lately he sees it sees as a potential blueprint for Labour in the rest of the UK. I think Drakeford also had a pretty public falling out with Corbyn over the EU and some internal Labour processes. Trying to co-opt him into their ridiculous internal squabbles is a daft thing to do if that’s what they’re trying to do. Drakeford won’t be interested in any of that rubbish, he’ll do his own thing. |
Drakeford said this about the next Labour leader.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/next-labour-leader-must-continue-175
He’s clearly a big supporter of the 2015-2019 policy platform. Which Starmer also said in his leadership campaign and has since done a complete 180 on.
We need more Drakefords and fewer Starmers.
What was the Drakeford-Corbyn fallout by the way? Not saying it didn’t happen but I can’t find it and it clearly wasn’t enough to stop Drakeford highlighting Corbyn’s legacy. | |
| |
| Brilliant article in the New York Times on 03:22 - May 9 with 370 views | Ryorry |
| Brilliant article in the New York Times on 15:23 - May 8 by Darth_Koont |
FFS.
I commented on the source of the article as that was the only thing relatively interesting about it. The article itself told me nothing I didn’t already know.
Yes, Boris is a lying shyster. But that’s common knowledge — and would have been to the journalist at any time in her career when it might have mattered. |
I commented
"How absolutely typical of you to somehow turn a brilliant anti-Johnson article into a retrospective whinge about "poor hard done by Jeremy Corbyn".
No wonder the Labour party is struggling, with "supporters" like you incessantly stirring & creating/increasing divisions within it."
Which points you then ignored 4 times.
But I'm bored with this now as I expect everyone else reading the thread is too, so I'll leave it there. [Post edited 9 May 2022 5:15]
| |
| |
| Brilliant article in the New York Times on 05:31 - May 9 with 357 views | Darth_Koont |
| Brilliant article in the New York Times on 03:22 - May 9 by Ryorry |
I commented
"How absolutely typical of you to somehow turn a brilliant anti-Johnson article into a retrospective whinge about "poor hard done by Jeremy Corbyn".
No wonder the Labour party is struggling, with "supporters" like you incessantly stirring & creating/increasing divisions within it."
Which points you then ignored 4 times.
But I'm bored with this now as I expect everyone else reading the thread is too, so I'll leave it there. [Post edited 9 May 2022 5:15]
|
Thank the lord. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
