3 ms·

Is the goal here to make Corbyn look good by comparison to Johnson? The median voter seems to think they are both unfit to lead, so it’s probably not an effecti

Is the goal here to make Corbyn look good by comparison to Johnson? The median voter seems to think they are both unfit to lead, so it’s probably not an effective argument.

jodrellblank 4y ago
The goal is to refuse to let Conservatives leave that kind of spin uncontested. Everything the comment accused Corbyn of doing leading to "you people will never win in the real world" was done by BoJo, and it didn't stop him winning in the real world.
- fshbbdssbbgdd 4y ago
  Some of the stuff you listed happened after Johnson won (or came to light after his victory), and before he resigned in disgrace, so doesn’t particularly serve the point you are making.
  - gghhzzgghhzz 4y ago
    he wrote Seventy Two Virgins (the book having a character who loved money, had a hocked nose and jewish name) in 2004. he continuously wrote racist, sexist and homophobic comments in his articles since. His relationship with Jennifer Arcuri and public spending implications was out before 2019. It was all out in the public domain. It was the media's jobs to ignore this and pretend the main issue was one case where Corbyn liked a photo on facebook that he later claimed he hadn't paid enough attention to and apologised for (Johnson has never apologised or been called on to apologise)
    - fshbbdssbbgdd 4y ago
      I haven’t looked into this question before, but it’s fascinating to compare the second-hand characterizations of what Johnson has apologized for with his direct quotes: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-piccaninnies-letterbox-apology-b1884677.html?amp https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson...
- gghhzzgghhzz 4y ago
  you should always ask the question. what was it that made it so difficult to elect someone like Corbyn, yet so easy to elect someone like Johnson? That's the actual interesting question here.
  - astrange 4y ago
    Mostly seems to be that British press is entirely opinionated tabloids who choose to "find out" that a scandal happened a year later based on whether they like the guy it happened to or not.

Is the goal here to make Corbyn look good by comparison to Johnson? The median voter seems to think they are both unfit to lead, so it’s probably not an effective argument.

jodrellblank 4y ago

The goal is to refuse to let Conservatives leave that kind of spin uncontested. Everything the comment accused Corbyn of doing leading to "you people will never win in the real world" was done by BoJo, and it didn't stop him winning in the real world.

fshbbdssbbgdd 4y ago
Some of the stuff you listed happened after Johnson won (or came to light after his victory), and before he resigned in disgrace, so doesn’t particularly serve the point you are making.
- gghhzzgghhzz 4y ago
  he wrote Seventy Two Virgins (the book having a character who loved money, had a hocked nose and jewish name) in 2004. he continuously wrote racist, sexist and homophobic comments in his articles since. His relationship with Jennifer Arcuri and public spending implications was out before 2019. It was all out in the public domain. It was the media's jobs to ignore this and pretend the main issue was one case where Corbyn liked a photo on facebook that he later claimed he hadn't paid enough attention to and apologised for (Johnson has never apologised or been called on to apologise)
  - fshbbdssbbgdd 4y ago
    I haven’t looked into this question before, but it’s fascinating to compare the second-hand characterizations of what Johnson has apologized for with his direct quotes: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-piccaninnies-letterbox-apology-b1884677.html?amp https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson...
gghhzzgghhzz 4y ago
you should always ask the question. what was it that made it so difficult to elect someone like Corbyn, yet so easy to elect someone like Johnson? That's the actual interesting question here.
- astrange 4y ago
  Mostly seems to be that British press is entirely opinionated tabloids who choose to "find out" that a scandal happened a year later based on whether they like the guy it happened to or not.