the snap general election thread

setmefree2

Moby wrote: »

He's such an 'orrible racist. He ran such a negative campaign against Sadiq.

he's great at fighting against a third runway - and he does give a !!!! about air quality.

setmefree2

lovinituk wrote: »

Maybe. Instead the EU will treat us like the new boy in a prison shower room.

If you knew me - you'd know I agree.

But i voted remain and i don't understand leave voters - especially the ones that voted Labour.

CKhalvashi

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

Don't the police determine what is required to protect our Prime Minister?
Explain your logic beyond a cheap shot.
Doesn't matter if it is JC or TM or whoever BTW.
Bizarre.

1 car with 2 firearms officers each in front and behind is reasonable.

You don't need a bike, then a car, then her, then 1 or 2 cars, then a bike blocking all the sliproads.

That will be 4 officers and her driver, not presumably 10 and her driver.

We're all in this together, remember, and my solution would be far less costly.

BobQ

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

That is not clear at all.

I voted remain, but after the reaction of the eu and the direction they want to go in I would definitely vote leave now, and I know a lot of people like that.

What really made my mind up? Jean-Claude Juncker asked eu leaders not to hold any more referendums because the people might have the cheek to vote to leave.

So basically saying don't let the people chose.

You misunderstand. She ran a remain campaign in the sense that it was based on negativity. She said that we had no choice but to support the current position, approve of her future plan, trust her, endorse her etc. The alternative was a deep abyss represented by the demonic Corbyn. As with the EU Referendum, people refused to accept that they had no choice. For me this position was exemplified by the statement that in 11 days we must start negotiations and so (she said) we had no choice but to endorse her.

Moby

chucknorris wrote: »

and because her opponent was Corbyn, and because she was being an opportunist. You have to think 'what could go wrong' (which she didn't, or at least not strongly enough).

One really good thing that has come out of this...no more talk of an Indy Ref. in Scotland for a while. The union looks safer!:)

setmefree2

For all those who wanted "none of the above".

YOU won.

The voter actually stopped both those crappy manifestos from being put into action.

Good times.

BobQ

CKhalvashi wrote: »

1 car with 2 firearms officers each in front and behind is reasonable.

You don't need a bike, then a car, then her, then 1 or 2 cars, then a bike blocking all the sliproads.

That will be 4 officers and her driver, not presumably 10 and her driver.

We're all in this together, remember, and my solution would be far less costly.

I cannot agree. The police are protecting the institution of Prime Minister as the head of a democratic government. As an individual she is expendable (although clearly nobody would wish her harm) but as PM she should be protected from the IS inspired nutters and their ilk.

BobQ

lovinituk wrote: »

Can they really come up with anyone worse than May? I'm not convinced.

.

I give you the current favorite BoJo. Can you imagine him at the negotiating table.

Moby

BobQ wrote: »

This we will never know. Corbyn motivated 40% of the nation to support him. However bad May was would another leader have done as well? Or would they have done better? We will never know.

It's all benefit of hindsight stuff isn't it. Hopefully we'll now see a rejuvenated Labour opposition and that will be good for all of us.

Moby

BobQ wrote: »

I give you the current favorite BoJo. Can you imagine him at the negotiating table.

Amber Rudd......but she has a majority of about 300:eek: