the snap general election thread

Joe_Horner

hallmark wrote: »

Haha, it's slowly dawning on Jezza's fanclub that they lost on Thursday.

Their celebratory posts are turning into the usual bitter whining, this time aimed at the DUP (who most of them had never heard of until yesterday lolol) or Saudi Arabia.

No, of course I hadn't heard of them when I was out there watching the loyalist !!!!!! inciting trouble because they knew 90% of the press coverage would be of the reaction.

Or when they were wrecking repeated serious attempts at peace settlements.

Or when their mates, set up by the same person who founded them, were carrying out assasinations.

No, you're right. DUP? Never heard of them. :mad:

CKhalvashi

hallmark wrote: »

Well now. If Corbyn had stood on a ticket of lets say an across-the-board rise in income tax of 5% (e.g. something approaching what would have been required to pay fora reasonable chunk of his spending) & had won a majority, or even his actual miserable 262 votes, off the back of it, then I'd have said fair enough.

However he tried to pretend you could fund £250 billion of spending by just kicking the richest 5% & some corporations with zero effect on the other 95%. A massive insult to all but the very thickest, or most tribal of voters.

Consequently he deserved his heavy loss.

So, Corbyn allegedly attacks everyone that works, gives money to the unemployed, is massively attacked by the press during the campaign and still increases his number of seats, including gaining the largest swing, means he's failed? 1000 votes more split between a few seats and he'd have derailed the Tories, remember that.

Interesting theory......

bobbymotors wrote: »

no matter which way it is spun, it was an awful night for TM and the Cons, and a decent night for labour - not a good night, they did, after all, lose.

May should do the decent thing and go, but I suspect she will try to hold on. The grandees won't let her though.

Agree!

hallmark

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

What do you mean Corbyn is out? that last paragraph makes me think that English isn't your first language.

Wow,that's a rather racist thing to say. I mean out of power. Gloriously out

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

Can I ask you a serious question now? which parts of Mays non-costed manifesto floated your boat?

None. What makes you think any of it did? Feel free to quote me saying so ever.

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

P.S I didn't realise you were so sensitive, after all, you've been unsuccessfully goading people on this forum for some time. I assumed you could take it without throwing a little paddy.

Christ now you're insulting the Irish. And Dwarves.

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

Joe_Horner wrote: »

No, of course I hadn't heard of them when I was out there watching the loyalist !!!!!! inciting trouble because they knew 90% of the press coverage would be of the reaction.

Or when they were wrecking repeated serious attempts at peace settlements.

Or when their mates, set up by the same person who founded them, were carrying out assasinations.

No, you're right. DUP? Never heard of them. :mad:

No it's fine to promote and befriend politicians linked to terrorist organisations, but not if your first name is Jeremy. .

Then you're an evil terrorist sympathiser. :rotfl:

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

hallmark wrote: »

Wow,that's a rather racist thing to say. I mean out of power. Gloriously out

Why would that be racist? are you not the same race as another European who happens to speak a different language?

chucknorris

Filo25 wrote: »

They should have been able to go after the Labour manifesto using the IFS analysis of it, the problem was that they were also scathing about the Tory manifesto, which was ludicrously short on detail of any kind.

TBH common sense alone would would have sufficed, but it seemed to be lacking. I was amazed at just how bad the Tory campaign was, they should have also been aware that, despite all JC's failings, campaigning isn't one of them, so probably not an ideal opponent to face in a snap election called on what looks like a totally impulsive decision. May might return, but for me, her limitations have been exposed, time to look elsewhere (but not Boris please).

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

hallmark wrote: »

None. What makes you think any of it did? Feel free to quote me saying so ever.

So you voted conservative out of fear. Fair enough.

You should learn to troll harder. Bye.

hallmark

BobQ wrote: »

Your blind loyalty to May is misplaced, she has damaged the nation in an act of political and personal hubris.

What loyalty to May?

I've never said anything good about her ever. I'd be better at her job & I'm not even a Tory.

Everything I've posted has been a celebration of the fact that Corbyn (who I sincerely loathe, along with the class war his nasty version of politics encourages) got a kicking and is not PM. The Tories were the only thing that could stop that happening. Thankfully they did.

hallmark

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

So you voted conservative out of fear. Fair enough.

You should learn to troll harder. Bye.

Haha stop making assumptions. You keep getting them wrong.

CKhalvashi

hallmark wrote: »

I've never said anything good about her ever. I'd be better at her job & I'm not even a Tory.

Ah, so you're a Kipper, disappointed at his party being burned toast.

Explains a lot

You seem awfully pro-Tory for someone that isn't one.