Page 6 of 30
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2023 1:21 pm
by MisterMuncher
Abernathy wrote: ↑Sun Feb 19, 2023 10:19 pm
I wonder if he realises that he has been appointed basically to be an appalling rentagobshite firing out reactionary soundbites every other day or whether that’s what he does anyway, it’s just more widely reported now ?
You can guarantee the same cub would absolutely recognise tokenism when he saw it happening with the various ethnic/gender/orientation showpony Tories wheeled out for "see, we're not anti-x, this is our best friend and she's X" duty.
He just hasn't noticed he's in the stable next door.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2023 8:44 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Fastidiously truthful Lee here, in correcting the record mode. He definitely pops into McDonalds 3 times a week, and would definitely have seen the same people at food banks the same week, and done this several times. He knows for a fact too that (eg) grandparents definitely didn't treat the family. And anyway burgers cost as little as 99p.
The MSM of course are not particularly hostile to Lee's party.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2023 9:16 pm
by kreuzberger
"My own debate."
He hasn't got the hang of very much, has he?
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2023 10:22 pm
by davidjay
kreuzberger wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 9:16 pm
"My own debate."
He hasn't got the hang of very much, has he?
He's got the hang of headlines and winding up the lefties. That's all that matters.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2023 7:55 am
by Watchman
I thought rewriting history was a bad thing
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2023 9:06 am
by RedSparrows
But Lee, even if you are quite right about that family (and ignoring how cheap McD can be)... It doesn't change the fact other people struggle. Why do you fixate on anecdotes and assume they are universal? I wonder...
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2023 9:28 am
by Bones McCoy
RedSparrows wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 9:06 am
But Lee, even if you are quite right about that family (and ignoring how cheap McD can be)... It doesn't change the fact other people struggle. Why do you fixate on anecdotes and assume they are universal? I wonder...
It's what thick people do.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2023 9:41 am
by davidjay
Looking at the replies to that, I'm sure it's just coincidence that everyone who knows a similar family has a timeline full of bigotry.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2023 11:33 am
by Crabcakes
I think the Tories may come to regret promoting Lee. He’s obviously there to stir up shit and distract people from bigger problems. But annoying as he is, he’s not very good at it. The family in McD’s story is obviously absolute cobblers - nothing adds up about it, they wouldn’t even be able to use a food bank multiple times a week, and what’s he doing spending so long in McDonald’s himself?
Every time he does one of these he’s not convincing anyone new to join, just winding up the same people who would never vote anything but Tory anyway. What he *is* doing though is putting off anyone whose vote is more soft. Because why would you throw your lot in with a ham-fisted bullshitter?
Plus, he’ll get caught by this at some point because he is no way smart enough to run proper interference schemes. He’ll either drop someone in it, dox someone, or fuck up and say he saw/did something he demonstrably didn’t.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2023 11:55 am
by davidjay
Crabcakes wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 11:33 am
I think the Tories may come to regret promoting Lee. He’s obviously there to stir up shit and distract people from bigger problems. But annoying as he is, he’s not very good at it. The family in McD’s story is obviously absolute cobblers - nothing adds up about it, they wouldn’t even be able to use a food bank multiple times a week, and what’s he doing spending so long in McDonald’s himself?
Every time he does one of these he’s not convincing anyone new to join, just winding up the same people who would never vote anything but Tory anyway. What he *is* doing though is putting off anyone whose vote is more soft. Because why would you throw your lot in with a ham-fisted bullshitter?
Plus, he’ll get caught by this at some point because he is no way smart enough to run proper interference schemes. He’ll either drop someone in it, dox someone, or fuck up and say he saw/did something he demonstrably didn’t.
A the risk of repeating myself, he's the political equivalent of Katie Hopkins or Jon Gaunt. To keep himself relevant he'll have to resort to ever-more extreme quotes, then he'll go too far and get sacked so that the Tories will be able to say that there's no room for whatever he did/said in their party. Like Thatcher, Warsi, John Taylor or any other non-PLU who gets welcomed into the fold, once his usefulness is over he'll be out.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2023 12:00 pm
by Andy McDandy
The Tories have been taking a lot of advice from American lobbying groups, particularly those on the Trumpian right. Not sure if it was deliberately done, but in parts of the USA, McDonald's is viewed as "that place where black people hang out". Appeals to the snobbery of white trash.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2023 12:38 pm
by Youngian
Naming a hoity-toity restaurant chain would stretch credulity. Most people have been to McDs and know there’s bargains and offers. There’s no flies on Lee.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2023 3:06 pm
by Crabcakes
It’s a shame it wasn’t Burger King, as at least then there’d be ample scope for “well Lee does like his Whoppers” type jokes.
As it is, we’ll just have to make do with pointing out his presence in McDonald’s is unnecessary as they already have their own clown.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2023 10:58 pm
by satnav
Lee Anderson was arguing yesterday that there weren't food shortages in the past because more people used to grow their own vegetables. The problem with this argument is that the vast majority of new houses now have extremely small gardens to growing food at home really isn't a realistic option for most people.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2023 12:27 am
by Spoonman
satnav wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 10:58 pm
Lee Anderson was arguing yesterday that there weren't food shortages in the past because more people used to grow their own vegetables.
I'm sure Lee's dad can tell him of a time when ration books existed.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2023 2:40 am
by Oboogie
Spoonman wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 12:27 am
satnav wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 10:58 pm
Lee Anderson was arguing yesterday that there weren't food shortages in the past because more people used to grow their own vegetables.
I'm sure Lee's dad can tell him of a time when ration books existed.
And those food shortages were caused by the far-right too!
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2023 7:13 am
by Youngian
satnav wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 10:58 pm
Lee Anderson was arguing yesterday that there weren't food shortages in the past because more people used to grow their own vegetables. The problem with this argument is that the vast majority of new houses now have extremely small gardens to growing food at home really isn't a realistic option for most people.
The main problem is that the argument is horse shit. In fact the opposite is true, domestic production peaked post WWII as Dig for Victory became a thankful memory. You can buy a sack of carrots or spuds cheaper than time wasting efforts in the garden. Idiot .
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2023 8:16 am
by Rosvanian
This bloke seems to really hate the people he's supposed to represent. He's basically just accused them of being lazy and entitled because they don't grow their own food. Comments like that aplenty amount the fringe nutters online, where expecting to be able to buy tomatoes in the winter is almost akin to being 'woke'.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2023 9:26 am
by davidjay
Youngian wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 7:13 am
satnav wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 10:58 pm
Lee Anderson was arguing yesterday that there weren't food shortages in the past because more people used to grow their own vegetables. The problem with this argument is that the vast majority of new houses now have extremely small gardens to growing food at home really isn't a realistic option for most people.
The main problem is that the argument is horse shit. In fact the opposite is true, domestic production peaked post WWII as Dig for Victory became a thankful memory. You can buy a sack of carrots or spuds cheaper than time wasting efforts in the garden. Idiot .
Indeed. The most expensive potatoes I've ever eaten were the ones I grew last year. I, and many other gardeners I know, grow food because it's a bit of fresh air and exercise. Anything I can eat is a bonus.
Re: Lee Anderson
Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2023 7:14 pm
by Bones McCoy
kreuzberger wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 9:16 pm
"My own debate."
He hasn't got the hang of very much, has he?
5 Across: A debate you have by yourself. (10).