Independent Leyton Orient Forum

RedO wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 11:58 am

spen666 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:22 am

slacker wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:02 am In is-the-pope-catholic-news, academics run the rule over the biased coverage of the Press.

http://theconversation.com/uk-election- ... our-127133

No surprises that the majority of titles slam Labour in an effort to push support towards the Tories.

no surprise that left wing academics accuse media of being pro Tory!

Are you refuting their evidence?

The only evidence is opinion evidence.

Get 2 right wingers to do an article and they will show media are biased in favour of left.

Its not a subject that is really able to be dealt with objectively

spen666 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 12:48 pm

RedO wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 11:58 am

spen666 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:22 am



no surprise that left wing academics accuse media of being pro Tory!

Are you refuting their evidence?

The only evidence is opinion evidence.

Get 2 right wingers to do an article and they will show media are biased in favour of left.

Its not a subject that is really able to be dealt with objectively

Sorry spent but talking about objectively with Max/some others is pointless

dOh Nut wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 1:01 pm Sorry spent but talking about objectively with Max/some others is pointless

spen666 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 12:48 pm

RedO wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 11:58 am

spen666 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:22 am



no surprise that left wing academics accuse media of being pro Tory!

Are you refuting their evidence?

The only evidence is opinion evidence.

Get 2 right wingers to do an article and they will show media are biased in favour of left.

Its not a subject that is really able to be dealt with objectively

It’s an opinion whether the mail or the sun or one of the other billionaire owned arse-wipe daily’s have run a negative article on Labour? Right oh.

Read it. They’ve counted them up.

You can argue that they’ve only carried out this research because they’re a bunch of left wing academics or whatever it was you called them. You can argue they’ve only published the results because they’re a bunch of Labour loving left wing academics.

But you can’t refute their findings - that the MSM are ridiculously biased towards the Conservative party and against the Labour Party.

Now they’ve published this information, I wonder if anyone will be able to come up with any reasons as to why this might be the case? It’s really confusing.

RedO wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 1:27 pm …..

It’s an opinion whether the mail or the sun or one of the other billionaire owned arse-wipe daily’s have run a negative article on Labour? Right oh.

Read it. They’ve counted them up.

what you define as a negative article on labour is not what a right winger would define as a negative article.

so yes it is opinion.

You can argue that they’ve only carried out this research because they’re a bunch of left wing academics or whatever it was you called them. You can argue they’ve only published the results because they’re a bunch of Labour loving left wing academics.

But you can’t refute their findings - that the MSM are ridiculously biased towards the Conservative party and against the Labour Party.

Now they’ve published this information, I wonder if anyone will be able to come up with any reasons as to why this might be the case? It’s really confusing.

Very very easy to refute their findings as factual. Its their opinion and they are entitled to hold it.

They are based on subjective views. There is no objective standard to judge the articles against

Its about as scientific as reading the posts on here and saying they are definitive and objective evidence

Everyone of us has a political bias, whether you care to admit it or not. Your opening line quoted above shows your bias.

Politics and therefore arguments about bias are inherently subjective

I'm not biased. I'm just aware the tories are a bunch of self-serving pyschopathic c***ts.

My observation so far is that Johnson isn’t having a great election campaign. The promises sound hollow (which, TBF, they always will when you’re the incumbent party in government for almost ten years) and the strategy to focus on Corbyn (as opposed to Labour) may not be having the desired effect on voters.

My own view is that when people get into the ballot box, their decision will be based on domestic issues over Brexit. And this is where Johnson is compromised. Despite his attempts to push promises that are a cringe-worthy attempt to appeal to swing Labour voters, the Tories are too associated by Brexit and the accompanying sh*t-show.

To Labour’s credit, they are generating policy ideas which (putting aside how deliverable they may be) do set out a different vision from the neo-liberal orthodoxy that has dominated the two main parties for the last 20 years. Voters now have a real choice. All the Tories have been able to do in response is to either mimick or try and discredit (even though this tactic can be just as easily deployed against their own ideas). The Tories are having to react to Labour, not the other way round.

As for whether or not the MSM is biased against Labour; in my opinion, it’s biased against their policies and a perceived risk that they may shift the ‘central’ position on the left/right axis to the left of its current position. The MSM was more than happy to support Labour when it adopted the economic policies of the Major government, so it’s not about Labour per se.

That being said, the various overt and covert campaigns to smear and undermine Corbyn (to which he isn’t above criticism either) will land some blows. I remain sceptical that Corbyn can improve upon his 2017 performance, as the honeymoon period is well and truly over. Most people will have already made their minds up about whom they will vote for (except Thor, of course), and I cannot see either party achieving significant enough gains in the swing marginals.

My prediction, for now, remains that we return a hung parliament with the Tories being the largest party. But, if either of the parties are to pull off a surprise victory, I wouldn’t rule out that it could be Labour that does it.

Problem for Labour, as I see it, is that they have promised more and more, all costing more and more - they have become believable less and less.

cymruO wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:21 pm Problem for Labour, as I see it, is that they have promised more and more, all costing more and more - they have become believable less and less.

Yes but it's nearly Xmas so you need to make a bit of effort to get into the spirit of the giveaway bonanza.

Try visualising Corbyn as Magic Santa that might help.

cymruO wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:21 pm Problem for Labour, as I see it, is that they have promised more and more, all costing more and more - they have become believable less and less.

We always seem able to pay for unexpected wars. Labour could get the money from the same place as finances them.

I'm struggling to see Corbyn as anything but an idiot, which all previous Labour prime minister's and most of their MPs think as well.

Tories have a 14 point lead, and amongst the younger generation Boris is trusted the most and Corbyn the least.

I will be sitting down in front of my log burner nice and snuggly watching with interest the leaders debate tonight.

Max B Gold wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:30 pm

cymruO wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:21 pm Problem for Labour, as I see it, is that they have promised more and more, all costing more and more - they have become believable less and less.

We always seem able to pay for unexpected wars. Labour could get the money from the same place as finances them.

The old money trick. I know you know how its created and further to that QE has blown apart any notion of a shortage of money.

The government and it does not matter who is in charge is pulling the wool.over people eyes about money supply.

Thor wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:35 pm amongst the younger generation Boris is trusted the most and Corbyn the least.

Prove it.

Look at the polling companies they are the ones saying it, not me.

Oforever wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:32 pm I'm struggling to see Corbyn as anything but an idiot, which all previous Labour prime minister's and most of their MPs think as well.

Fine. He is not an idiot, however. He may not be an intellectual colossus, he may lack the cynical ruthlessness of Johnson, he may even be described as naïve at times, but I wouldn’t describe anyone who has survived in politics as long as him as an idiot.

Think back to when he was first elected as Labour leader in 2015. How long did all those smart people predict he would last? Theresa May has received praise for her resilience, yet arguable Corbyn is equally deserving of that. He’s had every backstabbing schemer and hack try and smear him and stab him in the front, back and middle, and yet he’s still there. He’s now onto his third Tory leader, and yet they’ve had the nerve to call themselves strong and stable and him the risky option!

Thor wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:41 pm Look at the polling companies they are the ones saying it, not me.

Post a link up then.

Thor wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:41 pm Look at the polling companies they are the ones saying it, not me.

You literally just said it! (Well, wrote it, in case Spen is watching, but you get my point).

Thor wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:41 pm Look at the polling companies they are the ones saying it, not me.

Read an interesting article the other day, I'll have a look to see if I can find it again. Basically said all pollsters are still using weighting from pre-2007 which means that the Tories are massively boosted, particularly in Labour marginals. The assumption the pre-2007 weightings give is that young people will stay at home and the age cohort cross-over where people switch from Labour to Tory is late 30's. If you use the patterns from the last three elections the picture is radically different. The cross-over hovers around the mid to late 40's and Labour are neck and neck in the polls. Like I say, I'll try and find the article.

Oforever wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:32 pm I'm struggling to see Corbyn as anything but an idiot, which all previous Labour prime minister's and most of their MPs think as well.

To be fair you struggle to understand most things.

Explain to us a couple of things that make him an idiot.

Eat The Rich wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:51 pm

Thor wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:41 pm Look at the polling companies they are the ones saying it, not me.

Read an interesting article the other day, I'll have a look to see if I can find it again. Basically said all pollsters are still using weighting from pre-2007 which means that the Tories are massively boosted, particularly in Labour marginals. The assumption the pre-2007 weightings give is that young people will stay at home and the age cohort cross-over where people switch from Labour to Tory is late 30's. If you use the patterns from the last three elections the picture is radically different. The cross-over hovers around the mid to late 40's and Labour are neck and neck in the polls. Like I say, I'll try and find the article.

One of the in built assumptions was that 27% fewer 18-24 year olds would not vote this time compared to 2017.

The pollsters have been bought and paid for. Ignore them JC will win.

Whilst I'm not as certain as Max is, yeah, I reckon he's going to sneak home.

What makes Cornyn an idiot? Have you seen his economic policies? He is also a terrorist sympathizer and has literally no idea of our best midfield.