Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
Don't put words in my mouth because you have a chip on your shoulder about something.
Why would you assume I have a chip on my shoulder?
I just made a presumption because in my perception her reaction hasn't been any more aggressive than anyone elses reactions when pressed/interviewed.
But I asked to see examples of this aggression, so i'll wait for that first.
So do the press go after Johnson and with as much glee as they do Abbot? He makes a pretty relentless stream of stupid and ignorant remarks, often followed up by a 'witty' reposte to whoever has bothered to point out he's speaking bullshit.
How are Abbot's reactions more aggressive than other MPs btw?
£350m for the NHS deserves far more abuse than any statement Diane Abbott has or will ever make. Shameful to see that it hasn't.
Ummmm, yes. He is always in the press over something or other he has said wrong. Negative news stories on Johnson outnumber those on Abbott by roughly 8 to 1 according to Google's search and news trends. They also suggest there is more response to his comments by a similar factor, other than during the times when she really outdoes herself.
He also has the advantage of charisma which helps him recover faster from the things he does wrong.
The racism accusation is really just an attempt to shut down any discussion on someone who is a clear liability for the Labour Party.
Yeah a Foreign Secretary who has previously talked about "cheering crowds of flag-waving piccaninnies" and "watermelon smiles" and likened the EU to Hitler's plans for Europe, tend to garner some sort of reaction. The fact he has that job (and heck, was Michael Gove having a lie-in away from being Prime Minister) despite those incidents, while the idea of Diane Abbott being in government was a significant part of the Tories election campaign, suggests there is at least a slight gulf.
Or perhaps, the abuse she gets is driven by racism also, not just any mistakes/errors she makes in any interview
As evidenced by this video:
And for some reason you just don't want to accept that her race comes into the equation at all, for some reason.
Still waiting on her apparent aggression that nobody else shows also.
To be fair those thoughts were only briefly in her head and in her defence were no longer there after she had blurted them out. Therefore no longer her responsibility since those words escaping her mouth.
Unless any of that abuse comes from politicians or members of the press you have no point, as that is who you are accusing of being influenced by her race.
That should be their next line of defense; "oh, stop living in the past".
Boris Johnson 'charismatic'? Is he f*ck.
About as charismatic as a stupid child walking into a door.
So you mean to tell me the Daily Mail, Sun, Express & co don't target certain demographics based on race?
I remember the Daily Mail incorrectly inferring that she said that she was not 'proud to be British'
When she actually said: 'I am ashamed of being a British person when you have British Members of Parliament suggesting you should treat refugees like cattle, and test their teeth'
That's since led to this idea that she's not proud to be British, and she doesn't like white people etc. That makes her an easy target for continual bad press, and when any politician gets bad press, politicians on the opposite side will pile on in hopes of gaining their stature & public opinion.
Also where are these videos of her aggression, because your original point was that the press go after her because of her aggressive reactions.
He's a laugh, innit. Like a clown. Good thing that he doesn't hold a position of power.........
He's a walking, talking example of how we still have old boy clubs that can still get bumbling idiots into politics
Imagine a politician outwardly saying actual racist things numerous times over many years, and still being in a position to potentially run the country.
But Abbott is the one who deserves the negativity thrown at her. It's madness.
Indeed. I actually hate him as much as Farage, probably more so because at least Farage fought for something he believed in. Johnson is just an opportunist cnut that hides behind the veil of being wacky.
See this is the issue here. If you boil down racism to 'well as long as they don't actually use a racist slur then it's not racist (and even then we'll try and brush that under the carpet)' we get nowhere.
The issues being discussed here are more physiological and deep set than you're giving credit to. People aren't having a go at everyone for being overtly racist but people have to be aware that they hold racial biases (and all other sorts too) that mean they respond to different events differently based upon the race of the people involved.
For example, have a go at one of these tests on here: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html
Not even making this party political you just have to look at the different responses to Jeremy Corbyn's numbers gaffe and Diane Abbot's to realise that people responded differently, and more strongly, to hers. Her being a black woman inarguably had something to do with that.
Also on this issue:
Over 50% of Conservative voters think racism is perfectly fine (or will argue it away) if one of theirs does it...
Last edited:
Being in the press and his comments being reported on (which are often incorrect, if not downright offensive) is not the same as receiving vitriolic abuse from the media.
I'm not really sure what you mean by the google trends bit, do you have a link for that?
Funny how often racism is apparently just an attempt to shut down discussion these days. Though in interviews over the election cycle, she indeed did not perform well, I don't think anyone is doubting that.
Again, how were Abbot's responses particularly aggressive?
Whilst all that may be valid it's not really the topic at hand.
You have people attempting to state the feelings towards Diane Abbott are driven by her race, rather than her incompetence. Her race may well be a factor but to say that it is the main factor or even a significant factor is attempting to shut down valid commentary. It's a tactic you often see used recently.
Also @africanspur you can see limited trend results on trends.google.com and if you have paid access you can see more detailed stats.
Of course it's valid to the topic at hand, it is the topic at hand.
To dismiss my post there as irrelevant it suggests that you don't fully appreciate what others are saying here. It is a far more complex issue than you are willing to let it be.
Calling out racism when it occurs is seen as a 'tactic'
Yet you've avoided a few questions pertaining to the actual topic and dismissed others' points purely because it goes against your original point.
A point which you still haven't shown evidence for.
Yet you've avoided a few questions pertaining to the actual topic and dismissed others' points purely because it goes against your original point.
A point which you still haven't shown evidence for.
Gotta agree with you here, it's a bit like you boiling down the Grenfell victims' opposition to the Grenfell judge as "rich white man" huh?
The Britain of 2017 is vastly more tolerant than the society of 30 years ago to which she refers in the video. Rather, it is the ease by which people can attack anonymously that has increased. We are seeing MPs of many backgrounds sustaining direct and intimidating attacks though (verbal and physical), which leads to question why the focus is solely on Abbott in this thread.
What of Abbott's complicity with Stop the War in denying Syrian refugees a voice?
What of Abbott's complicity with Stop the War in denying Syrian refugees a voice?
Last edited:
Bolded was pretty much what she was referring to in the video.
Also, it seems appropriate to talk about the abuse of a black MP after another MP gets suspended from her party for referring to n*****s in woodpiles. That appears to be where the conversation sprang from before then becoming a debate about press criticism of Abbott in particular. Moving on to general abuse of MP's might follow, but the thread progressed quite naturally imo.
Yeah. Just watched the Daily Politics clip. On its face that seems pretty outrageous.
Last edited:
Ah, i thought this was in response to the election inquiry that has been announced.
And yes, i do recall her raising the impact of the internet. While a generally focused hate-filled email/tweet is obviously unpleasant, it is the premeditated and ongoing threats, or the face-to-face encounters which concern me most. The latter are the greater danger IMO, both to the democratic process and safety of individuals.
See this is the issue here. If you boil down racism to 'well as long as they don't actually use a racist slur then it's not racist (and even then we'll try and brush that under the carpet)' we get nowhere.
The issues being discussed here are more physiological and deep set than you're giving credit to. People aren't having a go at everyone for being overtly racist but people have to be aware that they hold racial biases (and all other sorts too) that mean they respond to different events differently based upon the race of the people involved.
For example, have a go at one of these tests on here: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html
Not even making this party political you just have to look at the different responses to Jeremy Corbyn's numbers gaffe and Diane Abbot's to realise that people responded differently, and more strongly, to hers. Her being a black woman inarguably had something to do with that.
Also on this issue:
Over 50% of Conservative voters think racism is perfectly fine (or will argue it away) if one of theirs does it...
"you just have to look at the different responses to Jeremy Corbyn's numbers gaffe and Diane Abbot's to realise that people responded differently, and more strongly, to hers. Her being a black woman inarguably had something to do with that."
Is that because she is a black woman though or because Corbyn handled the aftermath better? He did ask people not to blame the media or the presenter for his cock up and promised to do better in future.
That doesn't sound like Abbott or her defender's approach.
Bit of both almost certainly, these things always are, but Corbyn's gaffe never seemed to take hold as an attack line in the same way and Labour supporters were far quicker to rally around him and defend him, even before Corbyn's speech in the afternoon.
Does look like Tory MP's can indeed say these things, without losing their jobs. Just had the whip suspended.
At the end of the day, as our villain regularly reminds us, if you can get away with the racist things Boris has said and still be talked about as a potential party leader, it never really seems likely that those lower down will be held to much of a standard.
Survivors of 9/11 attack urge Theresa May to release Saudi Arabia terror report she suppressed
Relatives and survivors say British Premier has chance to pour ‘sunlight’ onto funding of extremism
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ay-survivors-urge-uk-pm-release-a7847776.html
Relatives and survivors say British Premier has chance to pour ‘sunlight’ onto funding of extremism
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ay-survivors-urge-uk-pm-release-a7847776.html
Ha! I am pleased it was taken as the compliment it was meant as. It would've felt wrong not to cite you.I love this.
I didn't know about this until doing some further googling yesterday, but if it is true...
She can still be removed from her party, right.
Turns out Britain is also a leading powerhouse in world records. Today Britain added world's oldest woman to that list, courtesy of Andrea Leadsom.