Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)

With all the recent shite talk of rebranding Corbyn, if someone in his team could just make him watch this



Ok it still might not win you the election but christ at least it's a coherent message.


He's gone very quiet since the reelection but then i think thats probably because the rebels have stopped creating news constantly.

Its not a bad idea for him to stay out of the news for a while whilst the tory mess is highlighted. Hopefully they take the time to get a solid brexit message.
 
With all the recent shite talk of rebranding Corbyn, if someone in his team could just make him watch this



Ok it still might not win you the election but christ at least it's a coherent message.


Watching it and I think Corbyn's problem is that he just doesn't have the same innate passion and drive that Bernie has when he talks. Sanders is that guy you see at the centre of a party or event; the sort of person everyone stands around and listens to. Corbyn's the one standing in the corner, quietly sipping his drink.

There's nothing wrong with that...but it's ultimately not what you typically want in a leader-type politician, and it's primarily not the type of leader you want when that leaders supposed to be an inspiring type of candidate for change.

I want to believe he'll have some sort of re-branding that'll work, but I'm not sure what can be done now that hasn't already been done. I'm losing patience with him because it's appearing more and more he'll be destroyed in 2020...and while I think it was all well and good to blame the dissenters up until now, he's won the re-election and needs to use that to actually start driving forward, creating a movement that genuinely has a message and appeals to people...and I've seen little to suggest that'll happen.
 
He's gone very quiet since the reelection but then i think thats probably because the rebels have stopped creating news constantly.

Its not a bad idea for him to stay out of the news for a while whilst the tory mess is highlighted. Hopefully they take the time to get a solid brexit message.

Trouble is Brexit highlights a very deep problem for Labour, much deeper than a mere policy position. It's core vote is being pulled in opposite directions based on very different value systems and the party doesn't know which way to follow. This is something that's been coming for decades actually, but Labours success in the late 90s masked the problem for a while.

What Corbyn needs to do is lead Labour through a period of reflection and analysis as deep as it faced in the late 80s when it became apparent the post war consensus wasn't coming back. It needs to figure out if it's possible to represent both working class social conservatives and middle class social liberals, given that the two groups increasingly want diametrically opposed things from their Government (and the EU).

Unfortunately Corbyn shows few signs of being the leader that can pull the party through that difficult process. Instead the party just kind of does nothing and is letting Brexit largely pass it by.
 
He's gone very quiet since the reelection but then i think thats probably because the rebels have stopped creating news constantly.

Its not a bad idea for him to stay out of the news for a while whilst the tory mess is highlighted. Hopefully they take the time to get a solid brexit message.
Hopefully that's the reasoning, the last few weeks have shown May to be awful(That recent gif all most makes me feel sorry for her)but I can't help but think the reason for all quite on the Labour side has more to do with this
Trouble is Brexit highlights a very deep problem for Labour, much deeper than a mere policy position. It's core vote is being pulled in opposite directions based on very different value systems and the party doesn't know which way to follow. This is something that's been coming for decades actually, but Labours success in the late 90s masked the problem for a while.

What Corbyn needs to do is lead Labour through a period of reflection and analysis as deep as it faced in the late 80s when it became apparent the post war consensus wasn't coming back. It needs to figure out if it's possible to represent both working class social conservatives and middle class social liberals, given that the two groups increasingly want diametrically opposed things from their Government (and the EU).

Unfortunately Corbyn shows few signs of being the leader that can pull the party through that difficult process. Instead the party just kind of does nothing and is letting Brexit largely pass it by.



Watching it and I think Corbyn's problem is that he just doesn't have the same innate passion and drive that Bernie has when he talks. Sanders is that guy you see at the centre of a party or event; the sort of person everyone stands around and listens to. Corbyn's the one standing in the corner, quietly sipping his drink.

There's nothing wrong with that...but it's ultimately not what you typically want in a leader-type politician, and it's primarily not the type of leader you want when that leaders supposed to be an inspiring type of candidate for change.

I want to believe he'll have some sort of re-branding that'll work, but I'm not sure what can be done now that hasn't already been done. I'm losing patience with him because it's appearing more and more he'll be destroyed in 2020...and while I think it was all well and good to blame the dissenters up until now, he's won the re-election and needs to use that to actually start driving forward, creating a movement that genuinely has a message and appeals to people...and I've seen little to suggest that'll happen.

Oh I Agree. I partly posted the video out of frustration as while I agree with the socialist argument put forward by likes Bernie and Corbyn, I think it's only really resonates when you have to (oddly enough)really sell it, which something Bernie does but Corbyn lacks. Wither this new ''re branding'' address the issue will have to be seen, although like yourself I'm not overly optimistic. Although it should be mentioned that his credit there has been a change in rhetoric at least since the Trump win at least.

My annoyances and where my patience is running out is with as you said the lack of a driving force to create a movement, fair enough for people like me who pretty much live in Toryland central but for the rest of the country there's no reason to try Syriza model in the form of Solidarity Clubs, there's not even talk of such things.
 
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-corbyns-radicalism-in-video-message-for-2017

Jeremy Corbyn will urge the public to join him in taking on the political establishment in 2017, in a new year video message aimed at cementing his reputation as a combative outsider.

In the video shot at Westminster, Corbyn describes 2016 as “a year that will live long in all of our memories” and says he understands some of the concerns that led to the Brexit vote.

“People didn’t trust politicians and they didn’t trust the European Union,” he says. “I understand that. I’ve spent over 40 years in politics campaigning for a better way of doing things, standing up for people, taking on the establishment and opposing decisions that would make us worse off.”

He promises to fight against a Brexit deal that would safeguard the interests of City banks or continue “corporate handouts” to big businesses, saying: “Labour was founded to stand up for people, and we founded the institutions that do that day in and day out, like our NHS. We are the party that listens to you and makes Britain better. Let’s do that, together, in 2017.”

Labour strategists have taken a deliberate decision to play to Corbyn’s strength as an unpolished political maverick who has notoriously refused to toe the party line throughout several decades as an MP.

The Labour leader has appeared more assured since he convincingly saw off Owen Smith’s leadership challenge in September, with his opponent admitting that Corbyn’s performance at the dispatch box has improved.

Corbyn also knows Labour will be under intense scrutiny in the months ahead. Close allies, including the shadow home secretary, Diane Abbott, have acknowledged that the party needs to try to close the gap with the Conservatives in the polls.

In the video, in which he appears in a tailored navy jacket against the south bank skyline of County Hall and the London Eye, Corbyn reflects on the past year, saying: “Every day I see the political system letting down the people of this country; how decisions made in Westminster are making people’s lives harder.”

He cites rising homelessness, the crisis in social care funding and the increasing prevalence of low pay and insecure jobs. “Millions of people can’t plan their lives because, whether on temporary or zero hours contracts, they don’t know what job or what hours they’ll have from day to day, week to week or month to month. And for many, pay is so low that it doesn’t make ends meet.”

Labour is attempting to gear up for a potential snap general election in early 2017, although no candidates have yet been selected for key seats. MPs with marginal seats in former industrial areas far from Corbyn’s Islington constituency doubt his appeal extends beyond the metropolis.

The party may have a battle on its hands to maintain the Copeland constituency that will shortly be vacated by Jamie Reed, the Corbyn critic who is leaving parliament to work for the nuclear site Sellafield.

Corbyn was blamed by many of his pro-EU MPs for failing to fight hard enough to win the referendum, but his allies believe that his cautious tone, in which he encouraged voters to stick with the EU “warts and all” better reflected the public mood.

John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, sparked outrage among some in his own party recently by citing the “enormous opportunities” Brexit could bring. Corbyn’s new year message reiterates his stance that Labour “accepts and respects the result of the referendum”.

After the shadow Brexit secretary, Keir Starmer, pushed the government to promise to produce a plan before legislating to invoke article 50 in the new year, Corbyn hinted that Labour might do more to try to influence the process. “We won’t be blocking our leaving the European Union, but we won’t stand by,” he said.

Corbyn’s more combative tone was evident in a Guardian interview earlier this week, in which he compared Theresa May’s wish to use the royal prerogative to take Britain out of the EU with Henry VIII.

The Labour leader makes no reference to his own turbulent year, which saw him face down scores of shadow cabinet resignations and a vote of no confidence by 172 of his own MPs – an overwhelming majority. Most backbenchers believe it is unlikely he will face a fresh threat to his leadership in 2017.

D'oh.
 
Wrong enemy in that advert. Cheap attempt to cash in on anti-EU sentiment in a new way I guess.
 
Wrong enemy in that advert. Cheap attempt to cash in on anti-EU sentiment in a new way I guess.
Yeah really odd stuff, well it's actual pretty awful. I still can't get over the two German lads watching the semi final from 2010, it's like really shit Back 2 The Future .
 
Yeah really odd stuff, well it's actual pretty awful. I still can't get over the two German lads watching the semi final from 2010, it's like really shit Back 2 The Future .

Surprised the referee that disallowed the Lampard goal didn't also buy a share in the railways.
 
That's terrible. It's also really hard to follow whatever point it's trying to make. How does the privatisation of rail companies in the Uk benefit people who live in other European countries?
It's a strange argument that evil European companies skim profits off our railways to subsidise ticket prices on their own, not actually beyond the bounds of believability. The prices here are a scandal compared to abroad. Unpleasant tone to the strange ad though.
 
It's a strange argument that evil European companies skim profits off our railways to subsidise ticket prices on their own, not actually beyond the bounds of believability. The prices here are a scandal compared to abroad. Unpleasant tone to the strange ad though.

I thought the point was that the European railways aren't privately owned like they are in the UK?
 
I thought the point was that the European railways aren't privately owned like they are in the UK?

The point isn't that hard to grasp is it? State owned companies in Europe are skimming money off the top and getting huge subsidies so why not just do it ourselves?

The xenophobic angle is unpleasant. But apparently that's what political discourse in this country is now.

It's still amusing to see Nick has posted the article though given how much he bitterly complained that far worse things were being called xenophobic during the Brexit campaign. Apparently it's fair game if he agrees with the political posistion of the person being a xenophobe...
 
It is weird that their public railways run franchises on our privately owned one. Or something like that.

How does that work?

And what the feck are they on about when they UK tax-payers subsidise EU fares even if they don't get the train? That has to be a shot at the whole EU project, which has feck all to do with trains at any level.

The whole thing's a hot mess. Xenophobia aside, the content is completely baffling. I guess that's this whole post-truth era we're living. Relying on dim arseholes to share party political content with unpleasant undertones via social media, without ever having to bother making a coherent point about your policies.

"Privatization bad. Europeans skiving off us. Gotcha. Let's tell all my mates!"
 
The point isn't that hard to grasp is it? State owned companies in Europe are skimming money off the top and getting huge subsidies so why not just do it ourselves?

The xenophobic angle is unpleasant. But apparently that's what political discourse in this country is now.

It's still amusing to see Nick has posted the article though given how much he bitterly complained that far worse things were being called xenophobic during the Brexit campaign. Apparently it's fair game if he agrees with the political posistion of the person being a xenophobe...

I certainly can't grasp that bit in bold. Explain it to me like I'm five.
 
They're basically trying to say that the UK rail system should be run more like the excellent European ones but don't want to alienate the Litttle Englanders so are using tortuous logic to simultaneously covet the way they run their rail networks, while portraying the evil EU as being partly responsible for English people being ripped off by private rail companies.

The whole thing is typical of the conflicted drivel from Corbyn's camp about Europe that saw them make such a hash of the Remain campaign.
 
Looked pretty accurate to me, the UK's private rail companies receive £3.5b+ in government subsidies every year (which is coming from taxpayers regardless of their rail usage) and pay back around £1b of that but still pay their shareholders dividends every year. The bulk of those rail operators are overseas companies who can bid lower than UK operators because they can build their expertise in and leverage their services against their national public operations. In fact South West and East Coast are the only UK operators that pay back more to the government than they take in subsidy and East Coast is still publicly owned.

http://actionforrail.org/private-ra...c-subsidies-to-fund-pay-outs-to-shareholders/

I don't see the xenophobia angle either, all I see is a sarcastic jibe at our useless government at their wasteful best and the money grubbing nature the privatizations they laud as a great success really harbour whilst our government tries to blame our declining services on the evil EU. Yes, Europeans are laughing at us and rightly so, we pay more both directly in fares and indirectly through subsidies than any other EU country for a system that we would struggle to even call second rate these days.
 
I certainly can't grasp that bit in bold. Explain it to me like I'm five.

It's just a classic left-wing argument isn't it?

We're all getting ripped off and paying more than we need to because the only reason Abellio (for example) exists is to turn a profit. Therefore it would be cheaper for all of us to just run it ourselves and not give the money away. The examples they picked are all, I think, true. They are state owned rail companies in France, Germany and the Netherlands whose international branches that run the franchises so not only are we stupid enough to pay more than we need to we're stupid enough to let our neighbours profit off of our stupidity.

I thought (and still do think actually) that the tone they were going for wasn't 'Europeans are evil for doing this' but 'Europeans are laughing at us for how stupid we're being by letting them make money at our expense'. I'm sure it was supposed to be a light hearted jest at us rather than a 'us vs them' thing, but then they included that football scene and it definitely misses that mark and becomes xenophobic at that point.
 
Last edited:
Over here in the Netherlands, everybody hates the Railways and they're anything but cheap. In terms of ticket prices it looks like we're slightly better off though.

I didn't understand the video either at first. But apparently you have the Dutch National Railways, which is an Ltd, yet all the shares are somehow owned by the State.

Back in the 90's they semi-privatised it by stopping all government subsidies, inspired by the British model. This is seen as the source of some massive problem. For example there was the Fyra-debacle, they wanted to build a high speed network, but they ended up buying shite trains so everything fell apart and they stopped the project. Costs: 11 billion of tax money, and there might be more to come.

Anyway, The Dutch National Railways has a daughter company callled Abellio:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abellio_(transport_company)

And the criticism is that Dutch National Railways use profits from Abellio's franchises to keep their ticket prices relatively 'low'.
 
I don't see the xenophobia angle either, all I see is a sarcastic jibe at our useless government at their wasteful best and the money grubbing nature the privatizations they laud as a great success really harbour whilst our government tries to blame our declining services on the evil EU. Yes, Europeans are laughing at us and rightly so, we pay more both directly in fares and indirectly through subsidies than any other EU country for a system that we would struggle to even call second rate these days.

I thought (and still do think actually) that the tone they were going for wasn't 'Europeans are evil for doing this' but 'Europeans are laughing at us for how stupid we're being by letting them make money at our expense'. I'm sure it was supposed to be a light hearted jest at us rather than a 'us vs them' thing, but then they included that football scene and it definitely misses that mark and becomes xenophobic at that point.

Come on, lads. You're describing a different video. How many times do they need to say "thank you" for you to accept that the point being made here is that EU train-fares are cheap because people in the UK are being ripped off? This isn't about making people jealous of the cheap fares on the continent, it's about making other EU countries share the blame for the extortionate prices in the UK. Like I said, the whole thing is a hot mess but that message gets home, loud and clear.

Anyway, The Dutch National Railways has a daughter company callled Abellio:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abellio_(transport_company)

And the criticism is that Dutch National Railways use profits from Abellio's franchises to keep their ticket prices relatively 'low'.

Now you could be onto something here. Although it's a testament to how terrible their argument is that it took this long for any of us to work out what the feck they're talking about. It does sound like an unusual situation, though. You'd have to wonder how many other UK franchises are owned by daughter companies of national railway companies.

The second point they're making still makes no sense . "Even if you don't get the train you're subsidising EU train fares" Well ok, that's a point about UK tax-payers money going to other EU countries. An entirely different argument, which has issues way beyond rail networks. And, if anything, the privatisation of utilities is a good thing if you're worried about your hard-earned money being misspent by the Government to benefit people living in other countries.
 
Come on, lads. You're describing a different video. How many times do they need to say "thank you" for you to accept that the point being made here is that EU train-fares are cheap because people in the UK are being ripped off? This isn't about making people jealous of the cheap fares on the continent, it's about making other EU countries share the blame for the extortionate prices in the UK. Like I said, the whole thing is a hot mess but that message gets home, loud and clear.



Now you could be onto something here. Although it's a testament to how terrible their argument is that it took this long for any of us to work out what the feck they're talking about. It does sound like an unusual situation, though. You'd have to wonder how many other UK franchises are owned by daughter companies of national railway companies.

The second point they're making still makes no sense . "Even if you don't get the train you're subsidising EU train fares" Well ok, that's a point about UK tax-payers money going to other EU countries. An entirely different argument, which has issues way beyond rail networks. And, if anything, the privatisation of utilities is a good thing if you're worried about your hard-earned money being misspent by the Government to benefit people living in other countries.

It literally says what he said in the video.

'The profits go to making our railways cheaper'. 0:44.

Are you sure its us watching a different video Pogue?
 
It was a touch nationalist, but mostly in advancing the cause of railways nationalisation. Moves toward the latter are a set objective of the leadership as we know.


It's still amusing to see Nick has posted the article though given how much he bitterly complained that far worse things were being called xenophobic during the Brexit campaign. Apparently it's fair game if he agrees with the political position of the person being a xenophobe...

All i have done here is post a story and its related video, for the purpose of discussion. Nothing more, nothing less. Often, i'll post my stated opinion on a matter, but not always. In large part my complaints centred around people being misrepresented or disparaged without justification, something which you appear to be doing here for no apparent reason.
 
Last edited:
It literally says what he said in the video.

'The profits go to making our railways cheaper'. 0:44.

Are you sure its us watching a different video Pogue?

I'm not the one trying to claim that they're laughing at the UK for privatising railways. They're not laughing at you, they're thanking you. I'm still not convinced there's any logic in this, that one Dutch company aside. And even then, it's kind of mental that a video about the evils of privatisation is based around an example of a private company allegedly using its profits to keep prices down for people using national rail services!
 
I'm not the one trying to claim that they're laughing at the UK for privatising railways. They're not laughing at you, they're thanking you. I'm still not convinced there's any logic in this, that one Dutch company aside. And even then, it's kind of mental that a video about the evils of privatisation is based around an example of a private company using its profits to keep prices down for people using national rail services!

I mean you sort of are. Only that your argument is that you're saying that Momentum are doing it in a 'evil, plotting, foreigner' sort of way, but we're saying that it doesn't seem like the tone they were going for based on the videos vibe.

It's a weird video, and they get the tone hopelessly wrong (especially at the end), but I do think the argument (as I see it) underlying it is valid enough.

Anyway, im not going to defend it too much because I agree with you that that's how it comes across. I just think what they were trying to do was less bad.

It was a touch nationalist, but mostly in advancing the cause of railways nationalisation. Moves toward the latter are a set objective of the leadership as we know.




All i ha e done here is post a story and its related video, for the purpose of discussion. Nothing more, nothing less. Often, i'll post my stated opinion on a matter, but not always. In large part my complaints centred around people being misrepresented or disparaged without justification, something which you appear to be doing here for no apparent reason.

You just seem an incredibly odd candidate to start bringing attention to issues of xenophobia in the political sphere because you were completely happy to give it oxygen when it suited. If you posted a story 'for the purpose of discussion' about Leave xenophobia during the referendum I'll happily apologise, but if memory serves you were completely silent and, in fact, defended it.
 
Last edited:
Come on, lads. You're describing a different video. How many times do they need to say "thank you" for you to accept that the point being made here is that EU train-fares are cheap because people in the UK are being ripped off? This isn't about making people jealous of the cheap fares on the continent, it's about making other EU countries share the blame for the extortionate prices in the UK. Like I said, the whole thing is a hot mess but that message gets home, loud and clear.

It probably is aiming to appeal a bit to the UKIP type protest voters but if anything it's highlighting how our government rips us off and doesn't care where the profits go and at least it's doing it with truth and a bit of humour rather than seeking to blame Johnny Foreigner for the state of the 6:57 from Portsmouth.

Now you could be onto something here. Although it's a testament to how terrible their argument is that it took this long for any of us to work out what the feck they're talking about. It does sound like an unusual situation, though. You'd have to wonder how many other UK franchises are owned by daughter companies of national railway companies.

The second point they're making still makes no sense . "Even if you don't get the train you're subsidising EU train fares" Well ok, that's a point about UK tax-payers money going to other EU countries. An entirely different argument, which has issues way beyond rail networks. And, if anything, the privatisation of utilities is a good thing if you're worried about your hard-earned money being misspent by the Government to benefit people living in other countries.

Aside from Abellio, linked with the Dutch National rail system we have Arriva, owned by Deutsche Bahn, Govia which is part owned by Keolis a subsidiary of SNCF and part shares in some services by the likes of SNCF and Ferrovia of Spain as well as the MTRC from Hong Kong.

As far as the argument over public vs private ownership goes, I'd personally rather see it re nationalised and run well for the benefit of the UK commuters and businesses but wouldn't trust anyone in the current government to run a piss up in a brewery and sadly suspect that we're so far down the rabbit hole with privatised services that there's no way back. That said, I'd also argue that we are that entwined in Europe that there's no way to extricate ourselves without fecking over our entire economy but it seems I'm in the minority on that one so who knows where things might go, maybe if Theresa and Boris do manage to sink us with Brexit Jeremy might appear electable and Momentum might get their wish to see the rail service back in public hands although my feelings of victory will be tainted slightly by being forced to move back to the 1930s..
 
It probably is aiming to appeal a bit to the UKIP type protest voters but if anything it's highlighting how our government rips us off and doesn't care where the profits go and at least it's doing it with truth and a bit of humour rather than seeking to blame Johnny Foreigner for the state of the 6:57 from Portsmouth.

That's exactly what it's doing. Johnny Foreigner gets cheap train tickets because you're being ripped off. Looks at those smug Europeans. You're paying for their tickets.
 
Now you could be onto something here. Although it's a testament to how terrible their argument is that it took this long for any of us to work out what the feck they're talking about. It does sound like an unusual situation, though. You'd have to wonder how many other UK franchises are owned by daughter companies of national railway companies.

The second point they're making still makes no sense . "Even if you don't get the train you're subsidising EU train fares" Well ok, that's a point about UK tax-payers money going to other EU countries. An entirely different argument, which has issues way beyond rail networks. And, if anything, the privatisation of utilities is a good thing if you're worried about your hard-earned money being misspent by the Government to benefit people living in other countries.

Railways are one big mindfeck in general, trying to understand them might be a waste of time.

From what I gather though, the counter arguments in this case were that Abellio only makes 'tens of millions' of profits. In this article it even says 3.64 million pounds:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...ritish-train-companies-revenue_n_8003970.html

So 3.6 million pounds of profits flow back to the Netherlands in this scenario, while the state owned railwails have a yearly turnover of 5 billion euro. So technically they're correct, realisticly the claims are completly empty.

Then there's the problem that other foreign companies are active on the Dutch rail network too (and I assume it's the same in other countries), so the market is just mixed up in general.

The real problem is still the privatisation. I don't even know what it means. In the UK it means rail services being provided by private companies, yet I also read the government is still funding those services, apparently they still own actual trains and are financially responsible for employees in some form.

Over here privatisation means the State owns all the shares of the Railways, yet the Railways get no subsidies and they can run it like a normal company. But when the idiot managers make the wrong decisions and create 11 billion worth of debt because of a failed project, it's still being paid for by tax money and upping the ticket prices. And the end conclusion of all kind of research-commissions and parlementary debates is none of this would've gotten so out of hand if the Railways had simply remained a state enterprise.

Like I said, a proper mindfeck.
 
Railways are one big mindfeck in general, trying to understand them might be a waste of time.

From what I gather though, the counter arguments in this case were that Abellio only makes 'tens of millions' of profits. In this article it even says 3.64 million pounds:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...ritish-train-companies-revenue_n_8003970.html

So 3.6 million pounds of profits flow back to the Netherlands in this scenario, while the state owned railwails have a yearly turnover of 5 billion euro. So technically they're correct, realisticly the claims are completly empty.

Then there's the problem that other foreign companies are active on the Dutch rail network too (and I assume it's the same in other countries), so the market is just mixed up in general.

The real problem is still the privatisation. I don't even know what it means. In the UK it means rail services being provided by private companies, yet I also read the government is still funding those services, apparently they still own actual trains and are financially responsible for employees in some form.

Over here privatisation means the State owns all the shares of the Railways, yet the Railways get no subsidies and they can run it like a normal company. But when the idiot managers make the wrong decisions and create 11 billion worth of debt because of a failed project, it's still being paid for by tax money and upping the ticket prices. And the end conclusion of all kind of research-commissions and parlementary debates is none of this would've gotten so out of hand if the Railways had simply remained a state enterprise.

Like I said, a proper mindfeck.

Yeah, it's all enormously complex. The whole misbegotten idea seems to be about making a viral video to take a pop at the Tories for privatising trains while people are smarting from ticket price hikes. This could easily have been done by comparing the crazy Uk prices with the cheap tickets (and efficient services) in countries who have nationalised services. It's the way they try and simultaneously appeal to the eurosceptics that turns it into a such a mess. I guess that's a price they're willing to pay to pander to those traditionally labour voting Brexiteers who want to blame the EU for all their problems.
 
Yeah, it's all enormously complex. The whole misbegotten idea seems to be about making a viral video to take a pop at the Tories for privatising trains while people are smarting from ticket price hikes. This could easily have been done by comparing the crazy Uk prices with the cheap tickets (and efficient services) in countries who have nationalised services. It's the way they try and simultaneously appeal to the eurosceptics that turns it into a mess.
I wouldn't disagree with that Pogue, although the Take Back Control tagline at the end did give me a giggle. In my opinion it does a fair job of highlighting how as a a country we feck ourselves over and then try to blame everybody else but sadly is so close to a lot of the UKIP/Leave type campaigning that most will miss the point and just hate the Germans instead.
 
So 3.6 million pounds of profits flow back to the Netherlands in this scenario, while the state owned railwails have a yearly turnover of 5 billion euro. So technically they're correct, realisticly the claims are completly empty.

Ah yes, that was the other aspect of it that irritated me. The classic 'pretend a small number is actually a big number to piss people off' technique.

They'll be writing it on a bus next.
 
Wrong enemy in that advert. Cheap attempt to cash in on anti-EU sentiment in a new way I guess.
This is exactly it. Labour is worried that it's too far left in the current climate, hence these kinds from videos.
 
Blimey, I was so distracted by figuring out how the railways work that I didn't fully grasp that Momentum is actually a left-wing pro Labour group. Fighting demagogy with more demagogy, that's the way to go.
 
You just seem an incredibly odd candidate to start bringing attention to issues of xenophobia in the political sphere because you were completely happy to give it oxygen when it suited. If you posted a story 'for the purpose of discussion' about Leave xenophobia during the referendum I'll happily apologise, but if memory serves you were completely silent and, in fact, defended it.

Gave it oxygen? Defended it? So you have decided to double down on your nonsense. And apparently my character is not fit to discuss or speak out against discrimination on this forum as well. What a fine place the CE has become since June.