Camertoff's powers of judgement

kabayiri

Exocet wrote: »

I used gaylord and Mandy once or twice only, the rest of the time I call him Mandelson. With an occasional Lord to make a point but it is his title after all.

I rather like the term Mandy. It makes him sound personable.

ninky_2

liz it's time for the likes of you and me to doff our caps, seal our lips and realise that this great cleggeron coalition is for the good of the country.

none of them are at all motivated by self interest.

george osborne is the finest chancellor this country has ever know.

that a cabinet full of suits and a homophobic woman are the finest characters we could hope for to rule us.

and that this is 'new' politics where we must no longer argue over policy issues or the best manifesto to take the country forward because it's all about letting those who know so much better than us rule us. and their horse-trading for power roles is just such a better way of doing it than letting party memberships decide on policy direction.

and of course none of these condom party supporters ever use derogatory names of phrases. that would just be childish. and so very pre-election results.

Graham_Devon

ninky wrote: »

liz it's time for the likes of you and me to doff our caps, seal our lips and realise that this great cleggeron coalition is for the good of the country.

none of them are at all motivated by self interest.

george osborne is the finest chancellor this country has ever know.

that a cabinet full of suits and a homophobic woman are the finest characters we could hope for to rule us.

and that this is 'new' politics where we must no longer argue over policy issues or the best manifesto to take the country forward because it's all about letting those who know so much better than us rule us. and their horse-trading for power roles is just such a better way of doing it than letting party memberships decide on policy direction.

and of course none of these condom party supporters ever use derogatory names of phrases. that would just be childish. and so very pre-election results.

It's only a day old.

Glad to see you have given it a fair chance before sounding off

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Just a question.

Do you feel as if you have to come up with silly little names for everyone to further your point?

Are you worried that if you don't come up with these silly little names constantly (and its not just you, it's all of the labour supporters, and most prominent in Discussion Time) that your point won't quite stand?

that's because Graham "i'm not a hypocrite with double standards" devon would ever do that would he

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Again, they simply buy up the reposessions. I believe they are already starting to do just that. Or at least there was an announcement by clown stating something along those lines.

what was that about people using silly little names and your point not standing :rotfl:

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

that's because Graham "i'm not a hypocrite with double standards" devon would ever do that would he

what was that about people using silly little names and your point not standing :rotfl:

Check out post 39.

You may think you caught me out, but got there before you dear boy

Good effort though. Congrats.

sjaypink

Oh for christ sake, are you 2 STILL banging on?! :cool:

Can't you both get a proper hobby..... lawn bowls or something....

Malcolm.

sjaypink wrote: »

Oh for christ sake, are you 2 STILL banging on?! :cool:

Can't you both get a proper hobby..... lawn bowls or something....

Talking of banging.... where have you been?

Rochdale_Pioneers

This thread is stupid. Its not "Camertoff". Its Cleggeron. And Libservatives or ConDem as the name of the political hybrid running the government.

Or, as it will be presented on the door step, "the Conservatives". Such a shame that the LibDems have voted themselves out of existance

Malcolm.

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

Such a shame that the LibDems have voted themselves out of existance

That option wasn't on my voting paper. :mad:

markharding557

LizEstelle wrote:

And we all know why. Camertoff has made a pig's ear of the choices available to him. Keep it up, Dopey Dave. The way you're going, Labour will get back in with another landslide.

I think you need a dose of reality because the labour party have a lot of work to do before they will be ready for another election.
1/ they have to sort their leadership and policy issues and the new leader will need time to make his mark on the party and if he has any sense he will tell mandleson he is no longer required.
2/they will have to become an effective opposition and be able to present a clear and viable alternative.
These things will not happen overnight or any time soon so labour will have to bide their time and not do any stupid things like in the 'foot'days in the early 80's