Jeremy Corbyn is, in many respects, a walking talking Own Goal. A Keen Arsenal Supporter, the Labour Leader is also well known for his enthusiastic and unabashed support for many Causes that go against the main Stream Narratives, so carefully cultivated by the Military-Industrial Complex. In and of itself, this does not make Corbyn a walking Own Goal, what does, is the other part of his peculiar set of principles, for, and in modern manners, he will not respond to Personal attacks, or, indeed respond like for like against them, when attacked. The Analogy rests with that distinction, and that sentence( admittedly a clumsy one of my own) is channelling Corbyn’s strange syntax and long sentences that make his typical Rhetoric hard to listen too and is a constant own goal, in the eyes of those who disagree with him.
Where one is a Target ( a Goal ) and where one refuses to Defend that Target, that is as if Arsenal run out on Saturday afternoon and refuse to field neither a Goal Keeper or, in their case A Back five as well. The Formation becomes a 3 upfront and 8 in the middle one. On the point of the Brexit celebration replay Eleven, Mr Corbyn was open last night to fielding the implausible formation of a Middle Eleven, no attack and no defence.
An own goal which the open goal was only too pleased to replay on repeat.
Mr Johnson, on the other hand, is The Human Open goal, so careless has he been with his loquacious sophistry over the years it is possible to bang the ball in the back of the net from anywhere on the pitch. If there is a misdemeanour faux pax or Top to commit or go over, it seems for Johnson he can not resist. Always, upon seeing a fence he will not pass without giving it. If one were asked to appoint a safe pair of hands your go-to obvious shoe-in would not Be, Boris de spaffel von count keep de johnson in de trousers.
Yesterday I pointed you, dear reader, at Mary Beards advice to her self for taking on the Ciceronian Rhetorician Johnson in an IQ squared debate of Greek v Roman civilisation.
Beard said. This.
00:23yeah Boris you know he’s really trained
00:26in classical rhetoric that’s all he does00:28I think one way you can undermine those00:31those high-level rhetorician it’s just00:35going for the jugular so I shall try to
go for the jugular
Oh, ho, ho
Dust in the wind
All we are is dust in the wind
(All we are is dust in the wind)
Dust in the wind
(Everything is dust in the wind)
Everything is dust in the wind
General election 2019: No fireworks moment in Johnson and Corbyn debate
For two politicians who pride themselves on telling it straight, Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn were both markedly on their best behaviour tonight.
They didn’t harangue each other, there was no heckling from the audience.
There was a wide range of subjects certainly, and profound disagreements – naturally.
But there was no moment that burst into fireworks. No massive gaffe on either side, or political car crash in the most public of forums.
They both stayed true to the tramlines that were long set out in this election.
For Boris Johnson, it was again and again making the case that the country can only move on if we leave the EU as soon as humanly possible.
For Jeremy Corbyn, the task was to pull the debate back as often as possible to the changes that nearly a decade of a squeeze on public spending has made to the fabric of millions of peoples lives.
To that end, it’s likely that tonight they will have confirmed in their respective supporters minds, the reasons why they are the chosen candidate to run the country.
Even though there were no obvious shocks or surprises, tonight may well have mattered for the many voters who would have been watching who are yet to make their decision.
Those floating voters, yet to be convinced, are the ones who will decide the ultimate result.
But the pattern of this campaign, however, has been long set.
The Conservatives have been in front, Labour struggling to close the gap.
So tonight, for Boris Johnson’s team, it was another hurdle they have crossed without a huge stumble.
For Jeremy Corbyn, another missed chance perhaps to make a break that didn’t come.
Sixty minutes of important clashes with only six days to go didn’t shake up the big picture of this election, which was sketched out weeks ago, leaving Labour with less and less time to make a difference.
That does not mean though for a second the Conservatives leave Maidstone tonight sure of a clean victory.
The margins are too tight, politics too unpredictable, there is still time to go, and the public too savvy to give their votes without a pause.
General election 2019: Corbyn and Johnson TV debate fact-checked
Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn have faced off in a head-to-head debate – the last time they are scheduled to meet before election day.
BBC Reality Check looked at their claims during the hour-long debate.
Boris Johnson said: We will “put in 50,000 more nurses” and “build 40 new” hospitals
Reality Check: Boris Johnson talked about his plans for 50,000 more nurses in the NHS in England by the end of the next parliament (ie five years).
Of these, 31,500 would be new nurses (19,000 newly-trained recruits and 12,500 overseas recruits). The remaining 18,500 would be existing nurses persuaded not to quit, or to come back.
We’ve previously looked in more depth at how realistic this goal is.
The Conservatives also say they will build and fund 40 hospital projects over 10 years – this has been repeatedly questioned in the campaign.
The party’s manifesto says they are proud “to have begun work on building 40 new hospitals across the country”.
They all have one thing in common – there is no building work happening as yet.
There will be £2.7bn over five years for the first six hospitals. For the remaining 34 projects, just £100m is available to develop business cases.
Jeremy Corbyn said: “There are now four million children living in poverty in our country”
Reality Check: One of the most commonly used measures of estimating children in poverty is using the Households Below Average Income (HBAI) statistics.
It estimates how many children live in UK households which earn 60% less than the median income.
There are two different ways it goes about doing this.
The relative low income figure is used by think tanks like the Resolution Foundation, and gives us an estimate of 4.1 million in 2017-18, or about 30% of children.
The Conservatives prefer to use the “absolute” figure, which is useful in comparing one year with another. Measured this way, the estimate would be 3.7 million children, or about 26%.
Boris Johnson said: Labour would “put up spending to £1.2 trillion”
Reality Check: Labour’s spending plans are nowhere near £1.2tn a year.
That’s the Conservatives’ estimate of the extra spending Labour would make during the whole of the next parliament (ie five years).
The Conservatives first made this costing of Labour’s plans before either party’s manifesto was published. When Labour’s manifesto was published, some items that the Conservatives had costed were not in it.
But the Tories repeated the analysis and reached the same figure of an increase in government spending of £1.2tn over the course of the parliament.
That translates to Labour spending an extra £240bn a year, but the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies costed it at £180bn extra a year by the year 2023-4.
Also, the Conservatives’ analysis makes a number of questionable assumptions – including that a Labour government reaches full-speed spending on its first day in office, instead of building up to it over five years.
It prices Labour’s nationalisations at £255bn. This is even more costly than the price tag suggested in a hotly contested analysis by employers’ organisation the CBI (£196bn).
It says the four-day week will cost £85bn during the parliament – when Labour have set a four-day week as an ambition over ten years.
Jeremy Corbyn said: Labour was “the only party that’s produced a fully costed manifesto with a grey book that adds up to every piece of expenditure we want”.
Reality Check: Labour’s manifesto said that the party’s day-to-day spending commitments would be matched by raising taxes. Their investment spending would be covered by borrowing.
But, a few days after the manifesto was published, Labour made a further spending pledge – a £58bn compensation package to women who lost out to changes in the state pension.
On Brexit, Boris Johnson said: “With the deal that we have… we can do such things as… ban the live export of animals, we can cut VAT on tampons.”
Reality Check: It is correct to say that the UK would be able to ban live animal exports after it leaves the EU, and the transition period ends.
Under EU single market rules, no member state can ban live animal exports.
The EU does put a number of animal welfare restrictions on exporting live animals. It is an offence to transport them in a way likely to cause injury of undue suffering. Animals have to be provided with adequate space as well as food, water and rest.
The Conservative manifesto pledged to abolish VAT on sanitary products, which is currently 5%. This would be possible after the transition, when the UK will not bound by the EU laws which currently do not allow that tax to fall below 5%.
The EU is also in the process of changing EU law so that VAT on sanitary products can be reduced to zero, but this will not take effect until 2022 at the earliest.
Jeremy Corbyn said: “Our tax proposals for corporation tax would be to raise it to 26%… which would be lower than it was in 2010, lower than it is in France, lower than it is in the USA”
Reality Check: Jeremy Corbyn defended Labour’s plans to raise corporation tax (that’s the tax companies pay on their profits).
Mr Corbyn is right that it would be lower than the rate in 2010-11, when it stood at 28%. When it comes to standard rates of corporation tax, according to figures from the OECD, France currently has a rate of 31%, but the United States has a rate of 21% (although individual states levy extra taxes on top).