The way it has to be crowbarred into every non answer. Each time I hear it I see Cummings' çunt ugly face.
Printable View
The way it has to be crowbarred into every non answer. Each time I hear it I see Cummings' çunt ugly face.
If only the Tories could point to a previous, perhaps even recent, example of when repeating the same short, memorable phrase over and over and over again had the desired effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert Augustus Chapman
. . . . . . .Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
If anything, I'd say this kind of consistent messaging is likely to be even more effective in a situation like a pandemic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert Augustus Chapman
In a General Election, you can quite reasonably imagine some people getting sufficiently irritated by the repetition that they feel less inclined to vote for those propogating it.
It's harder to imagine people annoyed by the "Stay home, save lives" message will react by doing the *opposite* of what the message asks of them.
And of course, it's working. We're observing the rules more effectively than any other country. It's almost like good messaging works.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
And actually, the messaging thing in GEs isn't counterproductive, as all the polling shows that the time at which it starts to grate with the tiny minority of political nerds like us is actually when it's just starting to cut through with the majority of people.
Your second point was going to be my main point. To political campaign strategists people like you and me are treated as utterly irrelevant - and this is something they openly acknowledge. The people they care about reaching are those who spend the least time thinking about politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
gained orthodoxy among Tories who believe that it delivered their thumping majority. I believe that the horror of Jeremy Corbyn, Diane Abbot et al, along with the correct suspicion that Brexit was being subverted, would have delivered the same majority with or without the mantra.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
The new "Red Wall" will inevitably collapse in five years time, due to the horrendous privations about to descend on us all and the failure of Brexit to deliver anything but a cheap supply of little Union Jacks. The tories will doubtless conjure up some three word magic spell in the belief it will save them. It won't.
And rightly so. Because of course one is usually 'interested in politics' because one has already chosen one's side. It's the still-persuadable they care about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
But it's not just the last election. It's also the Brexit vote ('Take Back Control') and by contrast, the lack of a positive, proactive message in 2017 ('Strong and Stable', ffs!)Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert Augustus Chapman
I'm not convinced the slogan that was to blame, it was more the fact it was coming out of Theresa May's mouth. She'd have made "Get Brexit Done" sound like an apology. When Tory support completely collapsed to allow Blair in it wasn't anything to do with Labour mantras, it was the loss of the belief of Tory financial acumen caused by Black Wednesday (and many other factors).Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
I don't think any message, however brilliantly contrived, could have saved the day for the tories in '97 any more than the most lame messaging could have lost them this election just gone.
Hate to remind ya, Herbs, but Labour isn't Working rather did the damage in 1979.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert Augustus Chapman
Though given Corbyn was supporting the Winter of Discontent, it's like Man U - Sperz. Maggive vs Corbyn. Why didn't we have the virus then when I was 8, cos I'd have lived, they'd have died and I'd have had months off school?
The message that had them over 20 pts ahead for about 3 weeks before the dementia tax, you mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Not rewriting history with hindsight again, are we?
New Labour, New Britain was very significant. Am I the only real political history geek here?Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert Augustus Chapman
They were polling that and better before they even started campaigning, gg. That's why the election took place. That slogan was indicative of a campaign based on the deeply uninspiring idea that a May government would just plod along competently. Nobody was enthused by it. The fact that their campaign and manifesto were also abortions were all just symptoms of the same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
The NHS has billions shoveled into it, and at the first sign of emergency, it surrenders faster than the French army.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert Augustus Chapman
Scrap the ****ing thing now.
May I make it clear that i fully support the hard working medical staff, my anger with the NHS failings lie elsewhere. Nor is the answer to throw more cash at it.
And they used that slogan without damaging their poll rating for 3 weeks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Then she dementia taxed, u-turned, denied u-turning, and somehow made 2 terrorist attacks look like a win for Jez. Thank fück she wasn't leading my side. Oh...
Out of interest, where do you get the idea that the French army surrenders more than the Brits from?Quote:
Originally Posted by dismalswamp
We legged it in 1940, not them, and the only reason we escaped is coz they suicided defending the outer perimeter.
Have the Frogs ever legged it like we did from Kabul in the 1st Afghan War? No.
30% of the troops taken off at Dunkirk were French, so they certainly did leg it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
One of the reasons the operation was possible was the brave perimeter action fought by French and British troops. More important was Hitler’s decision to halt the panzers - which were, in truth, desperately short of fuel and maintenance by that time. Furthermore, without the RAF containing the Luftwaffe before they reached the beaches, both troops and ships would have been bombed to nothing.
How did your precious Frogs get on when the winter turned a little chilly in Moscow, anyway? Oh yes, they turned round and slunk off home.
A tactical retreat or 'legging it' is not the same as surrendering though is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
One of the most idiotically ignored facts of Operation Dynamo is the extent to which the RAF savaged the Luftwaffe and what they sacrificed to do so. Arguably more strategically important than winning the Battle of Britain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Mostly the 20th century. The refussl to advance after the Nivelle offensive in 1917, 1940, Dien Bien Phu, Algeria. An impressive litany of loss.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
And actually, given that it was for most of the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries the pre-eminent land power of Europe, France massively underperformed. Largely because it undervalued naval power, spunked all its money on ensuring we lost America (out of sheer spite) and never had the brains to grasp that money wins wars - but they weren’t the last self-aggrandising, quasi-imperial European power to learn that last lesson the hard way.
Fück off. Only cos the cheating Ruski ƒucks burnt their own (ex-caputal) city like the heathen barbarians they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Oh, and I was talking about the outer-perimeter action fought by the frogs. 2 rgts fought to the death. Had they quit at the start, no evac at all. The fact they fought to the very last man is why we had that final day when, against RN advice, WSC ordered a final day of evac and we got the free froggies away.
23 miles of water does not make us better human beings. Let alone better soldiers. If Boney had tried to invade Nepal, the Girkhas would have handed him his arse on a plate like they did to us.
Well if you continue to insist on failing to quote your sources, I can’t try to help you any more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
All my wild and vague contentions are fully peer-reviewed before being tossed about willy-nilly. I fear you may be failing to follow convention.
Ah ganpz. You do rather cheat in these arguments old chap, by polluting the debate with .. well .. pesky facts and figures :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
‘Facts’ are often anything but factual.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert Augustus Chapman
Given their airfields were 22 miles further away than the Krauts, it really was a miracle that they managed to achieve anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
But I don't see how you could argue the final point, but I'm prepared to listen.
Losing 250k troops on the beaches would have been bad.
Losing air superiority over the Channel allowing Op Sealion to succeed would have been game over.
Oh, dear God, where to start.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Ok, the thing I've studied at the highest level.
Nivelle. Firstly, as an aside, it's a bit rich to pick the only one of the 4 chiefs who fücked up when the other 3 all won us the war in their own way, Joffre at the Marne (and in '18), Pétain at Verdun and Foch in '18.
But the Nivelle offensives were our fault, in part. That idiotic Easterner DLG wasn't prepared to pay the Butcher's Bill, so when Nivelle said he could win the war without using any GB troops, we lobbied for him to replace the stolid but heroic Joffre.
His successful counter-attack at Verdun was down to the fact that we were drawing all the Hun reinforcements to the Somme.
The Nivelle offensives were a disaster. There weren't enough howitzers or heavies, the prelim bombardment did far less damage than was required and France had it's own first day of the Somme moment as he kept the attack going into fully firing machine guns.
The offensive began on Apr 16 and by May 3 they were mutinying. That's why we fought Passchendaele.
And fair play, Nivelle was an idiot. Once they had a decent leader and were allowed more leave, they calmed down, and the French army saved our arses in 1918 - though tbf, that's cos op Michael hit us. Had they hit the frogs, we'd have saved them.
Foch took control, in part because Haig saw it as the only way to get that muppet DLG off his back, and the French fought heroically during both the Spring Offensive and the 100 Days.
By your logic, we might as well say the Royal Navy are all cowards cos they mutinied on the Bounty.
Oh, and your idea that Louis XIII and XIV should have worked out that paying for continental allies is the way to win wars because that's what GB did in the following century with the BofE and a publicly traded gilts market is just your usual trick of mistaking hindsight for history.
Oh, and trying to use the fact that France defeated us in the War of Septic Traitors as proof that they surrender more than us is silly even by your standards.
Yes, we know it bankrupted them. With hindsight. And that would lead to a revolution. With hindsight.
And then, with all the European powers united against them, the cowardly French thrashed the lot of them for the next 25 years, even though the RN had complete control of the oceans, even though the City of London was undefeated and paying anyone who'd fight for us, even though we had one of our greatest ever generals.
If the sub-human Ruskies hadn't cheated by burning one of their two great cities and surrendered like civilised human beings, then Boney could have imposed a harsher peace than Tislit, stopped the cheating Ruskies buying GB goods* and then come to the Peninsula and dealt with the Iron Duke in person and pushed us back to Torres Vedras again.
The French are not, nor have ever been cowards. Who would you rather have watching your back? An Imperial guardsman or any Yank like a navy seal? And ignore the fact that the Yank would probably shoot you in a friendly fire incident anyway.
*Though when Boney had to order 500k great coats for the Russian invasion, the only country that could fulfil the order was us. So he had to get family members to place the orders on the sly, breaking his own continental system.