Religious types who hate Lesbians warning electorate

[Drumroll]

Puggit said:

Drumroll said:

Why start a thread using such a rubbish source?

Care to illustrate why you're calling out Order-Order as 'rubbish' and 'questionable'. Examples please.

You clearly have an axe to grind - does Guido not have the same political view point as you?

guido Fawkes is run by a right-wing blogger Paul Staines, if you care to look at some of the stuff he has blogged about you would see his "sources" are often questionable.

So to me, it is a rubbish source, similar to the daily mail and the socialist worker.

No axe to grind as such just get miffed off when people use questionable sources to start a debate (be that left or right-leaning)

I will turn this around do you think Guido Fawkes presents a balanced view?

[blackrabbit]

Drumroll said:

Puggit said:

Drumroll said:

Why start a thread using such a rubbish source?

Care to illustrate why you're calling out Order-Order as 'rubbish' and 'questionable'. Examples please.

You clearly have an axe to grind - does Guido not have the same political view point as you?

guido Fawkes is run by a right-wing blogger Paul Staines, if you care to look at some of the stuff he has blogged about you would see his "sources" are often questionable.

So to me, it is a rubbish source, similar to the daily mail and the socialist worker.

No axe to grind as such just get miffed off when people use questionable sources to start a debate (be that left or right-leaning)

I will turn this around do you think Guido Fawkes presents a balanced view?

Just because its a right leaning site does not make the specific article incorrect. Too many on here think the Guardian is gospel and anything that doesn't align is rightwing rubbish.

In this case it looks real and beggars belief that labour would run a progressive lesbian candidate in a Northern area with a lot of Muslims. Labour clearly still are living in the Islington student bubble. If they want to win ever again they need someone concentrating on local issues and not someone divisive even in their own party.

[Drumroll]

blackrabbit said:

Drumroll said:

Puggit said:

Drumroll said:

Why start a thread using such a rubbish source?

Care to illustrate why you're calling out Order-Order as 'rubbish' and 'questionable'. Examples please.

You clearly have an axe to grind - does Guido not have the same political view point as you?

guido Fawkes is run by a right-wing blogger Paul Staines, if you care to look at some of the stuff he has blogged about you would see his "sources" are often questionable.

So to me, it is a rubbish source, similar to the daily mail and the socialist worker.

No axe to grind as such just get miffed off when people use questionable sources to start a debate (be that left or right-leaning)

I will turn this around do you think Guido Fawkes presents a balanced view?

Just because its a right leaning site does not make the specific article incorrect. Too many on here think the Guardian is gospel and anything that doesn't align is rightwing rubbish.

In this case it looks real and beggars belief that labour would run a progressive lesbian candidate in a Northern area with a lot of Muslims. Labour clearly still are living in the Islington student bubble. If they want to win ever again they need someone concentrating on local issues and not someone divisive even in their own party.

I would go back and explain why the article isn't that accurate, but they want me to disable my ad blocker so I can't. (won't)

Might come as shock to you but I don't very often read the Guardian and am quite capable of making my own mind up as to what is and isn't right-wing rubbish and guido Fawkes definitely falls into that category (right-wing rubbish)

I actually have no doubt that some muslins won't vote for the labour candidate because she is a lesbian, I also have no doubt that some non-muslins won't vote for her for the same reason.

[cb31]

Someone posted an election leaflet on here from her the other day. The big issues for her were Palestine, Kashmir and Islamaphobia in that order.

I would suggest the locals have other priorities so probably not the best candidate.

[chrispmartha]

cb31 said:

Someone posted an election leaflet on here from her the other day. The big issues for her were Palestine, Kashmir and Islamaphobia in that order.

I would suggest the locals have other priorities so probably not the best candidate.

I'm sure the leaflet I got wasn't like that, I'd have to dig it out of the bin to check though :-)

[cb31]

[irc]

As half UK Muslims think homosexuality should be illegal it isn't a big stretch to think it might affect their choice of vote.



https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/11/br...

PS Does my source for that stat meet the approval of PH. Seems all news sources are not equal here.

[Puggit]

Drumroll said:

I will turn this around do you think Guido Fawkes presents a balanced view?

As you point out, he is on the right of politics, so does spend the majority of his time exposing left wing failures. I've followed him since before his real fame hit - he's quite happy to hurt right wing politicians with his exposés as well. In terms of his accuracy, in my experience, I have never seen him get anything major wrong. He also often gets the news out first.

The left love to criticize him - but I've never seen anyone land a major blow on him.

[irc]

Puggit said:

The left love to criticize him - but I've never seen anyone land a major blow on him.

Standard. Can't debate the content so attack the messenger. Just like the campaign to get advertisers to boycott GB news before any content had even been seen.

[turbobloke]

Drumroll said:

...do you think Guido Fawkes presents a balanced view?

If Guido publishes accurate content then that's a reliable source.

Is balance a mix of spin - some agreeing with your viewpoint, some not?

Take in multiple sources for balance, as per bbc / guardian.

[irc]

Seems the candidate has only been a member of Labour for 3 weeks.
Local Asian candidates were excluded from the shortlist.

The Labour car crash continues.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/keir-starmers-...

Apologies in advance for the right wing rag source. Glad to be corrected if the article contains any false facts.

[survivalist]

Vanden Saab said:

survivalist said:

For a different viewpoint. Although I am far from a fan of organised religion.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2021/06/thre...

Warning Paul Mason content...

Not sure why you're waving a red card. Neatly sums up why labour are unelectable. Paul Mason is a lesson in shooting oneself in the foot. Topped only by Corbin as one of the reasons not to vote labour.

He does make one valid point though. People aren't voting againt the labour candidate because she is/might be a lesbian, but because voting labour in the current climate would be an insane move. No policies or plans, essentially just moaning about stuff the Tory party haven't done, or have done badly.

The biggest nonsense is this:

The progressive core of the British electorate still wants Labour to represent its economic interests: better wages, decent jobs, secure tenancies and good public services.


Newsflash - people want all that stuff, but don't want to sacrifice anything to get it. Labour can't get in because the leaders appear so incompetent that no one believes that they could deliver against any of those things.

[Diderot]

re. The Guardian: their much vaunted editorial policy is to champion and encourage hyperbole. Does this, therefore, make them an unreliable source? Is the Pontiff Catholic, and do Ursines defecate in wooded environs? Rhetorical questions obviously.

[rscott]

Both the Guardian and Order Order stories seem to have fairly poor sources.

Order Order - claims to be a message on a WhatsApp group, but no info about which group, how many members, etc. So could be 5 or 5,000 people discussing it.

Guardian - it's the Trevor Philips/C4 survey which had an incredibly distorted sample group. For cost reasons it only surveyed Muslims living in areas with relatively high Muslim areas. So excluded half the country and mainly talked to those who tended to be less integrated with the rest of the population and so have more conservative views.

[irc]

rscott said:

Both the Guardian and Order Order stories seem to have fairly poor sources.

Order Order - claims to be a message on a WhatsApp group, but no info about which group, how many members, etc. So could be 5 or 5,000 people discussing it.

Guardian - it's the Trevor Philips/C4 survey which had an incredibly distorted sample group. For cost reasons it only surveyed Muslims living in areas with relatively high Muslim areas. So excluded half the country and mainly talked to those who tended to be less integrated with the rest of the population and so have more conservative views.

Sounds just like this constituency to me though.

[chrispmartha]

cb31 said:

This is the leaflet i got, different part of Batley and Spen to the leaflet you posted, so they are clearly‘targeting’ different areas with different leaflets, which is probably a good strategy

[oddman]

rscott said:

Guardian - it's the Trevor Philips/C4 survey which had an incredibly distorted sample group. For cost reasons it only surveyed Muslims living in areas with relatively high Muslim areas. So excluded half the country and mainly talked to those who tended to be less integrated with the rest of the population and so have more conservative views.

So how well integrated do you think the Batley and Spen muslims are?

Labour have turned a blind eye to the antithetical views of Muslims in re gender and sexuality and the left of the party have been fellow travellers in re anti Israel/antisemitic views

They didn't care as long as the postal votes arrive by the wheelbarrow

They deserve a kicking for betraying their principles. George Galloway is like a sinister cartoon of Labour and the fact that he can pick off their votes should be a source of shame

[rscott]

oddman said:

rscott said:

Guardian - it's the Trevor Philips/C4 survey which had an incredibly distorted sample group. For cost reasons it only surveyed Muslims living in areas with relatively high Muslim areas. So excluded half the country and mainly talked to those who tended to be less integrated with the rest of the population and so have more conservative views.

So how well integrated do you think the Batley and Spen muslims are?

Labour have turned a blind eye to the antithetical views of Muslims in re gender and sexuality and the left of the party have been fellow travellers in re anti Israel/antisemitic views

They didn't care as long as the postal votes arrive by the wheelbarrow

They deserve a kicking for betraying their principles. George Galloway is like a sinister cartoon of Labour and the fact that he can pick off their votes should be a source of shame

I've no idea - my point was about the accuracy of that survey in general. How it isn't an accurate representation of British Muslims as it didn't use a representative sample.

[oddman]

rscott said:

I've no idea - my point was about the accuracy of that survey in general. How it isn't an accurate representation of British Muslims as it didn't use a representative sample.

Pretty typical northern mill town profile.

Mirpuri background with an overlay of Saudi financed Deobandi teaching. Niqab wasn't seen 25 - 30 years ago - now commonplace.

50% is probably a conservative estimate for thinking homosexuality shoiuld be illegal more likely an estimate of support for the death penalty.

[irc]

rscott said:

I've no idea - my point was about the accuracy of that survey in general. How it isn't an accurate representation of British Muslims as it didn't use a representative sample.

Can you point to a better one?