Question Time

[Hamble]

After 10 years of Tory austerity I'm not at all surprised that people wanted change. However, the rabid right stirred the pot and put all of the blame for your government's policies on the EU. Hate to say it, but when austerity continues post Brexit, you'll soon be enlightened.


No, he most certainly didn't! The fool should never have offered a referendum. I'm not denigrating voters, but the great majority wouldn't have had the knowledge to make an analysis of the spurious information that was fed to them... many still don't.


I have a feeling that's what will happen... if she can get the backstop sorted. The EU needs you as much as you need them, it's in both your interests to settle. They're saying no, but you're coming down to the wire now. Who knows.

I know some MPS fancy a Norway type deal, but that won't wash. You'd have to accept the same terms as if you were in the EU, and pay for the privilege... with no say. As someone who, had I lived in the UK, would have voted Remain, I wouldn't be happy with that. Leavers would be even more unhappy.

There was a heavy anti Government anti Tory anti establishment vote Labour in saturation directed through social media.
Cameron lost and resigned-labour considered it a victory at the time.

Now Labour wants Brexit.
Corbyn said he voted Remain.
Unfortunately Comrade Corbyn won't engage.
He has not got a plan or the skills to deliver Brexit.

A no deal is better than Corbyn.

I think like you I will stick with a modified May deal which incidentally is coming about due to the heavy defeat on her original vote.

Politics changes so much day by day that I have no choice other than to go with feelings at the time.
A few months ago I would have voted/opted for a 'no deal' first May deal 2nd.

[AdmiralAckbar]

Who is 'us'?

"Us" refers to anyone reading your comments on this forum... why, is paranoia creeping in?

All I'm trying to do is correct inaccuracies (like saying the BBC apologised) because if innaccuracies are not challenged, people end up thinking they are true (particularly when they see the same inaccuracy from several sources).

The BBC released a statement.

... am so glad you are using the correct term now...

... but then you spoiled it by slipping back into the quagmire with the following ...

BBC apologises to Diane Abbott after Labour complains ...
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politi...s-diane-abbott...

The BBC has apologised to Diane Abbott after Labour made a formal complaint about the “unacceptable” treatment of the shadow home secretary on Question Time last week.

BBC apologises to Diane Abbott after Labour complaint ... - Trendolizer

uk.trendolizer.com/.../bbc-apologises-to-diane-abbott-after-labour-complaint-about-q...

Viewing figures for QT tonight should go up.

Quoting others making the same mistake (using the word apology instead of statement) doesn't really change the fact the wrong word was used in each case.

... and btw those links (in your post #66) don't work.

[Normal]

I thought the statement she made was given in a very condescending manner.

[Hamble]

"Us" refers to anyone reading your comments on this forum... why, is paranoia creeping in?

All I'm trying to do is correct inaccuracies (like saying the BBC apologised) because if innaccuracies are not challenged, people end up thinking they are true (particularly when they see the same inaccuracy from several sources).

... am so glad you are using the correct term now...

... but then you spoiled it by slipping back into the quagmire with the following ...



Quoting others making the same mistake (using the word apology instead of statement) doesn't really change the fact the wrong word was used in each case.

... and btw those links (in your post #66) don't work.

You mean anyone reading your comments!

You asked for me for links in which it was reported to the BBC apologised remember?
I also put a link to the response.

Quote Admiral Ackbar.
"Finally, you once again used the word "apologised" ... can you show us ANYWHERE where the BBC have actually use the phrases "we are sorry for" or "we apologise for" or similar, as all we have from them so far is a statement that says "we should have made it clear" ... that's a statement, not an apology."

Again-Fiona Bruce did not lie as you requoted Salus Populi on.
The BBC qualified that.

The other complaint from Dianne Abbott is still awaiting a response.
Whether that will be an apology none of us know.

[Hamble]

So on what basis did you conclude some polls were left wing and others were right wing but YouGov was non-partisan? (Apart from the fact you were using YouGov to back up your claim that Fiona Bruce was referring specifically to it when she didn't even mention it)

Salus.p I thought you may find this interesting.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

I am sure it is fair game for a politician to quote a poll which favours
their party.

[AdmiralAckbar]

You mean anyone reading your comments!

You asked for me for links in which it was reported to the BBC apologised remember?
I also put a link to the response.

Quote Admiral Ackbar.
"Finally, you once again used the word "apologised" ... can you show us ANYWHERE where the BBC have actually use the phrases "we are sorry for" or "we apologise for" or similar, as all we have from them so far is a statement that says "we should have made it clear" ... that's a statement, not an apology."

Again-Fiona Bruce did not lie as you requoted Salus Populi on.
The BBC qualified that.

The other complaint from Dianne Abbott is still awaiting a response.
Whether that will be an apology none of us know.

I'm used to having to trawl back through previous posts to evidence where you've tripped yourself up, but you've handed this one to me on a plate...

If you re-read your quoted post above, specifically the two bits I've highlighted in bold - all you've done is referred back to the infamous BBC statement and then gone on to quote me where I detailed exactly why it was NOT an apology at all! Wow. Epic fail.

Also, to clarify, I have clearly stated in Post 61

... what Salus said (specifically, about Bruce being incorrect saying Labour were behind in the polls).

I don't have a specific axe to grind with Bruce, and although others have used the word "lie" (and their comments have been quoted in some of my responses so I can understand you confusion), I believe I used the word "mistaken" (as in that she was probably badly advised).

... I was clearly taking you to task over the "behind in the polls" misinformation bit, so for you to now say directly to me

Again-Fiona Bruce did not lie as you requoted Salus Populi on.
The BBC qualified that.

you are either clearly not quite keeping up or trying to rewrite history (as in what I said or didn't say).

Hope you have a great weekend because you've just made mine!

[salus.populi]

Fact!
If a newspaper holds a readership poll it is biased to the general readership of that paper.
Papers with wide differing political views such as THE SUN and THE GUARDIAN.

I've never seen a poll that is exclusively restricted n
to the readership of a newspaper.

I would expect to find a bias in Trade Union Polls.

I've been a union member for over 30 years but have never been asked by my union to take part in an opinion poll.

Did Dianne Abbott specifically mention the polls she was quoting from?

Can we now conclude that you didn't actually watch the programme? One minute you're convinced that Bruce was saying things she never said and the next you're asking what Abbott said. Basically you tell lies that fit your own agenda.

[Toodles McGinty]

I thought the statement she made was given in a very condescending manner.

I also thought that. No mention of the alleged incidents before the show was filmed, perhaps that is still under investigation.

I noticed that she let everyone waffle on for far too long last night. Or I thought so, at least. Maybe she felt under pressure to let them speak, rather than interrupt with spurious statements. I suppose the lesson being find out the facts before you speak on national television. There's certainly a lesson for politicians in that.

The chap from LBC was a pompous prick. Every statement ended on an inflection of triumph, whether or not he made sense. I believe he's the man behind 'Topless Darts'. Says it all, really.

I'd like to have heard more from the businessman. The possibilities of Brexit probably have greater clarity when your livelihood depends on it.

Once again, the representatives of the two main parties hardly oozed credibility. Just for a change...

[Hamble]

I've never seen a poll that is exclusively restricted n
to the readership of a newspaper.

I've been a union member for over 30 years but have never been asked by my union to take part in an opinion poll.

Can we now conclude that you didn't actually watch the programme? One minute you're convinced that Bruce was saying things she never said and the next you're asking what Abbott said. Basically you tell lies that fit your own agenda.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...l-full-results


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/365948...ant-may-as-pm/

[Hamble]

I'm used to having to trawl back through previous posts to evidence where you've tripped yourself up, but you've handed this one to me on a plate...

If you re-read your quoted post above, specifically the two bits I've highlighted in bold - all you've done is referred back to the infamous BBC statement and then gone on to quote me where I detailed exactly why it was NOT an apology at all! Wow. Epic fail.

Also, to clarify, I have clearly stated in Post 61 ... I was clearly taking you to task over the "behind in the polls" misinformation bit, so for you to now say directly to me you are either clearly not quite keeping up or trying to rewrite history (as in what I said or didn't say).

Hope you have a great weekend because you've just made mine!

I have nothing more to add other than that I am waiting for the outcome of Dianne Abbott and the Labour Party's complaint against the BBC.

[Hamble]

I also thought that. No mention of the alleged incidents before the show was filmed, perhaps that is still under investigation.

I noticed that she let everyone waffle on for far too long last night. Or I thought so, at least. Maybe she felt under pressure to let them speak, rather than interrupt with spurious statements. I suppose the lesson being find out the facts before you speak on national television. There's certainly a lesson for politicians in that.

The chap from LBC was a pompous prick. Every statement ended on an inflection of triumph, whether or not he made sense. I believe he's the man behind 'Topless Darts'. Says it all, really.

I'd like to have heard more from the businessman. The possibilities of Brexit probably have greater clarity when your livelihood depends on it.

Once again, the representatives of the two main parties hardly oozed credibility. Just for a change...

I miss the way the old fellow would intervene with 'one person to talk at a time no one can hear you if all at once'.

[Toodles McGinty]

I miss the way the old fellow would intervene with 'one person to talk at a time no one can hear you if all at once'.

Yes. Early days yet, maybe she'll adopt a certain gravitas down the line.

Unfortunate about the controversy of her second show. Sounds like the new producer (or director, I forget which) might want to curb their determination to be quite so confrontational in a bid to grab ratings. I don't mind a bit of argy-bargy on policies, quite welcome it, in fact. But I think personal slurs should be left out of the pre-show whipping up of the audience.

[silver fox]

Salus.p I thought you may find this interesting.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

I am sure it is fair game for a politician to quote a poll which favours
their party.

Sure politicians will quote a poll which favours them, but tell me when did the presenter of QT get to overule anyone based on their own bias.

The presenters job is surely to control the show, intervene if someone is blatantly lying, try to get politicians to actually answer questions, it isn't in any way their position to put anyone down with a lie of their own.

[Hamble]

Yes. Early days yet, maybe she'll adopt a certain gravitas down the line.

Unfortunate about the controversy of her second show. Sounds like the new producer (or director, I forget which) might want to curb their determination to be quite so confrontational in a bid to grab ratings. I don't mind a bit of argy-bargy on policies, quite welcome it, in fact. But I think personal slurs should be left out of the pre-show whipping up of the audience.

Totally agree.

Did you watch Fiona Bruce's other programme's 'Fake or Fortune' and Antique's Road Show'?
Her style on both was to bring her own personality and views into the programme which worked well.

Perhaps the style more suited for Question Time is newsreader mode
to avoid misunderstandings.

[Hamble]

Sure politicians will quote a poll which favours them, but tell me when did the presenter of QT get to overule anyone based on their own bias.

The presenters job is surely to control the show, intervene if someone is blatantly lying, try to get politicians to actually answer questions, it isn't in any way their position to put anyone down with a lie of their own.

The YouGov pol did put the Tory's ahead.

Dianne Abbott should have been quite capable of arguing her point on the polls and naming the ones she believed put Labour ahead backing up her facts.
Did she not know the result of the YouGov Poll?