Impersonation is a breach of Twitters rules that can lead to suspension.
Unless there is a FactCheck UK that they impersonated, I don't think they were in breach of any rules.
I have to say the digital game from the Tories has been light years ahead of last time. This is the kind of move that gets everyone looking at the page which says Corbyn hasn’t got a policy on Brexit. It reinforces their main point of attack, that was briefed beforehand with the letter and will now be discussed afterwards.
Love or hate the Tories this is a success for them - I mean it is a fact that Corbyn doesn’t have an opinion on Brexit, and he hopes to play this as a an intelligent reasonable position and the Tories are trying to say it is a dereliction of responsibility for a prospective PM.
Fact check by Conservative HQ. Amazing how some people are so gullible that they thought it was something else. Perhaps they are new to twitter or can’t read. Would love a formal complain from Corbyn, the public would laugh him off the Internet!
+35 to +18 for Corbyn on "did well" is more than "edging out" Johnson, as YouGov puts it. Coupled with the tie on "who won?" it presumably means that a lot of voters felt that Corbyn was doing well to achieve a score draw. Interesting that only 5% found it boring - contrary to the views of cynical pros.
I'm shore that in the last 2 GE, there have been weekly updates of the party's fundraising though the campaign, published by the electoral commition, but nothing this time.
Have the rules changed? or do they start soon? or have I misremembered?
Jones is probably right. Boris's people would have been most disappointed with the outcome. Having portrayed Jezza as a dangerously insane Marxist, Boris should have ended the contest tonight with a string of killer blows. That he didn't suggests that either Jezza isn't that crap or Boris is as crap as Jezza.
Betting had Corbyn 8/11f, so to say he was an underdog who can call a draw a win is complete nonsense
Impersonation is a breach of Twitters rules that can lead to suspension.
Unless there is a FactCheck UK that they impersonated, I don't think they were in breach of any rules.
I have to say the digital game from the Tories has been light years ahead of last time. This is the kind of move that gets everyone looking at the page which says Corbyn hasn’t got a policy on Brexit. It reinforces their main point of attack, that was briefed beforehand with the letter and will now be discussed afterwards.
Love or hate the Tories this is a success for them - I mean it is a fact that Corbyn doesn’t have an opinion on Brexit, and he hopes to play this as a an intelligent reasonable position and the Tories are trying to say it is a dereliction of responsibility for a prospective PM.
The Tories played by the Queensbury Rules last time and lost their majority. This time they're getting up to all sorts of shithousery and their opponents don't like it, it's probably warming a few Tory cockles.
Fact check by Conservative HQ. Amazing how some people are so gullible that they thought it was something else. Perhaps they are new to twitter or can’t read. Would love a formal complain from Corbyn, the public would laugh him off the Internet!
And now so many non-Tories have copied them in response! YOU ARE JUST FALLING INTO THEIR TRAP! It’s a bit rich calling it underhand when #winforcorbyn was trending before the debate!
1) participated in the debate so he couldn't be accused of being frit or shady like May in 2017 2) and, doing the debate, at worst drew it, thus keeping his opponents at arm's length.
Job done for the Tories.
Yup.
The Tories would rather have not done the debates, that is obvious, so a draw is a win...and a win is a huge win.
The debates and the manifesto's are the two main opportunities for both parties. Labour need to win well on both whereas from here the Tories only need a draw.
Impersonation is a breach of Twitters rules that can lead to suspension.
Unless there is a FactCheck UK that they impersonated, I don't think they were in breach of any rules.
I have to say the digital game from the Tories has been light years ahead of last time. This is the kind of move that gets everyone looking at the page which says Corbyn hasn’t got a policy on Brexit. It reinforces their main point of attack, that was briefed beforehand with the letter and will now be discussed afterwards.
Love or hate the Tories this is a success for them - I mean it is a fact that Corbyn doesn’t have an opinion on Brexit, and he hopes to play this as a an intelligent reasonable position and the Tories are trying to say it is a dereliction of responsibility for a prospective PM.
The Tories played by the Queensbury Rules last time and lost their majority. This time they're getting up to all sorts of shithousery and their opponents don't like it, it's probably warming a few Tory cockles.
Yes next time Boris will probably wave around that Labour councillor tweet about Anti-Semitism and deliberately exaggerate the number 200 cases outstanding for an average of 2 years - then the irate lefties will spend all night posting that they have 130 cases outstanding for an average of 1 year and doing all the advertising the Tories would ever want - it’s the 350m on the side of a bus all over again
CCHQ stunt will infuriate Team Boris surely? Could be a massive distraction
Distracting to whom though? The 2 people who give a toss. And one of those is now on Twitter reading up on Corbyn's porkies.
Precisely, oh let’s call out this ‘fake fact check’ which lists Corbyn’s lies. Hey everybody over here! These fools fail to realise the Tories want exactly that. Clearly it’s the Tory twitter account and when push comes to shove they can’t really argue that the thing they are all talking about just lists falsehoods by Jeremy Corbyn.
The Tories need to fight a bit dirty to take on Momentum. Clearly they have learned a lot from 2017 about how to win a digital war when they are clearly the underdogs. The PPB was another example of this.
So, there's a video clip about him at a Tea Party event talking about how the US is going in the wrong direction under Obama. And yet nobody seems to care. (Indeed, I've seen Dems defending it on the basis that it shows he knows how to reach out to Republicans.) Some candidates seem to get away with things in their past, others cannot.
Now, you can make the case that he's only running well in Iowa, and to a lesser extent New Hampshire. But if he wins both Primaries, then he will certainly have "the big mo".
So, there's a video clip about him at a Tea Party event talking about how the US is going in the wrong direction under Obama. And yet nobody seems to care. (Indeed, I've seen Dems defending it on the basis that it shows he knows how to reach out to Republicans.) Some candidates seem to get away with things in their past, others cannot.
Now, you can make the case that he's only running well in Iowa, and to a lesser extent New Hampshire. But if he wins both Primaries, then he will certainly have "the big mo".
That's a complete misrepresentation of what he said. He said he had friends who thought the Tea Party were the devil incarnate and friends who thought they were a legitimate expression of anger at the direction of the country. He didn't say either were his own views.
This Tory tw@tter stunt on "fact checking"....I presume brought to us from the same Kiwi brains that has been bringing all the stupid shit posting nonsense.
In 2017, the actual turn-out was a lot higher for 18-24 and 60+. If I was the Tories, would be a bit worried by that, as got to get the oldies out to vote as they overwhelmingly Tory these days.
Labour on the other hand will definitely to be able to fire up the youngsters in the next week or so with free uni and cancel student debt.
Just putting this out there now, big Tory leads are predicated on Northern working class voting Tory like they have never done before and youngster turn out being more normal levels i.e. not turning out like last time. That should worry CCHQ.
Turnout amongst older voters was a bit disappointing in 2017 if I remember correctly, perhaps because some of them assumed that Corbyn had no change of winning. The Tories will be hoping that doesn't happen again this time.
Turnout amongst older voters was a bit disappointing in 2017 if I remember correctly, perhaps because some of them assumed that Corbyn had no change of winning. The Tories will be hoping that doesn't happen again this time.
Neither is wrong. The latter would be the Germanic pronunciation. It's etiquette to run with the owner's preference, if you know it. If you don't, you just guess.
I prefer it when it's intelligent guesswork. Unfortunately this isn't something that's taught at school though. A useful rule of thumb regarding US pronunciations is that it's a long way from Europe and people generally use an English pronunciation of European names. eg. Scarlett Johansson is jo- not yo-.
CCHQ stunt will infuriate Team Boris surely? Could be a massive distraction
Distracting to whom though? The 2 people who give a toss. And one of those is now on Twitter reading up on Corbyn's porkies.
Precisely, oh let’s call out this ‘fake fact check’ which lists Corbyn’s lies. Hey everybody over here! These fools fail to realise the Tories want exactly that. Clearly it’s the Tory twitter account and when push comes to shove they can’t really argue that the thing they are all talking about just lists falsehoods by Jeremy Corbyn.
The Tories need to fight a bit dirty to take on Momentum. Clearly they have learned a lot from 2017 about how to win a digital war when they are clearly the underdogs. The PPB was another example of this.
In 2017, the actual turn-out was a lot higher for 18-24 and 60+. If I was the Tories, would be a bit worried by that, as got to get the oldies out to vote as they overwhelmingly Tory these days.
Labour on the other hand will definitely to be able to fire up the youngsters in the next week or so with free uni and cancel student debt.
Just putting this out there now, big Tory leads are predicated on Northern working class voting Tory like they have never done before and youngster turn out being more normal levels i.e. not turning out like last time. That should worry CCHQ.
Yougov only excludes those who definitely won't vote, don't know or refused to answer from its headline poll, it does not just include those certain to vote
In 2017, the actual turn-out was a lot higher for 18-24 and 60+. If I was the Tories, would be a bit worried by that, as got to get the oldies out to vote as they overwhelmingly Tory these days.
Labour on the other hand will definitely to be able to fire up the youngsters in the next week or so with free uni and cancel student debt.
Just putting this out there now, big Tory leads are predicated on Northern working class voting Tory like they have never done before and youngster turn out being more normal levels i.e. not turning out like last time. That should worry CCHQ.
Yougov only excludes those who definitely won't vote, don't know or refused to answer from its headline poll, it does not just include those certain to vote
I understand that. My point was that the looking at the certainty vote as a rough indicator of how each much of demographic is going to vote, there is more opportunity for Labour to get the yuff much more fired up. And we know what they will be doing re uni fees. I am still waiting for them to offer "medical" weed as well.
Turnout amongst older voters was a bit disappointing in 2017 if I remember correctly, perhaps because some of them assumed that Corbyn had no change of winning. The Tories will be hoping that doesn't happen again this time.
Turnout amongst older voters was a bit disappointing in 2017 if I remember correctly, perhaps because some of them assumed that Corbyn had no change of winning. The Tories will be hoping that doesn't happen again this time.
I think 60-69 is usually a little higher than 77% although I may be wrong.
I think it is roughly inline with 2015 (but they use different age boundaries in the report I saw). However, Brexit vote much much higher. 90% of 65+ voted.
Turnout amongst older voters was a bit disappointing in 2017 if I remember correctly, perhaps because some of them assumed that Corbyn had no change of winning. The Tories will be hoping that doesn't happen again this time.
If the Tories stay ahead then they need to bang the drum in the last week that last time Labour closed in at the last minute in order to drive turnout amongst the 60+ age range who really don’t like Corbyn.
Turnout amongst older voters was a bit disappointing in 2017 if I remember correctly, perhaps because some of them assumed that Corbyn had no change of winning. The Tories will be hoping that doesn't happen again this time.
If the Tories stay ahead then they need to bang the drum in the last week that last time Labour closed in at the last minute in order to drive turnout amongst the 60+ age range who really don’t like Corbyn.
I am fairly certain they will be doing so, especially as they don't seem to actually have any policies.
I also think most people are aware of what happened last time. That obviously give Labour supporters hope that the Messiah can pull it off again, but I also think it will definitely drive some wavering oldies down the polling station to hold their nose and vote for Boris.
I never understand the requirement for more teachers. Surely there is one per classroom and the assistance comes from teaching assistants. Obviously if there are increasing population numbers then schools will be required to be built and teachers recruited,
Obviously other public services are not the same, more police, doctors, nurses etc can be deployed more readily where required.
I never understand the requirement for more teachers. Surely there is one per classroom and the assistance comes from teaching assistants. Obviously if there are increasing population numbers then schools will be required to be built and teachers recruited,
Obviously other public services are not the same, more police, doctors, nurses etc can be deployed more readily where required.
Turnout amongst older voters was a bit disappointing in 2017 if I remember correctly, perhaps because some of them assumed that Corbyn had no change of winning. The Tories will be hoping that doesn't happen again this time.
If the Tories stay ahead then they need to bang the drum in the last week that last time Labour closed in at the last minute in order to drive turnout amongst the 60+ age range who really don’t like Corbyn.
I am fairly certain they will be doing so, especially as they don't seem to actually have any policies.
I also think most people are aware of what happened last time. That obviously give Labour supporters hope that the Messiah can pull it off again, but I also think it will definitely drive some wavering oldies down the polling station to hold their nose and vote for Boris.
Yes I am an advocate of the theory that we are always fighting the current battle on the terms of the last war. So this time we have seen Boris take part in debates, I predict a Tory manifesto that is short in length and on detail with no fancy adult social care plans. After successfully engaging with electorate by promising to spend lots of money on public services, Labour are now promising to spend lots and lots more on public services pushing their credibility. Corbyn will answer questions about Anti Semitism and his friendship with terrorist groups in the same way as last time, but is likely to be less successful as it has not just been Tories criticising him - numerous ex labour MPs have now done so too.
It is playing into the Tory hands at the moment that they had such an appalling campaign last time as the are reacting against that.
There will now be radio phone-ins about the topic, in which clueless members of the public will talk a load of wank about the pile of wank.
Things will then move on in the morning with more Prince Andrew stories, and the pile of wank will be quickly forgotten.
We will nevertheless have to live with this wank for years and even decades, with one of those two wankers wanking everything up and making our already wanky country even wankier.
I never understand the requirement for more teachers. Surely there is one per classroom and the assistance comes from teaching assistants. Obviously if there are increasing population numbers then schools will be required to be built and teachers recruited,
Obviously other public services are not the same, more police, doctors, nurses etc can be deployed more readily where required.
The size of classes can change.
Well clearly but where the number of kids is 30 or below, and due to the buildings in most schools there is no capacity for additional teachers.
I've only watched extracts. How people can find one person more "trustworthy" and "in touch" than another and yet still find the other person more "likeable" makes me wonder what characteristics they want in a person that outweigh trustworthiness and being in touch. But then I have never been keen on extraverts.
I've thought about this long and hard, including trying to imagine my reaction if the roles had been reversed. My considered conclusion is this:
Anyone who seriously refers to the Tories Twitter stunt as "impersonation", has lost all grip on reality.
The doctored video of Keir Starmer is, in my view, over the line and they should not have done that.
The thing is the Tories are ahead, I didn't watch the debates but it appears Boris didn't implode, so why do it. Its bloody beyond stupid.
Also, Jezza has outrider social media mob that peddle fake news etc, doing crap like this just means you don't have a leg to stand out if you want to point out their dodgy behaviour. Also Team Jezza are at least smart enough to have all their dodgy cheerleaders at arms length so can practice deniability.
I've thought about this long and hard, including trying to imagine my reaction if the roles had been reversed. My considered conclusion is this:
Anyone who seriously refers to the Tories Twitter stunt as "impersonation", has lost all grip on reality.
The doctored video of Keir Starmer is, in my view, over the line and they should not have done that.
The thing is the Tories are ahead, I didn't watch the debates but it appears Boris didn't implode, so why do it. Its bloody beyond stupid.
Also, Jezza has outrider social media mob that peddle fake news etc, doing crap like this just means you don't have a leg to stand out if you want to point out their dodgy behaviour. Also Team Jezza are at least smart enough to have all their dodgy cheerleaders at arms length so can practice deniability.
Two things:
1) their Twitter handle referenced CCHQ throughout. It is for this reason that I think use of the word impersonation is so ludicrous.
2) pointing out blatant lies by Corbyn outriders is getting no one anywhere.
The thing is the Tories are ahead, I didn't watch the debates but it appears Boris didn't implode, so why do it. Its bloody beyond stupid.
Also, Jezza has outrider social media mob that peddle fake news etc, doing crap like this just means you don't have a leg to stand out if you want to point out their dodgy behaviour. Also Team Jezza are at least smart enough to have all their dodgy cheerleaders at arms length so can practice deniability.
I am a little bit bemused by the reaction to the Tories 'Fact Checking' link.
Are the left upset that the facts are wrong?
Or are they upset that the words fact and check were used?
If it is the former then it will be easy to rebut the claims...if it is the latter then I am afraid it is a hilarious objection, and I hope whoever is doing the outstanding social media job for the Tories continues to work their magic on the left who are hating having their tactics turned back on them.
I've only watched extracts. How people can find one person more "trustworthy" and "in touch" than another and yet still find the other person more "likeable" makes me wonder what characteristics they want in a person that outweigh trustworthiness and being in touch. But then I have never been keen on extraverts.
The idea that you can make judgements about those characteristics in people from watching a short TV show is ridiculous.
Talking of social media, you couldn't make it up....
The comic who Jeremy Corbyn has chosen to take over his Instagram during the debate has gigged to raise money for Hamas. Tez Ilyas is the first name on the line up of a ‘Human Appeal‘ event this year. Human Appeal is an organisation with “a record of links with the terrorist group Hamas” according to the Telegraph
Talking of social media, you couldn't make it up....
The comic who Jeremy Corbyn has chosen to take over his Instagram during the debate has gigged to raise money for Hamas. Tez Ilyas is the first name on the line up of a ‘Human Appeal‘ event this year. Human Appeal is an organisation with “a record of links with the terrorist group Hamas” according to the Telegraph
It sounds a bit tenuous but it should have been caught.
Tbh I'd have thought Styne sounds more Jewish than Steen but what do I know? Until pb tonight I'd not considered Epstein's religion. Given what we now know of his activities, I do not suppose he gave it much thought himself.
Talking of social media, you couldn't make it up....
The comic who Jeremy Corbyn has chosen to take over his Instagram during the debate has gigged to raise money for Hamas. Tez Ilyas is the first name on the line up of a ‘Human Appeal‘ event this year. Human Appeal is an organisation with “a record of links with the terrorist group Hamas” according to the Telegraph
It sounds a bit tenuous but it should have been caught.
As a one off, yes. The point is that it keeps happening. And not just old video clips from 10 years e.g. We had the Jezza do the photoshoot with the Hamas supporter to promote Jewish New Year only a couple of months ago.
Either this team are absolutely incompetent and / or its is just more evidence of the views of the sort of people which the Labour leadership are happy to associate with.
Tbh I'd have thought Styne sounds more Jewish than Steen but what do I know? Until pb tonight I'd not considered Epstein's religion. Given what we now know of his activities, I do not suppose he gave it much thought himself.
Even as somebody who rarely has anything good to say about Jezza, I am not sure I can get worked up about a single pronunciation of a name.
The thing is the Tories are ahead, I didn't watch the debates but it appears Boris didn't implode, so why do it. Its bloody beyond stupid.
Also, Jezza has outrider social media mob that peddle fake news etc, doing crap like this just means you don't have a leg to stand out if you want to point out their dodgy behaviour. Also Team Jezza are at least smart enough to have all their dodgy cheerleaders at arms length so can practice deniability.
I am a little bit bemused by the reaction to the Tories 'Fact Checking' link.
Are the left upset that the facts are wrong?
Or are they upset that the words fact and check were used?
If it is the former then it will be easy to rebut the claims...if it is the latter then I am afraid it is a hilarious objection, and I hope whoever is doing the outstanding social media job for the Tories continues to work their magic on the left who are hating having their tactics turned back on them.
It was an idiotic stunt with no upside for the Conservative Party, especially given their leader's past record. Too clever by half, perhaps?
Why did Corbyn pronounce Ep-styne, “Ep-shteen”? Was it to emphasise his Semitic provenance?
If you'd actually listened to how he pronounced it, you'd know that what he said was "Ep-shtyne".
That's how a large proportion of English-speaking people pronounce the final syllable in names such as "Einstein" and "Rubinstein" too. Nothing anti-Jewish about it whatsoever.
The thing is the Tories are ahead, I didn't watch the debates but it appears Boris didn't implode, so why do it. Its bloody beyond stupid.
Also, Jezza has outrider social media mob that peddle fake news etc, doing crap like this just means you don't have a leg to stand out if you want to point out their dodgy behaviour. Also Team Jezza are at least smart enough to have all their dodgy cheerleaders at arms length so can practice deniability.
I am a little bit bemused by the reaction to the Tories 'Fact Checking' link.
Are the left upset that the facts are wrong?
Or are they upset that the words fact and check were used?
If it is the former then it will be easy to rebut the claims...if it is the latter then I am afraid it is a hilarious objection, and I hope whoever is doing the outstanding social media job for the Tories continues to work their magic on the left who are hating having their tactics turned back on them.
It was an idiotic stunt with no upside for the Conservative Party, especially given their leader's past record. Too clever by half, perhaps?
The whole shit posting / meme bollocks strategy seems exactly that. I don't get it....and the thing is who are they convincing with all of this. The Tories aren't going to win the yuff vote and middle aged / old people who they need to get down the polling station in as large a number as possible are on the FaceAche and won't get all this stuff.
It is like they are running a social media campaign for an Andrew Yang type candidate trying to blow up reddit, when the whole of the Tory offer is aimed squarely at the older demographic who don't do the likes of reddit.
As Epstein is German it would be pronounced Ep-stine as they stress the second letter in the EI as in the number one ‘Ein’, and conversely number four ‘vier’. In English we do it the other way around so Ep-steen. I don’t understand why you would add a sh sound that is not written.
Tbh I'd have thought Styne sounds more Jewish than Steen but what do I know? Until pb tonight I'd not considered Epstein's religion. Given what we now know of his activities, I do not suppose he gave it much thought himself.
Yes it’s hardly like he would stop trafficking underage girls to observe the sabbath.
Tbh I'd have thought Styne sounds more Jewish than Steen but what do I know? Until pb tonight I'd not considered Epstein's religion. Given what we now know of his activities, I do not suppose he gave it much thought himself.
Yes it’s hardly like he would stop trafficking underage girls to observe the sabbath.
Perhaps somebody could ask Prince Andrew about it...
Tbh I'd have thought Styne sounds more Jewish than Steen but what do I know? Until pb tonight I'd not considered Epstein's religion. Given what we now know of his activities, I do not suppose he gave it much thought himself.
Even as somebody who rarely has anything good to say about Jezza, I am not sure I can get worked up about a single pronunciation of a name.
On checking a couple of American news videos, including the Jane Doe 15 one, it sounds like EpSTEEN is actually the correct pronunciation.
Wigmore said he and Banks were increasingly spending their time away from politics, working on a business growing hemp for CBD products in central America, dubbing themselves the “Breaking Bad Boys of Brexit”.
“We’ve gone into hemp in a big way because it’s Belize and gets six harvests a year. It’s not cannabis, you can’t get high on it,” he said.
The Sun are offering £10k to whoever can tell them where Ghislaine Maxwell is. That's not much for a story, but it sounds as though more is to come in the near future. The "newspaper" describes her as being "at the centre of the Andrew sex abuse storm".
Talking of social media, you couldn't make it up....
The comic who Jeremy Corbyn has chosen to take over his Instagram during the debate has gigged to raise money for Hamas. Tez Ilyas is the first name on the line up of a ‘Human Appeal‘ event this year. Human Appeal is an organisation with “a record of links with the terrorist group Hamas” according to the Telegraph
That seems ill-informed or disingenuous by the Telegraph and those peddling this. Human Appeal is a charity registered with the Charity Commission (England and Wales).
I'm unclear how a political party organiser having hired a standup comic who has previously performed at a fundraising event for an English registered charity is worthy of such criticism. If Telegraph have revelations now, they should be tested by the Commission or good journalism, not weaponised to attack Ilyas or Labour for acting in good faith with a registered charity registered as acting for public benefit.
Climate change, NHS, and how the economy works (or doesn't) for everyone is important. The quality and probity of decision-makers is clearly relevant too. Johnson and Corbyn and their teams require scrutiny, as do the others.
But not under insidious incitement through criticism of everything from a comic hired to how someone pronounces the name Epstein...
Talking of social media, you couldn't make it up....
The comic who Jeremy Corbyn has chosen to take over his Instagram during the debate has gigged to raise money for Hamas. Tez Ilyas is the first name on the line up of a ‘Human Appeal‘ event this year. Human Appeal is an organisation with “a record of links with the terrorist group Hamas” according to the Telegraph
That's disingenuous.
I'm unclear how a political party organiser having hired a standup comic who has previously performed at a fundraising event for an English registered charity is worthy of such criticism.
Climate change, NHS, and how the economy works (or doesn't) for everyone is important. The quality and probity of decision-makers is clearly relevant too. Johnson and Corbyn and their teams require scrutiny, as do the others.
But not under insidious incitement through criticism of everything from a comic hired to how someone pronounces a name...
Not exactly your regular charity. CIA claim they are front for Hamas and in a US State Department cable (leaked to Wikileaks) from 2003 accused Human Appeal of providing “financial support to organizations associated with Hamas” and stating that “members of its field offices in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Chechnya had connections to al-Qaeda associates.”
As a one-off, it is nothing, but this stuff keeps happening with the current Labour leadership.
Talking of social media, you couldn't make it up....
The comic who Jeremy Corbyn has chosen to take over his Instagram during the debate has gigged to raise money for Hamas. Tez Ilyas is the first name on the line up of a ‘Human Appeal‘ event this year. Human Appeal is an organisation with “a record of links with the terrorist group Hamas” according to the Telegraph
That's disingenuous.
I'm unclear how a political party organiser having hired a standup comic who has previously performed at a fundraising event for an English registered charity is worthy of such criticism.
Climate change, NHS, and how the economy works (or doesn't) for everyone is important. The quality and probity of decision-makers is clearly relevant too. Johnson and Corbyn and their teams require scrutiny, as do the others.
But not under insidious incitement through criticism of everything from a comic hired to how someone pronounces a name...
Not exactly your regular charity. CIA claim they are front for Hamas and in a US State Department cable (leaked to Wikileaks) from 2003 accused Human Appeal of providing “financial support to organizations associated with Hamas” and stating that “members of its field offices in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Chechnya had connections to al-Qaeda associates.”
As a one-off, it is nothing, but this stuff keeps happening with the current Labour leadership.
It's certainly thought-provoking. But a) Charity Commission investigated and stated there was no relationship with Hamas-supporting 'Union of Good' as alleged by some. b) Jewish Chronicle reported that links with Hamas were untrue, and apologised for previous suggestions. https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/human-appeal-international-an-apology-1.45385
Thus, as far as a comic supporting such a charity it's a non-event. For a senior political, unwise (given previous - though unproven and retracted - allegations). But using a comic, during a busy national election campaign, that once played at a charity gig. Picking up on that is a bit beyond. Though I agree that more care in general is required - by all.
Since Jeffrey Epstein's preferred pronunciation was "Ep-steen" (as I learnt a few hours ago), presumably the pronunciation "Ep-styne" should be considered dodgy too, given that "yne" for "ein" is just as foreign a pronuncation as "sh" for "s".
Since that observation can't be fitted in a tweet, it will probably get little traction though.
Since Jeffrey Epstein's preferred pronunciation was "Ep-steen" (as I learnt a few hours ago), presumably the pronunciation "Ep-styne" should be considered dodgy too, given that "yne" for "ein" is just as foreign a pronuncation as "sh" for "s".
Since that observation can't be fitted in a tweet, it will probably get little traction though.
Indeed.
So Johnson and Corbyn both potentially mispronounce a name slightly. A name that most viewers are likely unsure of. That's not a story. Yet for some that demonstrates that 'Corbyn's anti-semitic'. Wow.
The thing is the Tories are ahead, I didn't watch the debates but it appears Boris didn't implode, so why do it. Its bloody beyond stupid.
Also, Jezza has outrider social media mob that peddle fake news etc, doing crap like this just means you don't have a leg to stand out if you want to point out their dodgy behaviour. Also Team Jezza are at least smart enough to have all their dodgy cheerleaders at arms length so can practice deniability.
I am a little bit bemused by the reaction to the Tories 'Fact Checking' link.
Are the left upset that the facts are wrong?
Or are they upset that the words fact and check were used?
If it is the former then it will be easy to rebut the claims...if it is the latter then I am afraid it is a hilarious objection, and I hope whoever is doing the outstanding social media job for the Tories continues to work their magic on the left who are hating having their tactics turned back on them.
Lying is not about being true, or not. Lying is communicating with an intent to deceive someone else. Satire is different, it may deceive, but doesn't have that intent (or there is a reveal). Even if Lab did indeed do anything similar, that doesn't justify it.
Since Jeffrey Epstein's preferred pronunciation was "Ep-steen" (as I learnt a few hours ago), presumably the pronunciation "Ep-styne" should be considered dodgy too, given that "yne" for "ein" is just as foreign a pronuncation as "sh" for "s".
Since that observation can't be fitted in a tweet, it will probably get little traction though.
Those who think Corbyn is being antisemitic for using a specific pronunciation are, quite simply, mad.
So, from reading this thread, it sounds like there’s no point wasting an hour of my time watching the ‘debate’, if Jeremy exaggerating someone’s name and Boris’ team annoying the internet lefties were the highlights of the evening.
Why do they persist in having live audiences for these debates? It's so tedious hearing the baying and whooping from the partial elements on both sides.
As others noted already, each answer / rebuttal was given far too little time to fully develop a coherent point so all you have time for is glib soundbytes.
Since Jeffrey Epstein's preferred pronunciation was "Ep-steen" (as I learnt a few hours ago), presumably the pronunciation "Ep-styne" should be considered dodgy too, given that "yne" for "ein" is just as foreign a pronuncation as "sh" for "s".
Since that observation can't be fitted in a tweet, it will probably get little traction though.
Those who think Corbyn is being antisemitic for using a specific pronunciation are, quite simply, mad.
It made the Daily Mail;
'Every Jew watching noticed that': David Baddiel tweets his concerns as Jeremy Corbyn mis-pronounces Jeffrey Epstein's surname as 'Epschtine' sparking ANOTHER anti-Semitism row - as Labour leader and Boris Johnson dodge Prince Andrew question in debate
Since Jeffrey Epstein's preferred pronunciation was "Ep-steen" (as I learnt a few hours ago), presumably the pronunciation "Ep-styne" should be considered dodgy too, given that "yne" for "ein" is just as foreign a pronuncation as "sh" for "s".
Since that observation can't be fitted in a tweet, it will probably get little traction though.
Those who think Corbyn is being antisemitic for using a specific pronunciation are, quite simply, mad.
It made the Daily Mail;
'Every Jew watching noticed that': David Baddiel tweets his concerns as Jeremy Corbyn mis-pronounces Jeffrey Epstein's surname as 'Epschtine' sparking ANOTHER anti-Semitism row - as Labour leader and Boris Johnson dodge Prince Andrew question in debate
Perhaps its an indication of the sensitivity to the issue in the Jewish community?
I think it's the ultimate storm in a teacup. I myself have difficulty pronouncing strange surnames, so I have a lot of sympathy for Corbyn in that regard.
Since Jeffrey Epstein's preferred pronunciation was "Ep-steen" (as I learnt a few hours ago), presumably the pronunciation "Ep-styne" should be considered dodgy too, given that "yne" for "ein" is just as foreign a pronuncation as "sh" for "s".
Since that observation can't be fitted in a tweet, it will probably get little traction though.
Those who think Corbyn is being antisemitic for using a specific pronunciation are, quite simply, mad.
It made the Daily Mail;
'Every Jew watching noticed that': David Baddiel tweets his concerns as Jeremy Corbyn mis-pronounces Jeffrey Epstein's surname as 'Epschtine' sparking ANOTHER anti-Semitism row - as Labour leader and Boris Johnson dodge Prince Andrew question in debate
Perhaps its an indication of the sensitivity to the issue in the Jewish community?
I think it's the ultimate storm in a teacup. I myself have difficulty pronouncing strange surnames, so I have a lot of sympathy for Corbyn in that regard.
In the same sort of way, the name of the pop group Spandau Ballet ought to be pronounced Sh-pandau Ballet because that's how it's said in German and it's a German placename. In fact, Radio One DJ Tommy Vance did pronounce it that way occasionally.
The Yougov charts in the header might give both teams pause for thought.
Boris is seen as less trustworthy but more likeable and prime ministerial. It is the last two charts that are hard to reconcile and will worry Labour. Corbyn is rated higher on did well, and lower on badly, yet Boris edges the overall win.
The Tory Fact-check thing merely confirms the contempt the party has for the electorate and its willingness to deceive. Given the polling leads I genuinely don’t get why they are doing it. The trouble this kind of thing stores up for further down the line really isn’t worth the bother. It’s the same with ruling out an extension to the transition. They don’t need to do it. They’re up against Jeremy Corbyn, for God’s sake!!
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
An attempt to deceive would have been had they done it from a new account. In reality, all the tweets were made from an account called "CCHQPress".
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
An attempt to deceive would have been had they done it from a new account. In reality, all the tweets were made from an account called "CCHQPress".
And it has had exactly the desired affect - the Twittermob of Corbyn supporters aren’t talking about anything Boris Johnson said last night, they’re all utterly sidetracked by a stunt they’re only upset about because they didn’t think of it first.
David Cameron’s two famous quotes about Twitter were completely correct and ahead of their time.
Impersonation is a breach of Twitters rules that can lead to suspension.
Unless there is a FactCheck UK that they impersonated, I don't think they were in breach of any rules.
Pretty scuzzy trick though. I hope it backfires on the mendacious chimps who did it.
This is a good example of how daft the outrage bus has become
I’m not suggesting that you had any racist intent. But if you were a politician and there was anyone of African descent involved you would be accused of racism because you called them “chimps”
I think it’s a salvage than language is so cauterised like this
Comments
Love or hate the Tories this is a success for them - I mean it is a fact that Corbyn doesn’t have an opinion on Brexit, and he hopes to play this as a an intelligent reasonable position and the Tories are trying to say it is a dereliction of responsibility for a prospective PM.
Night all.
Have the rules changed? or do they start soon? or have I misremembered?
The Tories would rather have not done the debates, that is obvious, so a draw is a win...and a win is a huge win.
The debates and the manifesto's are the two main opportunities for both parties. Labour need to win well on both whereas from here the Tories only need a draw.
The Tory digital team have been outstanding in this campaign.
https://twitter.com/lucyprebblish/status/1196907215363424256?s=09
The Tories need to fight a bit dirty to take on Momentum. Clearly they have learned a lot from 2017 about how to win a digital war when they are clearly the underdogs. The PPB was another example of this.
The only surprise is that people think this is ok and will vote for more of it.
https://mobile.twitter.com/rabiasquared/status/1196913239604502534
He also seems to be a bit Teflon Pete.
So, there's a video clip about him at a Tea Party event talking about how the US is going in the wrong direction under Obama. And yet nobody seems to care. (Indeed, I've seen Dems defending it on the basis that it shows he knows how to reach out to Republicans.) Some candidates seem to get away with things in their past, others cannot.
Now, you can make the case that he's only running well in Iowa, and to a lesser extent New Hampshire. But if he wins both Primaries, then he will certainly have "the big mo".
https://twitter.com/ZachMontellaro/status/1196089658763022339?s=20
Labour on the other hand will definitely to be able to fire up the youngsters in the next week or so with free uni and cancel student debt.
Just putting this out there now, big Tory leads are predicated on Northern working class voting Tory like they have never done before and youngster turn out being more normal levels i.e. not turning out like last time. That should worry CCHQ.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/23/tories-hire-facebook-propaganda-pair-to-run-online-election-campaign
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50480498
I also think most people are aware of what happened last time. That obviously give Labour supporters hope that the Messiah can pull it off again, but I also think it will definitely drive some wavering oldies down the polling station to hold their nose and vote for Boris.
Obviously other public services are not the same, more police, doctors, nurses etc can be deployed more readily where required.
It is playing into the Tory hands at the moment that they had such an appalling campaign last time as the are reacting against that.
I shall retire to my bed for a good... read.
Anyone who seriously refers to the Tories Twitter stunt as "impersonation", has lost all grip on reality.
The doctored video of Keir Starmer is, in my view, over the line and they should not have done that.
Also, Jezza has outrider social media mob that peddle fake news etc, doing crap like this just means you don't have a leg to stand out if you want to point out their dodgy behaviour. Also Team Jezza are at least smart enough to have all their dodgy cheerleaders at arms length so can practice deniability.
1) their Twitter handle referenced CCHQ throughout. It is for this reason that I think use of the word impersonation is so ludicrous.
2) pointing out blatant lies by Corbyn outriders is getting no one anywhere.
Are the left upset that the facts are wrong?
Or are they upset that the words fact and check were used?
If it is the former then it will be easy to rebut the claims...if it is the latter then I am afraid it is a hilarious objection, and I hope whoever is doing the outstanding social media job for the Tories continues to work their magic on the left who are hating having their tactics turned back on them.
https://twitter.com/Baddiel/status/1196929204417433600?s=20
The comic who Jeremy Corbyn has chosen to take over his Instagram during the debate has gigged to raise money for Hamas. Tez Ilyas is the first name on the line up of a ‘Human Appeal‘ event this year. Human Appeal is an organisation with “a record of links with the terrorist group Hamas” according to the Telegraph
Either this team are absolutely incompetent and / or its is just more evidence of the views of the sort of people which the Labour leadership are happy to associate with.
That's how a large proportion of English-speaking people pronounce the final syllable in names such as "Einstein" and "Rubinstein" too. Nothing anti-Jewish about it whatsoever.
It is like they are running a social media campaign for an Andrew Yang type candidate trying to blow up reddit, when the whole of the Tory offer is aimed squarely at the older demographic who don't do the likes of reddit.
“We’ve gone into hemp in a big way because it’s Belize and gets six harvests a year. It’s not cannabis, you can’t get high on it,” he said.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/nov/19/arron-bankss-private-twitter-messages-leaked-by-hacker
They certainly are "interesting" characters.
I'm unclear how a political party organiser having hired a standup comic who has previously performed at a fundraising event for an English registered charity is worthy of such criticism. If Telegraph have revelations now, they should be tested by the Commission or good journalism, not weaponised to attack Ilyas or Labour for acting in good faith with a registered charity registered as acting for public benefit.
Climate change, NHS, and how the economy works (or doesn't) for everyone is important. The quality and probity of decision-makers is clearly relevant too. Johnson and Corbyn and their teams require scrutiny, as do the others.
But not under insidious incitement through criticism of everything from a comic hired to how someone pronounces the name Epstein...
As a one-off, it is nothing, but this stuff keeps happening with the current Labour leadership.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/50482316
a) Charity Commission investigated and stated there was no relationship with Hamas-supporting 'Union of Good' as alleged by some.
b) Jewish Chronicle reported that links with Hamas were untrue, and apologised for previous suggestions.
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/human-appeal-international-an-apology-1.45385
Thus, as far as a comic supporting such a charity it's a non-event. For a senior political, unwise (given previous - though unproven and retracted - allegations). But using a comic, during a busy national election campaign, that once played at a charity gig.
Picking up on that is a bit beyond.
Though I agree that more care in general is required - by all.
Since that observation can't be fitted in a tweet, it will probably get little traction though.
So Johnson and Corbyn both potentially mispronounce a name slightly.
A name that most viewers are likely unsure of.
That's not a story.
Yet for some that demonstrates that 'Corbyn's anti-semitic'.
Wow.
Lying is communicating with an intent to deceive someone else.
Satire is different, it may deceive, but doesn't have that intent (or there is a reveal).
Even if Lab did indeed do anything similar, that doesn't justify it.
As others noted already, each answer / rebuttal was given far too little time to fully develop a coherent point so all you have time for is glib soundbytes.
'Every Jew watching noticed that': David Baddiel tweets his concerns as Jeremy Corbyn mis-pronounces Jeffrey Epstein's surname as 'Epschtine' sparking ANOTHER anti-Semitism row - as Labour leader and Boris Johnson dodge Prince Andrew question in debate
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7703789/Boris-Johnson-Jeremy-Corbyn-REFUSE-Prince-Andrew-leadership-debate.html
Perhaps its an indication of the sensitivity to the issue in the Jewish community?
Is there a more up to date version?
If so, does internet address change each time you update it?
https://imgur.com/HISAOZH
Boris is seen as less trustworthy but more likeable and prime ministerial. It is the last two charts that are hard to reconcile and will worry Labour. Corbyn is rated higher on did well, and lower on badly, yet Boris edges the overall win.
https://imgur.com/A3iD3GQ
I'm relieved it wasn't another case of me being hopeless with IT!
(That was a autocorrect typo but I liked it,,,)
David Cameron’s two famous quotes about Twitter were completely correct and ahead of their time.
I’m not suggesting that you had any racist intent. But if you were a politician and there was anyone of African descent involved you would be accused of racism because you called them “chimps”
I think it’s a salvage than language is so cauterised like this