Current Affairs The Labour Party

[Tubey]

Mate, she literally said "STONG AND STABLE LEADERSHIP" to every question. She's a total blert, get with it.

She's awful at PMQs; Corbyn is worse. That's my point - the moment a somewhat competent, forceful politician asks an obvious question about her weakness, she's flustered.

Corbyn never manages to do it. Others do, like Cooper last week, and Robertson this.

 

[Milkman]

She's awful at PMQs; Corbyn is worse. That's my point - the moment a somewhat competent, forceful politician asks an obvious question about her weakness, she's flustered.

Corbyn never manages to do it. Others do, like Cooper last week, and Robertson this.

Put them in a room without 300 baying Tories openly laughing at the struggles of poor people and then you might have a contest worth judging.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Pensioners have had a disproportionately good time for too long so I've little sympathy.

 

[neil999]

Pensioners have had a disproportionately good time for too long so I've little sympathy.

agree, but they always vote...but i reckon tories can safely gamble on this as they are unlikely to change their allegiance

 

[flibbyflob]

Corbyn's last PMQs. And thank everything for that - I'm sick of cringing every Wednesday.

Wouldn't bet on it. He is stubborn enough to stay on whatever the result

 

[Old Blue 2]

Pensioners have had a disproportionately good time for too long so I've little sympathy.

You clearly know jack-sh1t about the overall state benefits system...

Even less, it would appear, about the post-WW2 purposes of the welfare state when it was brought in.

Let's see you provide the usual shedloads of googled upper-class right-wing info to support your contention...

 

[orly]

You clearly know jack-sh1t about the overall state benefits system...

Even less, it would appear, about the post-WW2 purposes of the welfare state when it was brought in.

Let's see you provide the usual shedloads of googled upper-class right-wing info to support your contention...

Lost your temper and swearing again.

 

[neil999]

You clearly know jack-sh1t about the overall state benefits system...

Even less, it would appear, about the post-WW2 purposes of the welfare state when it was brought in.

Let's see you provide the usual shedloads of googled upper-class right-wing info to support your contention...

the triple lock doesnt help pensioners who are on a very low level income as they are generally on pension credit and could be on housing benefit and council tax supprt which isnt subject to these rules, triple lock helps middle/high income pensioners, but im sure you knew all of that..

 

[Old Blue 2]

Lost your temper and swearing again.

Nah, our friend Bruce doesn't know what he's talking about. And having such an arrogant stance as he displays annoys me. Having worked in the State Benefits system for over 30 years, I've probably forgotten more about it than Bruce knows...

 

[orly]

Nah, our friend Bruce doesn't know what he's talking about. And having such an arrogant stance as he displays annoys me. Having worked in the State Benefits system for over 30 years, I've probably forgotten more about it than Bruce knows...

... right....

 

[Old Blue 2]

... right....

I take it you don't believe me. You don't believe the poverty I've seen over the decades, not just with the Pensioners I came into contact with, but the ordinary sick and unemployed.

I hope it never hits you, orly...

 

[orly]

I take it you don't believe me. You don't believe the poverty I've seen over the decades, not just with the Pensioners I came into contact with, but the ordinary sick and unemployed.

I hope it never hits you, orly...

I just think, in this instance, there's just a better way in terms of GrandOldTeam self-preservation, to put your point across

 

[Old Blue 2]

I just think, in this instance, there's just a better way in terms of GrandOldTeam self-preservation, to put your point across

Go read that post of Bruce's again, that I replied to. In my opinion, it was sneering and snidey, and lacking in any foundation in fact. That is why I replied the way I did. It was apparent it was a throwaway comment about pensioners. To me, it was a slur on those who rely on State aid.

If I posted some of the things I've seen, and had to deal with, as a young lad working in a Social Security office and out on the road visiting claimants (as they were called then), people wouldn't believe it...

 

[neil999]

Go read that post of Bruce's again, that I replied to. In my opinion, it was sneering and snidey, and lacking in any foundation in fact. That is why I replied the way I did. It was apparent it was a throwaway comment about pensioners. To me, it was a slur on those who rely on State aid.

If I posted some of the things I've seen, and had to deal with, as a young lad working in a Social Security office and out on the road visiting claimants (as they were called then), people wouldn't believe it...

It was about state pensions tho..not young lads

 

[Tubey]

Go read that post of Bruce's again, that I replied to. In my opinion, it was sneering and snidey, and lacking in any foundation in fact. That is why I replied the way I did. It was apparent it was a throwaway comment about pensioners. To me, it was a slur on those who rely on State aid.

If I posted some of the things I've seen, and had to deal with, as a young lad working in a Social Security office and out on the road visiting claimants (as they were called then), people wouldn't believe it...

Or or... it was an acknowledgement of this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38948369

Yet you decided to do your usual; go full on madman aggressive and pre-emptively dismiss any evidence to back up a point given to you.