Register    Login    Search    FAQ



CTFC.com Official Site Cheltenham Town FC 500 Club

Other Useful Links:     Leo's Blog    Robins Trust    CTFC Chatter    Football Ground Guide    This is Gloucestershire    News Now    CTFC History Site

Board index » THE NEST » NON FOOTY/JOKES ETC




 Page 1 of 2 [ 48 posts ] Go to page 1, 2  Next



Author Message
 Post subject: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 06:56 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 04:27
Posts: 15310
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
F*ck Murdoch. F*ck Dacre. Millennials Revenge.


Top  Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 08:18 
Offline

Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 10:37
Posts: 3835
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 2 times
Totally screws up the Brexit negotiations, though. We might as well drop our pants, bend over, shout "Harder, Junker!!! Harder!" - and then thank them for it when they've finished.

On the plus side, UKIP lost 10% of their vote, which sends a clear message about what the country thinks now about leaving the EU - and the decimation of the SNP shows what Scots think about Indyref2.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 09:13 
Offline

Joined: 04 Mar 2013, 13:39
Posts: 831
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
asl wrote:
Totally screws up the Brexit negotiations, though. We might as well drop our pants, bend over, shout "Harder, Junker!!! Harder!" - and then thank them for it when they've finished.

On the plus side, UKIP lost 10% of their vote, which sends a clear message about what the country thinks now about leaving the EU - and the decimation of the SNP shows what Scots think about Indyref2.


That's one interpretation, though i'd suggest a more accurate one would be that as a one policy party, UKIP achieved it's mission and is struggling to create a meaningful identity for itself now and as a result, people see no need to vote for them. I'm not convinced appetite for leaving the EU has drastically changed, especially to such a level that a 'clear message' has been sent in any way, shape or form.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 09:21 
Offline

Joined: 27 Dec 2015, 15:19
Posts: 683
Location: Ebley, Stroud District
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Excellent result!

Disaster for the Tories and UKIP dead and buried :D .


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 10:33 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 27 Sep 2010, 14:02
Posts: 8497
Location: Cheltenhamshire
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Excellent result...yeah, we're shafted...excellent...


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 10:35 
Offline

Joined: 27 Dec 2015, 15:19
Posts: 683
Location: Ebley, Stroud District
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
We would've been shafted had the voters given Theresa May a blank cheque. Thankfully a lot of them saw through her power grab attempt.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 10:39 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 27 Sep 2010, 14:02
Posts: 8497
Location: Cheltenhamshire
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
And we'd have been shafted had anyone else got in, the same as we always are. Now we're shafted but with an uncertainty as to how. Or when.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 10:45 
Offline

Joined: 04 Mar 2013, 13:39
Posts: 831
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
We're doomed either way, when the choice is essentially continued austerity or increasing the budget deficit substantially and deferring austerity to future generations (albeit window dressed differently in both cases).

This was the first time I've conceded that spoiling your vote was a legitimate choice.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 10:51 
Offline

Joined: 27 Dec 2015, 15:19
Posts: 683
Location: Ebley, Stroud District
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Image

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_na ... chart.html

Debt has increased under Tories, despite the austerity.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 10:54 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 27 Sep 2010, 14:02
Posts: 8497
Location: Cheltenhamshire
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Yeah we can all pull figures out of our wazoos supporting one party or the other but they're all c!#p. There is no good choice. Anyone that actually supports one party over another shouldn't really be allowed to vote because they're obviously delusional and not responsible enough :P


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 10:57 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 12:19
Posts: 10894
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
I feel the voting reflects a number of things but it's pretty clear that the Tories are out of touch with a lot of people and their pandering to the far right has back fired big time. The country is hugely divided and pretty much every reliable indicator suggests the young don't want Hard Brexit, they don't want NHS privatisation, Tuition fees and fox hunting, all things the Tories wanted to achieve.

A hung parliament is clearly not good but at least it's a huge reality check for the likes of Farage, May, Nuttall that a significant proportion of the people are unhappy with their political views.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 10:57 
Offline

Joined: 27 Dec 2015, 15:19
Posts: 683
Location: Ebley, Stroud District
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
On the contrary, I feel the people that flip-flop between parties, especially those that jump between Lib Dems/Tories and Labour/Tories need educating in politics and are "not responsible enough" to vote :P .


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 11:00 
Offline

Joined: 04 Mar 2013, 13:39
Posts: 831
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
You are aware, aren't you, that in 2010 we were 2 years in to a 5 year recession? A recession in which our exposure was increased by Gordon Brown's deregulation of the financial sector, as Chancellor.

The recession led to increased welfare spending and reduced tax receipts. You might benefit from reading the below.

https://fullfact.org/economy/labour-and ... onal-debt/


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 11:02 
Offline

Joined: 27 Dec 2015, 15:19
Posts: 683
Location: Ebley, Stroud District
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
All the graphs still going up since 2010. Still supports what I put up. Just suggests it's less (but an increase is still an increase!)


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 11:03 
Offline

Joined: 04 Mar 2013, 13:39
Posts: 831
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Robin wrote:
I feel the voting reflects a number of things but it's pretty clear that the Tories are out of touch with a lot of people and their pandering to the far right has back fired big time. The country is hugely divided and pretty much every reliable indicator suggests the young don't want Hard Brexit, they don't want NHS privatisation, Tuition fees and fox hunting, all things the Tories wanted to achieve.

A hung parliament is clearly not good but at least it's a huge reality check for the likes of Farage, May, Nuttall that a significant proportion of the people are unhappy with their political views.


Agree with this. Worth mentioning though that NHS privatisation began under 'New' Labour and whilst it has shamefully continued under successive governments, I'd really like to see Labour hold their hands up to this when playing the NHS card.


Last edited by Circa 1887 on 09 Jun 2017, 11:07, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 11:04 
Offline

Joined: 04 Mar 2013, 13:39
Posts: 831
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Johnsons Red Army wrote:
All the graphs still going up since 2010. Still supports what I put up. Just suggests it's less (but an increase is still an increase!)


Try reading it rather than just looking at the pictures.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 11:07 
Offline

Joined: 27 Dec 2015, 15:19
Posts: 683
Location: Ebley, Stroud District
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Claim
Government debt has doubled under the Conservatives.

Conclusion
Not correct. Public sector net debt, adjusted for inflation, rose by 53% between 2009/10 and 2016/17.

Whether it be 50000000000%, 53% or 0.0000000000000000053%, anything above 0 is an increase in debt, however you want to try and dress it up.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 11:12 
Offline

Joined: 04 Mar 2013, 13:39
Posts: 831
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Yes, but your spin is that it's the fault of the previous coalition government and the incumbent Conservative government, You do not acknowledge whatsoever the financial crisis the coalition inherited and the economic landscape created by it. So you are either being willfully misleading in the point you are trying to make, or you do not understand economics.

Some more facts below for context:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39897498


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 11:44 
Offline

Joined: 23 Dec 2009, 02:56
Posts: 4015
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 3 times
Johnsons Red Army wrote:
All the graphs still going up since 2010. Still supports what I put up. Just suggests it's less (but an increase is still an increase!)


and if Labour had got in with them having no idea how much things were going to cost, the numbers would be a lot higher again in all probability


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 11:56 
Offline

Joined: 04 Mar 2013, 13:39
Posts: 831
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Ralph wrote:
Johnsons Red Army wrote:
All the graphs still going up since 2010. Still supports what I put up. Just suggests it's less (but an increase is still an increase!)


and if Labour had got in with them having no idea how much things were going to cost, the numbers would be a lot higher again in all probability


This is the trouble at election time, particularly on social media. People post eye catching 'facts' which are taken as the true picture by those with no appetite to verify details independently. The reality is they are highly selective, misleading snapshots of a much more complex story. Then it's shared and re-tweeted until considered a 'truth' by many.

Other examples i've seen are:
- Theresa May abolishing Department for Energy and Climate Change, likening her to Trump and America's withdrawal to the Paris Climate Agreement. In reality, it merged with two further departments to form the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy.
- Conservatives wanting to legalise the ivory trade in UK. In reality, it is already legal, they simply did not include a direct reference to a ban in their manifesto. So you could argue there are no more pro the ivory trade than any previous UK government.

There are countless more on all sides of the political divide, but these two have been the most prevalent i've seen.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 12:17 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 04:27
Posts: 15310
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Circa 1887 wrote:
Yes, but your spin is that it's the fault of the previous coalition government and the incumbent Conservative government, You do not acknowledge whatsoever the financial crisis the coalition inherited and the economic landscape created by it. So you are either being willfully misleading in the point you are trying to make, or you do not understand economics.

Some more facts below for context:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39897498


Financial crash: years in the making globally. Begun with triple whammy of oil price, Chinese buying up of US and EU debt but not allowing their currency to fluctuate, the sub-prime market in the USA which also spread to UK, facilitated by Labour deregulation of the banks. Added to increased public spending due to unhealthier population (NHS), housing costs and low wages.

Anyone who studied the Great Depression knows you have to spend and invest your way out of debt, recession and back to growth.

Austerity not only cut demand and thus supply for goods and services, the hardship it caused increased need for social services, healthcare, and welfare. Last thing you want to do to a sluggish economy is cut demand, as this will only hinder growth. Spending on HS2 and Hinckley Point etc saw a bit of a bounce, but that has ended and the last two quarters of low growth is what austerity causes.

Grow your way out of debt (i.e keep debt same but increase GDP). Tories austerity has killed the economy, so no growth, and what money is going around gets siphoned off to subsidies to pay train company dividends etc.

Keynes is the master, and Tory obsession with Hayek will never help the country in the long run. Basis economics, but then most people get their economics knowledge from journalists or people in the pub, rather than from people with experience working in economics.

As for Brexit, the mandate is now clear: leaving the single market was not on the EU Ref ballot paper. It was in the Tory election manifesto. And many people rejected it.

There is no mandate for a hard Brexit. And if DUP are to be king makers, then no hard border and a customs union will be the price May's replacement has to pay to the EU.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 12:32 
Offline

Joined: 04 Mar 2013, 13:39
Posts: 831
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Who decides that there is or isn't a mandate? Theresa May and the Conservatives, like it or not, are the biggest party both in terms of MPs and the popular vote. Yes she doesn't have a parliamentary majority, but would you consider a majority of 1 to equate to a mandate?

I think your a little obsessed with your disdain for the Tories. Killing the economy? The year on year growth compares favorably with the rest of the EU - but you've chosen to look at quarters in isolation.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 12:43 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 04:27
Posts: 15310
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Ralph wrote:
Johnsons Red Army wrote:
All the graphs still going up since 2010. Still supports what I put up. Just suggests it's less (but an increase is still an increase!)


and if Labour had got in with them having no idea how much things were going to cost, the numbers would be a lot higher again in all probability


Ralph, the Labour manifesto was fully costed, with all the costs provided and indicated revenue sources. Everyone knew what costs they were proposing. The manifesto without any costings in was the Tories. No one knew what costs they were proposing, not even May who when asked always said they'd 'consult' after the election - part of the reason the manifesto and campaign fell apart.

(FYI: 8 pages of costs and references for for manifesto pledges from Labour. http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/Images/ ... Future.PDF


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 12:46 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 04:27
Posts: 15310
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Circa 1887 wrote:
Who decides that there is or isn't a mandate?


David Davis, Brexit Secretary for one.

http://www.independent.co.uk/News/uk/po ... 80541.html


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 12:50 
Offline

Joined: 04 Mar 2013, 13:39
Posts: 831
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Though obviously the Labour manifesto was torn to shreds for not stacking up financially, not even remotely.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/l ... mic-ruin/#

...which is on par with not costing pledges, as per the Tories.

As for mandates and whether individuals do or don't consider there to be one, you can quote a thousand people pre and post the election, all with their own political leanings and motivations. The one thing that cannot be debated is the numbers.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 12:54 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 04:27
Posts: 15310
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
True. Though lol, Spectator review of tax and social democracy, you might as well ask the Chinese government to write an article about Tianamen Square.

The phobia and hatred of tax in the UK (often by those who benefit most from it) is something I will never comprehend.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 13:08 
Offline

Joined: 04 Mar 2013, 13:39
Posts: 831
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Taking in to consideration that unless the Guardian print it, you won't believe it....it's worth noting even the IFS said the numbers don't stack up.

Whilst it's not only Labour whose numbers stack up, I wouldn't be using their 'fully costed' manifesto as a badge of honor.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 14:03 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 04:27
Posts: 15310
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Circa 1887 wrote:
Taking in to consideration that unless the Guardian print it, you won't believe it....it's worth noting even the IFS said the numbers don't stack up.

Whilst it's not only Labour whose numbers stack up, I wouldn't be using their 'fully costed' manifesto as a badge of honor.


Yes I read the IFS and do give them credit. We'll never know now anyway.

Re: Spectator. I like a lot of their stuff, but they do the annoying thing of confusing economics, society, and morality. So I agree with their free-market advocacy (I am a huge fan of free markets) but they try and included things which are social policy or moral questions (do we want to stop pollution, end child poverty, raise tax to fund our infrastructure, etc) into economic arguments, which is wrong.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 15:48 
Offline

Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 10:15
Posts: 808
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
Circa 1887 wrote:
Taking in to consideration that unless the Guardian print it, you won't believe it....it's worth noting even the IFS said the numbers don't stack up.

Whilst it's not only Labour whose numbers stack up, I wouldn't be using their 'fully costed' manifesto as a badge of honor.


Yes I read the IFS and do give them credit. We'll never know now anyway.

Re: Spectator. I like a lot of their stuff, but they do the annoying thing of confusing economics, society, and morality. So I agree with their free-market advocacy (I am a huge fan of free markets) but they try and included things which are social policy or moral questions (do we want to stop pollution, end child poverty, raise tax to fund our infrastructure, etc) into economic arguments, which is wrong.


You mentioned free markets, Gas and Electricity pricing isn't one. It is a fake market created by the Tories. Here's a typical example. I have recently changed from First Utility to Future Energy as they simply were cheaper. I told FU I was leaving and if they could they match FE prices I would stay but they weren't allowed to by the government.

In a true free market, they would have the choice to lower their prices. If I were leaving for e.g. Sky, they would use their retention team to persuade you to stay.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 17:12 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 04:27
Posts: 15310
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Red Duke wrote:
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
Circa 1887 wrote:
Taking in to consideration that unless the Guardian print it, you won't believe it....it's worth noting even the IFS said the numbers don't stack up.

Whilst it's not only Labour whose numbers stack up, I wouldn't be using their 'fully costed' manifesto as a badge of honor.


Yes I read the IFS and do give them credit. We'll never know now anyway.

Re: Spectator. I like a lot of their stuff, but they do the annoying thing of confusing economics, society, and morality. So I agree with their free-market advocacy (I am a huge fan of free markets) but they try and included things which are social policy or moral questions (do we want to stop pollution, end child poverty, raise tax to fund our infrastructure, etc) into economic arguments, which is wrong.


You mentioned free markets, Gas and Electricity pricing isn't one. It is a fake market created by the Tories. Here's a typical example. I have recently changed from First Utility to Future Energy as they simply were cheaper. I told FU I was leaving and if they could they match FE prices I would stay but they weren't allowed to by the government.

In a true free market, they would have the choice to lower their prices. If I were leaving for e.g. Sky, they would use their retention team to persuade you to stay.


I agree. I am pro-free market were markets can exist, and anti-market failure, externalities, and natural monopolies.

Utilities and trains are not free markets (inefficient/bad companies with no incentive to improve, high barriers to entry, no consumer choice, monopolies, etc) which I would nationalise. Similarly, where market failure creates negative externalities to society (pollution, urban blight, poverty wages) I would legislate to fix the failure, and a free-market would under-supply public goods/commons (libraries, parks etc) which the state needs to provide.

Nationalise industries where a free-market cannot exist, legislate to fix market failure, and let everything else be free.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 17:51 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 13:26
Posts: 11471
Location: The Death Star.
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 0 time
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
Ralph, the Labour manifesto was fully costed, with all the costs provided and indicated revenue sources.2017/Funding%20Britain%27s%20Future.PDF


Wrong wrong wrong...manifesto of pure fantasy that why Labour lost greatly. Its a very bad day for the Labour party with a manifesto which the figures didn't add up. A campaign based on lies and the foolish pissed up students fell for it.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 20:24 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 04:27
Posts: 15310
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Circa 1887 wrote:
Ralph wrote:
Johnsons Red Army wrote:
All the graphs still going up since 2010. Still supports what I put up. Just suggests it's less (but an increase is still an increase!)


and if Labour had got in with them having no idea how much things were going to cost, the numbers would be a lot higher again in all probability


This is the trouble at election time, particularly on social media. People post eye catching 'facts' which are taken as the true picture by those with no appetite to verify details independently. The reality is they are highly selective, misleading snapshots of a much more complex story. Then it's shared and re-tweeted until considered a 'truth' by many.

Other examples i've seen are:
- Theresa May abolishing Department for Energy and Climate Change, likening her to Trump and America's withdrawal to the Paris Climate Agreement. In reality, it merged with two further departments to form the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy.
- Conservatives wanting to legalise the ivory trade in UK. In reality, it is already legal, they simply did not include a direct reference to a ban in their manifesto. So you could argue there are no more pro the ivory trade than any previous UK government.

There are countless more on all sides of the political divide, but these two have been the most prevalent i've seen.


Having been delivering projects for both DECC and BIS when May merged them to BEIS I can tell you that removing Climate Change from the name was not an accident. The mininal sustainability activity May was interested in was shifted to DEFRA and all they have done since is write the air quality report (and how it kills children) which May did her best to suppress anyway (because she thought it would look bad if people knew she made no effort to stop killing children). Why do you think she wouldn't condemn Trump pulling out of PCA and now is happy to bring the climate change denying DUP (as well as anti abortion, anti LGBT rights and anti Good Friday Agreement) into the front benches?


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 20:43 
Offline

Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 10:15
Posts: 808
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Malabus wrote:
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
Ralph, the Labour manifesto was fully costed, with all the costs provided and indicated revenue sources.2017/Funding%20Britain%27s%20Future.PDF


Wrong wrong wrong...manifesto of pure fantasy that why Labour lost greatly. Its a very bad day for the Labour party with a manifesto which the figures didn't add up. A campaign based on lies and the foolish pissed up students fell for it.


Err...I think the words wrong and fantasy should apply to you. All the campaigns were based on lies - the old adage how do you know when a politician is lying - the lips are moving - is truer today than ever before.

Politicians in London still haven't learnt their lessons of recent elections. They still believe the polls and forget that the rest of the country has become disconnected from the capital. We had s#!t for over the last ten years while the rich have got exceedingly richer where the rest of us have become poorer. People are looking for change as it can't be any worse than what we have now.

Theresa May thought it was all about Brexit but forgot that people's real concerns are the NHS and education for their children. She also forgot about not pissing off her core voters.

It will go down in history as a lesson of how to not run an election.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 09 Jun 2017, 21:13 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 04:27
Posts: 15310
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Probably the worst manifesto and campaign of any sitting government. That, and the refusal to answer basic questions despite journalists warning her it looked bad showed utter arrogance and disdain for the electorate, who rightly gave her a kicking.

I see Kensington just went to Labour. Is that a well known Marxist terrorist enclave or a place where people have money and are financially literate?


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Hung Parliament
 Post Posted: 10 Jun 2017, 11:21 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 27 Sep 2010, 14:02
Posts: 8497
Location: Cheltenhamshire
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Imagine if the Tories had put a half decent campaign together. As it were, they were bloody horrendous and are still the largest party.

Complacency, obviously, from the PM and her team is the reason she only won against second-rate opposition 3-2 AET, instead of 4-0 with it all being wrapped up by half-time.


Top 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
 Page 1 of 2 [ 48 posts ] Go to page 1, 2  Next




Board index » THE NEST » NON FOOTY/JOKES ETC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: