It's certainly a bad bunch and a case of voting for the least worst option . On that basis a can't think of anything worse than Corbyn as Prime Minister and Abbot as Home Secretary. That is the stuff of nightmares.
Pre-conditions?
- Thread starter ^woody^
- Start date
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,609
- Reaction score
- 552
- Country
Politics has become partisan and some will vote one way no matter if they are voting against their own interests - see Republicans wanting to keep ACA but end Obamacare. Yet 45% of Republican voters in a poll now agree with the sentiment of AOC of a 70% top rate tax on the super wealthy.
Policies should come first.
Policies should come first.
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,609
- Reaction score
- 552
- Country
Politics has become partisan and some will vote one way no matter if they are voting against their own interests - see Republicans wanting to keep ACA but end Obamacare. Yet 45% of Republican voters in a poll now agree with the sentiment of AOC of a 70% top rate tax on the super wealthy.
Policies should come first.
Policies should come first.
S
SammyInnit
She had no obligation.
As we were told well before the referendum was held but as you say, here are. Perhaps better to accept it because it's unlikely to chance.
This has been going on for the last 4-5 years and many have been campaigning longer than that.
Sponsored Links
S
SammyInnit
Oh look, another one with 'notchy's disease'...
Isn't it amazing how many 'different' usernames are increasingly using similar wording in lieu of an argument when they are picked up on their errors
Deal or no deal is irrelevant to the point. You're the one that threw that in to misrepresent what id said. That's a strawman argument.
You can quite happily sit and convince yourself that I'm not replying for any other reason but the short answer is I'm not going to argue with someone who shifts the goal posts to come out on top.
IMO the PM has a duty to work for the benefit of the country, which is not the same as working to pacify fringe extremists in their own party.
S
SammyInnit
In fact she had no obligation.
Bollards.Taking 'no-deal' off the table is 'for the benefit of the UK'...
But it's not just 'two parties squabbling', it's factions within parties also squabbling...
That is however parliamentary democracy - a system of 'government' that quitters wanted to 'get back'!
But if people disagree, then surely they should ask to be consulted about it?
Corbyns only using it as a excuse.
He realises he cant go to May and say 'I havent got a Scooby which option to go for, Ive got 5 million voters that are leavers so Im not gonna put peoples ref on the table'. Also he wants an election more than to sort out Brexit.
May wont offer it either, for same reason.
If she comes back with some worthless tweak to her cop out deal, she will get hammered.
We may be heading for a super Brino since a peoples vote needs TM and JC to make some form of pact.
You mean if they grow up and realise socialism is ok only in theory.
S
SammyInnit
As I remember there was enough going on in the Labour party over the last two years with them trying to get shot of Corbyn.
Is that better or worse or the same as staying in?
Is it ok to pick and choose which bits are ok and implement those? That could work. And if they don't - just back-track and implement some of the opposition party ideas.
Works for the Tories. Or does it.....
Worse than staying in.
Mays deal.....worst fudge in history
A super soft Brino better than being in limbo for business.
That's downright depressing.
Sponsored Links
