How sorry for Theresa May do you feel?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Manchester, London Bridge, Brexit, the election, the Grenfell...the list goes on. She has had a terrible time and she has the queens speech thing. She would hardly have any free time or sleep :(

How sorry for her do you feel right now, your heart must go out to her?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/11_04/theresamayPA_468x717.jpg

[Smithy]

I don't :)

[smudgie]

I do feel for her, but it is all part of the job.
The horrors that have happened this past month or so are heartbreaking for everyone in the country, as they must be for her on a personal level.
On top of that it is her job to try and make sure these tragedies never happen again, on top of Brexit, Queen's speech and trying to sort her party out.
Very difficult, but it goes with the job.:shrug:

[Kizzy]

0rvFlxiDATw

[Cherie]

I wouldn't wish what has happened in England in the last month on any leader, losing her majority is the least of her problems now, and anyone that gloats over it when people have died needlessly is pretty sick, I don't think she has handled Grendell particularly well so far

[Black Dagger]

I don't. She can lie in her bed.

[Kizzy]

I wouldn't wish what has happened in England in the last month on any leader, losing her majority is the least of her problems now, and anyone that gloats over it when people have died needlessly is pretty sick, I don't think she has handled Grendell particularly well so far

Who has gloated?... Who would gloat?

What an odd thing to say, almost as odd as thinking anyone would have any sympathy for may in relation to recent incidents, ALL my sympathy is for the victims.

It's Grenfell btw.

[joeysteele]

Nothing at all do I feel for her.
I have never thought anything else as to her since coming across her over a decade ago.
To me she is a deceiver and false. Even in tragedies she has to be near shamed in coming anywhere close to the needed and right response.

[Withano]

As if shes personally writing the queens speech

[King Gizzard]

Not really any sympathy at all, when she put herself in this position by wanting to be PM. She should expect mass scrutiny. Cameron had the same level but just dealt with it better, talked himself out of a few holes whereas she just seems to hide or get someone else in the cabinet to deal with it. When he realised he'd ****ed up, he left. She's just desperately gripping onto power and does herself no favours. She doesn't help herself, especially shirking any sort of responsibility by debating and talking to the media when that's one of the first things on the job description. The elections was her fault (granted probably an advisors idea but she agreed to do it). Without *personally* knowing her she seems devoid of any emotion or empathy

I'm not really factoring the last week in because what has happened would be difficult for anyone. But Corbyn getting in amongst the victims and talking, sympathising (and giving out hugs..) while she hides behind a "security" excuse (but then the next day she actually goes and visits victims so that excuse was bull****). Even if you dislike Corbyn you have to admit he's handled this week admirably. Although it probably has to be said he's coming into this as the opposition and not facing the anger of the victims who want answers. It wouldn't have harmed her showing her face the first opportunity she could all the same

[Greg!]

I feel a bit sorry for her. Getting called a "murderer" and things is a bit much.

BUT she brings it on herself by never answering questions, not meeting the fire victims and calling an unnecessary election for selfish reasons.

[Toy Soldier]

Hmm. She saw a little bit of power in sight and she grabbed it with both hands, when she wasn't cut out for the job either professionally (she's just not good at it) or emotionally (she doesn't know how to handle it).

So... Not very sorry. Nothing has happened "to" her that she didn't invite through personal ambition.

[Cherie]

Who has gloated?... Who would gloat?

What an odd thing to say, almost as odd as thinking anyone would have any sympathy for may in relation to recent incidents, ALL my sympathy is for the victims.

It's Grenfell btw.

I do have sympathy because as I said and I repeat no leader in any country should have to deal with what May has had to deal with in the last month, and that has nothing to do with the election which pales in comparison to all the horrors England has heaped on it. The opposition are gloating and trying to make political hay out of a tragedy, shameless really, and i don't doubt the Torys would be doing the same if Corbyn was PM.

[Kazanne]

Manchester, London Bridge, Brexit, the election, the Grenfell...the list goes on. She has had a terrible time and she has the queens speech thing. She would hardly have any free time or sleep :(

How sorry for her do you feel right now, your heart must go out to her?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/11_04/theresamayPA_468x717.jpg

Really sorry for her,I would not want that job for anything.I am sure people think they just sit back and do nothing,they don't,it's hard graft and they wont always get it right,more annoying is the fact whatever she does is wrong in some people eyes,do you think she sits there and thinks,Oh I'll do this today that will piss the electorate off" ? a weaker person would have run for the hills,but no,she has apologised to her party and is endeavouring to get things right, and the things shouted at her by people (and journalists) is disgusting,If I was her I wouldn't want to help people like that . I see the BBC has had a hammering for their bias towards the Conservatives in the election,and the relish on peoples faces (reporters mainly)Kay Burley was particularly bad.when they were digging the knife in,which is funny as they actually won.

[bots]

I don't feel sorry for her, its her job, its what she signed up to when she accepted the position.

I can have some sympathy for not being able to please all the people all of the time, particularly when views are so polarised as they are now. Lets not kid ourselves, labour would fare no differently with the current divides in the country. So, I accept that she may have handled things different and its a view held by many, but that doesn't mean its all the people. Its not a competition about who can shout the loudest or the most aggressively

[Kizzy]

I do have sympathy because as I said and I repeat no leader in any country should have to deal with what May has had to deal with in the last month, and that has nothing to do with the election which pales in comparison to all the horrors England has heaped on it. The opposition are gloating and trying to make political hay out of a tragedy, shameless really, and i don't doubt the Torys would be doing the same if Corbyn was PM.

Good for you I wouldn't wish terrorism or tragedy on any country either, although I would have thought that would go without saying.
The opposition are not gloating, they are calling for an adequate response which, as yet they have not had.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/theresa-may-criticised-inhuman-newsnight-interview-grenfell-fire-response-meeting-victims-latest-a7794506.html

[Withano]

I think people who feel sorry for her forget that she can step down at any point. She can actually step down and have her whole party benefit greatly. Its a win/win situation, and shes chooses the weird third option.

[Brillopad]

Good for you I wouldn't wish terrorism or tragedy on any country either, although I would have thought that would go without saying.
The opposition are not gloating, they are calling for an adequate response which, as yet they have not had.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/theresa-may-criticised-inhuman-newsnight-interview-grenfell-fire-response-meeting-victims-latest-a7794506.html

They are not just calling they are demanding - taking from the rich (as in steal their property) to give to the poor as in line with their far-left policies. That is a road democracy does not want to go down. If, as some have already mentioned, Corbyn is that passionate about this he can offer a room or pay for a room/house for someone - he can afford it. Set an example.

It's the same as people spouting about taking millions of refugees - those that dictate these policies and impose them on others never do anything personally to accommodate people they insist must be allowed in. Again - words come cheap.

[joeysteele]

Sorry can't vote in the poll since there's no 'not at all sorry for her' on it.

[Northern Monkey]

A little sorry for her.Yes she has brought it on herself with the election but the other events she's had to deal with must take there toll.It's not been an easy ride.

[Jack_]

Not in the slightest. She called this election in an attempt to wipe out all opposition, effectively set up a one-party state, and then enact the cruelest Conservative manifesto for a generation.

Her hubris in thinking she could avoid the electorate at all costs was astounding, refusing to take part in debates, kicking workers out of factories to talk to a handful of her cronies, pretending she was going to go out and 'talk to the voters' when she did anything but (and the time she did it was a disaster). She had the gall to stand on the steps of number ten the morning after without acknowledging the disastrous night they'd had, or apologise to any of her colleagues who lost their seats, instead continuing to pretend all is fine and dandy. And then she refuses to meet the victims of Grenfell when even the Queen can.

She is a despicable ****, and deserves all the humiliation and abuse she gets.

[Brother Leon]

Not at all. She bought it on herself.

[hijaxers]

How can you feel sorry for someone with no empathy :conf:

[Shaun]

Those events have nothing to do with her so I don't think anything of her at all.

[jet]

How can you feel sorry for someone with no empathy :conf:

I'm sure she has empathy, she just finds it hard to show it. Some people are just naturally reserved and closed - off.
Many don't seem to mind at all that Corbyn, the cuddly hugger, and McDonnell supported and sympathised with the IRA murdering THOUSANDS of innocent people, and NOT in a role as peace promoters as they try to spin it.
Many just deny it or refuse to believe it and carry on with their Corbyn love regardless.
I've learned that many Labour supporters under Corbyn are uncaring hypocrites.

[Brillopad]

Not in the slightest. She called this election in an attempt to wipe out all opposition, effectively set up a one-party state, and then enact the cruelest Conservative manifesto for a generation.

Her hubris in thinking she could avoid the electorate at all costs was astounding, refusing to take part in debates, kicking workers out of factories to talk to a handful of her cronies, pretending she was going to go out and 'talk to the voters' when she did anything but (and the time she did it was a disaster). She had the gall to stand on the steps of number ten the morning after without acknowledging the disastrous night they'd had, or apologise to any of her colleagues who lost their seats, instead continuing to pretend all is fine and dandy. And then she refuses to meet the victims of Grenfell when even the Queen can.

She is a despicable ****, and deserves all the humiliation and abuse she gets.

That is really grim. I get you don't like her or her policies - but that is very vitriolic.

You don't know what she said to to her colleagues as are not privy to everything she does. She isn't an open book - she doesn't have that kind of nature - but to say she deserves all the humiliation and abuse she gets because she doesn't present her every thought and every feeling on camera is OTT and lacks understanding of different personality types. Emotional hysteria in my opinion.

[Crimson Dynamo]

That is really grim. I get you don't like her or her policies - but that is very vitriolic.

You don't know what she said to to her colleagues as are not privy to everything she does. She isn't an open book - she doesn't have that kind of nature - but to say she deserves all the humiliation and abuse she gets because she doesn't present her every thought and every feeling on camera is OTT and lacks understanding of different personality types. Emotional hysteria in my opinion.

:clap2:

[jet]

That is really grim. I get you don't like her or her policies - but that is very vitriolic.

You don't know what she said to to her colleagues as are not privy to everything she does. She isn't an open book - she doesn't have that kind of nature - but to say she deserves all the humiliation and abuse she gets because she doesn't present her every thought and every feeling on camera is OTT and lacks understanding of different personality types. Emotional hysteria in my opinion.

:clap1:

[Tom4784]

I feel sorry for the victims, I don't give a **** about her.

As for her as PM in general? I don't feel sorry for her at all. She's a woeful PM that, if she was in anyway decent, would know to simply stand down and let someone better suited to the position to take over. It's her choice to be PM and flack comes with the job.

[Jack_]

That is really grim. I get you don't like her or her policies - but that is very vitriolic.

You don't know what she said to to her colleagues as are not privy to everything she does. She isn't an open book - she doesn't have that kind of nature - but to say she deserves all the humiliation and abuse she gets because she doesn't present her every thought and every feeling on camera is OTT and lacks understanding of different personality types. Emotional hysteria in my opinion.

She and her policies are grim.

I find it deplorable that she called this vanity election for no other reason than to crush all opposition in this country. That is the reason it was called, nobody in the EU gave a **** about the size of her parliamentary majority. She did so with a 20 point poll lead and unusually high favourability ratings, thinking she and her party were untouchable - that they could do, say, or avoid anything they like and still be gifted a carte blanche mandate to implement a manifesto that took the piss even out of their core support base. She wanted to be vindicated in dismantling our public services, continuing to sell our NHS off to the highest bidder, making further ideological cuts to the poorest and most vulnerable in our society so that her filthy rich cronies could benefit, ran a negative, vitriolic campaign that concentrated less on what they were offering (which was very little) and more on lying about what the opposition were. The personal attacks, the smears, the 'naked and alone' (which no man would have ever gotten away with saying), the audacity of not costing your policies and then criticising the oppositions for 'not adding up', the avoidance of scrutiny, a campaign led by two bullies (not my words, but those of Tory ministers), the gall of her using Islamic fundamentalism to try and drum up support for revoking hard fought for rights, her continued avoidance of the electorate, the list goes on. This is all, by the way, after she used her inaugural speech last July to attempt to appear like a centrist, moderate Conservative, stressing how she wanted to support the 'just about managing'. The last seven weeks have proven that to be a lie, and exposed her for the power thirsty charlatan that she is. I cannot abide the woman because of what she wanted to do to this country, and I'm expected to express sympathy for someone who cares very little about me or 95% of the population? Not a chance. I didn't like Cameron or his policies, but they were nowhere near as disgusting as she was attempting to get away with, and at the very least at least he was statesmanlike. She is a laughing stock, and rightly so. It couldn't have happened to a more contemptible person. Of course I'm emotionally hysterical, the woman and the current state of her party actually makes my blood boil. Not just figuratively, but literally.

And sorry, but with all due respect, I'm not going to be lectured on morality from someone who thinks these kind of policies are supportable.

[Kizzy]

That is really grim. I get you don't like her or her policies - but that is very vitriolic.

You don't know what she said to to her colleagues as are not privy to everything she does. She isn't an open book - she doesn't have that kind of nature - but to say she deserves all the humiliation and abuse she gets because she doesn't present her every thought and every feeling on camera is OTT and lacks understanding of different personality types. Emotional hysteria in my opinion.

It's not even an nth of what has been directed at other MPs of late ... you can't laugh along with one being abused while condemning the abuse of another unless you really are a dice faced hypocrite.

[Jack_]

It's not even an nth of what has been directed at other MPs of late ... you can't laugh along with one being abused while condemning the abuse of another unless you really are a dice faced hypocrite.

No but that's just it Kizzy isn't it - Labour, Jeremy Corbyn, their supporters and anyone on the left have spent the last 18 months being mocked, berated and vilified. That is perfectly acceptable, but no one better dare criticise our Conservative Prime Minister, for that would be immoral, since our Dear Leader must be worshipped at all costs - after all, it's a dictatorship she was seeking.

It's pathetic and it's tiresome.

[joeysteele]

She and her policies are grim.

I find it deplorable that she called this vanity election for no other reason than to crush all opposition in this country. That is the reason it was called, nobody in the EU gave a **** about the size of her parliamentary majority. She did so with a 20 point poll lead and unusually high favourability ratings, thinking she and her party were untouchable - that they could do, say, or avoid anything they like and still be gifted a carte blanche mandate to implement a manifesto that took the piss even out of their core support base. She wanted to be vindicated in dismantling our public services, continuing to sell our NHS off to the highest bidder, making further ideological cuts to the poorest and most vulnerable in our society so that her filthy rich cronies could benefit, ran a negative, vitriolic campaign that concentrated less on what they were offering (which was very little) and more on lying about what the opposition were. The personal attacks, the smears, the 'naked and alone' (which no man would have ever gotten away with saying), the audacity of not costing your policies and then criticising the oppositions for 'not adding up', the avoidance of scrutiny, a campaign led by two bullies (not my words, but those of Tory ministers), the gall of her using Islamic fundamentalism to try and drum up support for revoking hard fought for rights, her continued avoidance of the electorate, the list goes on. This is all, by the way, after she used her inaugural speech last July to attempt to appear like a centrist, moderate Conservative, stressing how she wanted to support the 'just about managing'. The last seven weeks have proven that to be a lie, and exposed her for the power thirsty charlatan that she is. I cannot abide the woman because of what she wanted to do to this country, and I'm expected to express sympathy for someone who cares very little about me or 95% of the population? Not a chance. I didn't like Cameron or his policies, but they were nowhere near as disgusting as she was attempting to get away with, and at the very least at least he was statesmanlike. She is a laughing stock, and rightly so. It couldn't have happened to a more contemptible person. Of course I'm emotionally hysterical, the woman and the current state of her party actually makes my blood boil. Not just figuratively, but literally.

And sorry, but with all due respect, I'm not going to be lectured on morality from someone who thinks these kind of policies are supportable.



Absolute brilliance.
All factual and really well said Jack_

[Crimson Dynamo]

No but that's just it Kizzy isn't it - Labour, Jeremy Corbyn, their supporters and anyone on the left have spent the last 18 months being mocked, berated and vilified. That is perfectly acceptable, but no one better dare criticise our Conservative Prime Minister, for that would be immoral, since our Dear Leader must be worshipped at all costs - after all, it's a dictatorship she was seeking.

It's pathetic and it's tiresome.

wait "anyone on the left" have been "mocked, berated and vilified" for the past 18 months?

anyone?

like say Jon Snow, Alex Ferguson, Sir Billy Connelly, the guy from Springwatch, Hillary Benn, the 2 gay hairdressers from Gogglebox, Billy Bragg?

wow, who knew

[GiRTh]

:clap1:She and her policies are grim.

I find it deplorable that she called this vanity election for no other reason than to crush all opposition in this country. That is the reason it was called, nobody in the EU gave a **** about the size of her parliamentary majority. She did so with a 20 point poll lead and unusually high favourability ratings, thinking she and her party were untouchable - that they could do, say, or avoid anything they like and still be gifted a carte blanche mandate to implement a manifesto that took the piss even out of their core support base. She wanted to be vindicated in dismantling our public services, continuing to sell our NHS off to the highest bidder, making further ideological cuts to the poorest and most vulnerable in our society so that her filthy rich cronies could benefit, ran a negative, vitriolic campaign that concentrated less on what they were offering (which was very little) and more on lying about what the opposition were. The personal attacks, the smears, the 'naked and alone' (which no man would have ever gotten away with saying), the audacity of not costing your policies and then criticising the oppositions for 'not adding up', the avoidance of scrutiny, a campaign led by two bullies (not my words, but those of Tory ministers), the gall of her using Islamic fundamentalism to try and drum up support for revoking hard fought for rights, her continued avoidance of the electorate, the list goes on. This is all, by the way, after she used her inaugural speech last July to attempt to appear like a centrist, moderate Conservative, stressing how she wanted to support the 'just about managing'. The last seven weeks have proven that to be a lie, and exposed her for the power thirsty charlatan that she is. I cannot abide the woman because of what she wanted to do to this country, and I'm expected to express sympathy for someone who cares very little about me or 95% of the population? Not a chance. I didn't like Cameron or his policies, but they were nowhere near as disgusting as she was attempting to get away with, and at the very least at least he was statesmanlike. She is a laughing stock, and rightly so. It couldn't have happened to a more contemptible person. Of course I'm emotionally hysterical, the woman and the current state of her party actually makes my blood boil. Not just figuratively, but literally.

And sorry, but with all due respect, I'm not going to be lectured on morality from someone who thinks these kind of policies are supportable.

[Braden]

Only because I'm not a 'like to see my enemy while their down' kind of person (of which, I am not suggesting anyone on here is). I absolutely get why people hate her, she's displayed abominable tactics and behaviour, before, after and during the election. The fact that she initially ignored survivors and residents after the Grenfell fire is truely disgusting.

[Brillopad]

No but that's just it Kizzy isn't it - Labour, Jeremy Corbyn, their supporters and anyone on the left have spent the last 18 months being mocked, berated and vilified. That is perfectly acceptable, but no one better dare criticise our Conservative Prime Minister, for that would be immoral, since our Dear Leader must be worshipped at all costs - after all, it's a dictatorship she was seeking.

It's pathetic and it's tiresome.

And people were defending Corbyn and his faults just as now people are defending May and her faults. Different perspectives.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Only because I'm not a 'like to see my enemy while their down' kind of person (of which, I am not suggesting anyone on here is). I absolutely get why people hate her, she's displayed abominable tactics and behaviour, before, after and during the election. The fact that she initially ignored survivors and residents after the Grenfell fire is truely disgusting.

I am pretty sure she wanted to but was advised against it by her security and probably it was a good idea

[jet]

She and her policies are grim.

I find it deplorable that she called this vanity election for no other reason than to crush all opposition in this country. That is the reason it was called, nobody in the EU gave a **** about the size of her parliamentary majority. She did so with a 20 point poll lead and unusually high favourability ratings, thinking she and her party were untouchable - that they could do, say, or avoid anything they like and still be gifted a carte blanche mandate to implement a manifesto that took the piss even out of their core support base. She wanted to be vindicated in dismantling our public services, continuing to sell our NHS off to the highest bidder, making further ideological cuts to the poorest and most vulnerable in our society so that her filthy rich cronies could benefit, ran a negative, vitriolic campaign that concentrated less on what they were offering (which was very little) and more on lying about what the opposition were. The personal attacks, the smears, the 'naked and alone' (which no man would have ever gotten away with saying), the audacity of not costing your policies and then criticising the oppositions for 'not adding up', the avoidance of scrutiny, a campaign led by two bullies (not my words, but those of Tory ministers), the gall of her using Islamic fundamentalism to try and drum up support for revoking hard fought for rights, her continued avoidance of the electorate, the list goes on. This is all, by the way, after she used her inaugural speech last July to attempt to appear like a centrist, moderate Conservative, stressing how she wanted to support the 'just about managing'. The last seven weeks have proven that to be a lie, and exposed her for the power thirsty charlatan that she is. I cannot abide the woman because of what she wanted to do to this country, and I'm expected to express sympathy for someone who cares very little about me or 95% of the population? Not a chance. I didn't like Cameron or his policies, but they were nowhere near as disgusting as she was attempting to get away with, and at the very least at least he was statesmanlike. She is a laughing stock, and rightly so. It couldn't have happened to a more contemptible person. Of course I'm emotionally hysterical, the woman and the current state of her party actually makes my blood boil. Not just figuratively, but literally.

And sorry, but with all due respect, I'm not going to be lectured on morality from someone who thinks these kind of policies are supportable.

On the other hand, Corbyn is wonderful alternative, eh?
An interesting read from 2016 -

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/shouldnt-vote-jeremy-corbyn/

What follows is an appeal to Jeremy Corbyn supporters to think again. It’s from Chris, a Labour party member, who does not want to give his full name for fear of abuse. He has compiled a vast, but by no means exhaustive list of the moral and political failings of the Labour leader. He told me:
I’ve noticed that a few of my very clever, thoughtful, moderately left-wing friends were pro-Corbyn, which amazed me. What I discovered was that they knew almost no facts about him or his fellow travellers. I then noticed that any given critical article about Corbyn only listed one or two facts about him. Normal, good people, who aren’t political anoraks like me, don’t have time to read hundreds of articles on politics – they read a few articles and base the rest of their opinions on gut feeling and general trend of the headlines/social media. I decided to collate in one place the most striking, verifiable facts about Corbyn and the movement he represents.
They are well worth reading.

I write this as a passionate leftist and liberal. Below is a list of facts about Jeremy Corbyn which have not previously been collated in one place. The reader can make up their own mind, based on these facts. This list has been broken up into three sections: ‘Ethics’, ‘Leadership & Electability’, and ‘Social Media & Activists’.

Part One: Ethics
1. Against peace in Ireland

During the 1980s and 1990s, Jeremy Corbyn supported the IRA and opposed the Northern Ireland peace process:
By voting against the peace process and the Anglo-Irish Agreement in Parliament, as he believed republican nationalists shouldn’t have to compromise (the evidence is here and here).
By attending and speaking at annual pro-IRA commemorations for terrorists between 1986 and 1992. The programme for one such event reads: ‘In this, the conclusive phase in the war to rid Ireland of the scourge of British imperialism…force of arms is the only method capable of bringing this about’.

By aligning with terrorists. Corbyn was general secretary of the editorial board of the hard-left journal Labour Briefing which supported IRA violence and explicitly backed the Brighton Hotel Bombing, which killed 5 people and maimed 31 others. In its December 1984 leader, the editorial board ‘disassociated itself’ from an article criticising the Brighton bombing, saying the criticism was a ‘serious political misjudgement’. The board said it ‘reaffirmed its support for, and solidarity with, the Irish republican movement’, and added that ‘the British only sit up and take notice when they are bombed into it’. Alongside its editorial, the board reprinted a speech by Gerry Adams describing the bombing as a ‘blow for democracy’. The same edition carried a reader’s letter praising the ‘audacity’ of the IRA attack and stating: ‘What do you call four dead Tories? A start.’ They had previously printed the following:
We refuse to parrot the ritual condemnation of ‘violence’ because we insist on placing responsibility where it lies…. Let our Iron Lady know this: those who live by the sword shall die by it. If she wants violence, then violence she will certainly get.

If Corbyn wanted to support a unified Ireland through peaceful means he could have supported the SDLP (Northern Ireland’s Social Democratic and Labour Party), which wanted to unify Ireland through a democratic process. Instead, Corbyn attended ‘Troops Out’ rallies where the SDLP were denounced as sell-outs. In 2015, on BBC Radio Ulster, Corbyn refused five times to specifically condemn IRA violence and terrorism. He hung up rather than answer the question. You can listen here.

Corbyn also appointed as his Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell, who opposed the peace process as late as 1998 as it meant compromise. McDonnell also said (before, admittedly, later apologising):
It's about time we started honouring those people involved in the armed struggle. It was the bombs and bullets and sacrifice made by the likes of Bobby Sands that brought Britain to the negotiating table. The peace we have now is due to the action of the IRA. Because of the bravery of the IRA and people like Bobby Sands we now have a peace process.
It is worth remembering that the IRA bombed, shot, or beat to death 1,696 men, women and children, and of course did not achieve a united Ireland.

2. For the Iranian religious right.
Jeremy Corbyn has been paid £20,000 to appear five times on the totalitarian Iranian regime’s propaganda channel, which was banned in the UK for its role in filming the tortured forced-confession of Iranian liberal journalist Maziar Bahari. By hosting interviews, Corbyn gives the propaganda the ‘credibility’ of a Western politician. It’s fascinating to hear Iranian democracy campaigner Maziar Bahari’s own thoughts on Corbyn, who he describes as ‘a useful idiot’, and goes on to say:
People who present programmes for Press TV and get paid for it should be really ashamed of themselves — especially if they call themselves liberals and people who are interested in human rights.
The Iranian regime executes gay people, democracy activists, Kurds, and orders the rape of female prisoners. But Corbyn is happy to take their money and aid their propaganda campaign. Watch the end of this clip as Jeremy hosts a caller who describes the BBC as having hosted ‘Zionist liars’.

3. For anti-Semites
Jeremy Corbyn has praised and supported Raed Salah, an Islamist who has been accused of spreading the Blood Libel (an old antisemitic conspiracy that Jews use the blood of gentile children to make their bread). Salah has also been charged with inciting racial hatred and violence, and has claimed the Jews were behind 9/11. Corbyn has said: ‘Salah is a very honoured citizen’, ‘Salah’s is a voice that must be heard’, ‘Salah is far from a dangerous man’, and ‘I look forward to giving you tea on the terrace because you deserve it!’.
Corbyn wrote in defence of a vicar who suggested that 9/11 was an inside job by the Jews.
Corbyn invited Hamas and Hizbollah to Parliament and called them his ‘friends’. Bear in mind that Hamas’s Charter is explicitly genocidal – it makes it clear its supporters want to kill Jews and repeats Nazi conspiracy theories. Their founding Charter also rules out any peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestine problem. It says:
Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement… There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through jihad.
Corbyn doesn’t invite extremist Zionists to parliament, only extremist anti-Semites.
Corbyn was also a long-time backer of an anti-Israel group founded by Paul Eisen, attending its 2013 event even after Eisen had outed himself as a Holocaust denier years earlier.

4. For Putin
As his right-hand man, Corbyn appointed Seumas Milne, who has argued we should focus more on the positives of Stalin’s communist dictatorship. Milne was also part of the pro-Stalin and pro-Soviet fellow travellers of Fergus Nicholson’s wing of the British Communist Party (he was not an official member), and worked at the pro-Soviet paper Straight Left. Milne has also blamed Russia’s recent invasion of the Ukraine on the West, and has hosted a propaganda media conference for Vladimir Putin.

5. Against self-determination
Corbyn suggested that the Falkland Islands should be shared with Argentina, ignoring a referendum in which 99.8 per cent of the islanders voted to remain British.

Part Two: Electability and Leadership
Jeremy Corbyn has repeatedly demonstrated he isn’t a viable leader. Here’s how:
Corbyn has shown he has little idea about how to handle the media. Even left-wing newspapers such as The Guardian and The Independent have complained that the Corbyn team, through incompetency, release their press statements too late to give them full coverage the next day. One example was the announcement of an internal inquiry into anti-Semitism in the Labour party, wider coverage of which would have taken pressure off Corbyn and the Labour party. Instead, the announcement was made late on a Friday night – meaning the saga dragged on.
On national television, Jeremy Corbyn refused to back a shoot-to-kill policy if a Paris-style machine gun attack happened in London. He then changed his mind and backtracked a day later.
Corbyn’s botched attempt at a publicity stunt on a ‘ram-packed’ train was questioned by Virgin who released CCTV images showing the Labour leader appearing to walk past empty seats before he had filmed a video showing him sitting on the floor of a train carriage. Another image released by Virgin also showed Corbyn having later found a seat.
The following advisors and colleagues have resigned under Corbyn or disowned him in the last ten months, citing incompetence and his unelectability:
Neale Coleman, the former aide to Ken Livingstone, resigned following the unexpected announcement of policies he had not be consulted on.
Richard Murphy, the left wing tax specialist who was initially supportive of Corbyn, and whose policies the Labour leader took up, has now disowned him due to his failure to create a detailed plan. He said he had lost faith in Corbyn’s vision.
David Blanchflower resigned, citing his lack of ability and electability. And Simon Wren-Lewis criticised the Labour leadership for not campaigning ‘more strongly‘ in the EU referendum.
World famous left-wing economist Thomas Picketty has also resigned as Corbyn’s economic advisor, criticising his ‘weak’ EU campaign.
The Labour MP Thangam Debonaire disowned Corbyn after saying the Labour leader hired and fired her while she was receiving cancer treatment – all without a single word. Her full, shocking account can be read here.
The Labour MP Lilian Greenwood, who never publicly criticised Corbyn, and who voted with him on Syria, resigned as the Shadow Transport shadow, claiming Corbyn has repeatedly undermined her. Oh, and there’s also….
The 172 Labour MPs, whose views range from centrist to centre-left to fully left-wing, who voted that they had no confidence in Corbyn’s leadership.
But these aren’t the only indications Corbyn isn’t up to the job:
Corbyn has the lowest public approval rating for an opposition leader after ten months since records began. An Ipsos Mori poll said Corbyn’s rating was -41, compared to -32 for Michael Foot at the same time during his doomed leadership.
Every large-scale study into why Labour lost the 2015 general election came to the same conclusion: Labour was not trusted on the economy. Corbyn’s response? To promise £500billion in spending but refuse to say where the money will come from.
Jeremy Corbyn also had a disastrous referendum campaign. Having been pro-Brexit for decades – voting against Common market membership in 1975, and against the Maastricht Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty as an MP – his ‘pro-Remain’ campaign was, at best, half-hearted. What’s more:
Corbyn missed the first day of the Labour ‘Remain‘ campaign so he could attend an anti-nuclear weapons rally instead.
Leaked emails show that during the EU referendum campaign, Labour party ‘Remain’ campaigners came to the conclusion that the Corbyn Team were deliberately sabotaging their efforts.
A full 45 per cent of the millions of Labour voters weren’t aware that Labour was for ‘Remain’.
Corbyn’s first actions after the referendum was to, unwisely, call for the immediate invoking of Article 50.

Part Three: Social Media & Activists
It cannot be emphasised enough that abusive Corbyn supporters only represent a vocal minority. However it is also clear that Labour wasn’t experiencing the problems of abuse and intimidation prior to the birth of this current movement. In the process of fact checking, it became apparent that some incidents of abuse may have been exaggerated in order to criticise the pro-Corbyn movement. However, it’s simply not possible to claim that the hundreds-upon-hundreds of separately documented incidents, abusive voicemails and phone calls, physical confrontations, police callouts and death threats are all exaggerations. Here are a list of just some of them:
Over 40 female MPs have written to Jeremy Corbyn pleading with him to try to curtail the abuse they receive from his supporters. It’s not clear what Jeremy Corbyn has actually done about this issue.
Across the country, Labour constituency meetings have been temporarily suspended by the NEC because of the levels of abuse and intimidation taking place at some of these gatherings.
Since challenging Corbyn’s leadership, Labour MP Angela Eagle has been called a ‘dyke’ at a constituency meeting, and has been told by police that, for now, she should not hold constituency surgeries because her safety cannot be guaranteed.
BBC journalist Laura Kuenssberg has received abuse from Corbyn supporters, including being called a ‘*****’ and a ‘bitch’.
At the release of the Labour anti-Semitism report, Labour MP Ruth Smeeth was abused by a Corbyn supporter. Meanwhile, Corbyn apparently watched and said nothing.
Of course, there are many other facts to bear in mind when making your choice for Labour leader. It is up to each individual to vote with their conscience, but all of us must strive to vote based on the facts.
Yours sincerely,

CG (name anonymised to avoid harassment and abuse)











How many young voters don't know the half of it about Santa Corbyn.

[Kazanne]

That is really grim. I get you don't like her or her policies - but that is very vitriolic.

You don't know what she said to to her colleagues as are not privy to everything she does. She isn't an open book - she doesn't have that kind of nature - but to say she deserves all the humiliation and abuse she gets because she doesn't present her every thought and every feeling on camera is OTT and lacks understanding of different personality types. Emotional hysteria in my opinion.

I so agree with you, and she is supposed to be the one with no empathy:laugh: the irony,

[Kazanne]

Only because I'm not a 'like to see my enemy while their down' kind of person (of which, I am not suggesting anyone on here is). I absolutely get why people hate her, she's displayed abominable tactics and behaviour, before, after and during the election. The fact that she initially ignored survivors and residents after the Grenfell fire is truely disgusting.

That is so not true,she was advised it would be a security risk,did you see the way some people shouted and lunged at her ? she also went to the hospitals to see the survivors she has also called a meeting with the councils and some of the residents,she has ignored no one.

[Braden]

I am pretty sure she wanted to but was advised against it by her security and probably it was a good idea

But she's the Prime Minister. If she honestly wanted to meet those people, she would've had the gall to do so (or should've). I get that security advised against, but at a time like this I think it would've been a good thing to have her say '**** that, let me see these people' (obviously not those words verbatim :p)

DId she not go the very next day, and was completely fine?

[Crimson Dynamo]

But she's the Prime Minister. If she honestly wanted to meet those people, she would've had the gall to do so (or should've). I get that security advised against, but at a time like this I think it would've been a good thing to have her say '**** that, let me see these people' (obviously not those words verbatim :p)

DId she not go the very next day, and was completely fine?

Yes she should have but thats not the type of person she is

mind you she is laughably supposed to be a "Christian" but then I guess that is just for the 1 hour a week...

[Braden]

That is so not true,she was advised it would be a security risk,did you see the way some people shouted and lunged at her ? she also went to the hospitals to see the survivors she has also called a meeting with the councils and some of the residents,she has ignored no one.

Many people in the area have been rightly outraged by the fact that she turned a blind eye to the residents who witnessed this horrendous attack and the few survivors. The lunging came after her decision to ingore these people, during her time when she eventually met them. I'm not saying it was correct of them to conduct themselves this way, but if she's a Prime Minister for the people she would've made an effort to visit these vulnerable with no hesitation.

[bots]

That is so not true,she was advised it would be a security risk,did you see the way some people shouted and lunged at her ? she also went to the hospitals to see the survivors she has also called a meeting with the councils and some of the residents,she has ignored no one.

i've taken to using a particularly handy forum feature, and what a relief, it brings the stress levels right down :wavey:

[Braden]

i've taken to using a particularly handy forum feature, and what a relief, it brings the stress levels right down :wavey:

Oh, so have I. Ttrust me, it still doesn't work :p

[Kazanne]

But she's the Prime Minister. If she honestly wanted to meet those people, she would've had the gall to do so (or should've). I get that security advised against, but at a time like this I think it would've been a good thing to have her say '**** that, let me see these people' (obviously not those words verbatim :p)

DId she not go the very next day, and was completely fine?

It wasn't actually the crowd were getting confrontational,she was beckoned to the car.

[Braden]

It wasn't actually the crowd were getting confrontational,she was beckoned to the car.

Well, I wasn't there so I apolgise if I'm incorrect.

[Kazanne]

Well, I wasn't there so I apolgise if I'm incorrect.

It was on the news.

[Brillopad]

It wasn't actually the crowd were getting confrontational,she was beckoned to the car.

As her security it is their job to protect her - she was quite exposed there and she is an obvious target of terrorists who could easily have been there.

Can't see why people can't see that.

[jet]

As her security it is their job to protect her - she was quite exposed there and she is an obvious target of terrorists who could easily have been there.

Can't see why people can't see that.

They don't want to.

[Braden]

Oh my god, I've caused outroar on Serious Debates & News. I love the Tories, really. Have a good night everyone:

https://m.popkey.co/330875/pVoZ1_s-200x150.gif

[Brillopad]

They don't want to.

You are right Jet. Just comes across as another excuse to attack May because feelings have been running high against her for a while from some quarters.

[Cherie]

Oh my god, I've caused outroar on Serious Debates & News. I love the Tories, really. Have a good night everyone:

https://m.popkey.co/330875/pVoZ1_s-200x150.gif

:love:

[Kazanne]

Oh my god, I've caused outroar on Serious Debates & News. I love the Tories, really. Have a good night everyone:

https://m.popkey.co/330875/pVoZ1_s-200x150.gif

Why have you caused outroar ?:shrug: Have I missed something,:laugh:

[smudgie]

On the other hand, Corbyn is wonderful alternative, eh?
An interesting read from 2016 -

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/shouldnt-vote-jeremy-corbyn/



How many young voters don't know the half of it about Santa Corbyn.

Interesting read, but then some of us already acknowledged this.

[Jack_]

On the other hand, Corbyn is wonderful alternative, eh?
An interesting read from 2016 -

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/shouldnt-vote-jeremy-corbyn/



How many young voters don't know the half of it about Santa Corbyn.

Ah, you see here you made two fundamental mistakes. Firstly, you wrongly assumed I am a Corbynista. I voted for the man twice, first time because I believed it was time to shift the Labour Party back to its traditional, progressive, anti-austerity, left position and no other candidate offered any kind of transformative post-Miliband vision. The second time I voted for him because Owen Smith was even more 'unelectable' than Corbyn. I have on several occasions however had and expressed reservations about his leadership and his lack of condemnation and clarity on certain issues - some of which were addressed in that post. The party and the movement is bigger than one man, it's just that he is and was the only person offering a vision of what I want Labour to stand for. In future, my preference is for Clive Lewis to be the leader.

The other mistake you made - and this is common on TiBB - is not reading my post properly. My issue with Theresa May is primarily the policy platform that she stood on, coupled with her disdain for and arrogant complacency with the electorate. Oh, and the fact she and her advisors wanted to opportunistically turn the UK into a one-party state. I find that disgraceful and struggle to see how others don't. So rather than my issue being with her character or own personal values per se (as it is for Corbyn's detractors and what you've just responded to me with), it is rather with the current state of her party (of which she is the leader). As I noted in the post you quoted, I may have disliked Cameron and his policies, but certainly not as much as her's and I at least recognised his statemanlike abilities. A competent Prime Minister she is not.

I am interested in policies, and her's (or rather the Conservatives) are repulsive. It's worth pointing out however that it was she and her advisors who sought to turn this election campaign into a presidential one (which spectacularly backfired), so for people to criticise others for attacking her is really quite laughable. She made her bed and now she will lie in it.

Finally, on the matter of yet another patronising smear of younger voters - the Self Servatives and their supporters need to learn that while ever they continue to mock and take young people for granted, you will be doing your party a disservice. For years people have denigrated young people for not voting, well now they have - and they've said a massive **** you to the Tories - if they don't start addressing that, it will rightly in part contribute to their downfall. And another thing - people can mock young voters for supporting 'Santa Corbyn' all they like, but there is a whole swathe of vacuous members of the electorate who believe that the economy can be equated to a household budget, that Labour caused the financial crash, that immigrants and benefit claimants must pay the price for cutting the deficit, that austerity is necessary and not ideologically motivated, and so on and so forth. Mock young people all you wish, but the truth is that the large majority of the electorate are completely uninformed.

[joeysteele]

All what Jack_ said for me.

The Woman has security,they would have kept her safe, for crying out loud the Queen in her nineties managed it.

Just who does May think she is.
Pathetic is what she is and I'll reserve my sympathy for the victims of these tragedies and most certainly not for an ice cold fish like Mrs May.

[Brillopad]

Ah, you see here you made two fundamental mistakes. Firstly, you wrongly assumed I am a Corbynista. I voted for the man twice, first time because I believed it was time to shift the Labour Party back to its traditional, progressive, anti-austerity, left position and no other candidate offered any kind of transformative post-Miliband vision. The second time I voted for him because Owen Smith was even more 'unelectable' than Corbyn. I have on several occasions however had and expressed reservations about his leadership and his lack of condemnation and clarity on certain issues - some of which were addressed in that post. The party and the movement is bigger than one man, it's just that he is and was the only person offering a vision of what I want Labour to stand for. In future, my preference is for Clive Lewis to be the leader.

The other mistake you made - and this is common on TiBB - is not reading my post properly. My issue with Theresa May is primarily the policy platform that she stood on, coupled with her disdain for and arrogant complacency with the electorate. Oh, and the fact she and her advisors wanted to opportunistically turn the UK into a one-party state. I find that disgraceful and struggle to see how others don't. So rather than my issue being with her character or own personal values per se (as it is for Corbyn's detractors and what you've just responded to me with), it is rather with the current state of her party (of which she is the leader). As I noted in the post you quoted, I may have disliked Cameron and his policies, but certainly not as much as her's and I at least recognised his statemanlike abilities. A competent Prime Minister she is not.

I am interested in policies, and her's (or rather the Conservatives) are repulsive. It's worth pointing out however that it was she and her advisors who sought to turn this election campaign into a presidential one (which spectacularly backfired), so for people to criticise others for attacking her is really quite laughable. She made her bed and now she will lie in it.

Finally, on the matter of yet another patronising smear of younger voters - the Self Servatives and their supporters need to learn that while ever they continue to mock and take young people for granted, you will be doing your party a disservice. For years people have denigrated young people for not voting, well now they have - and they've said a massive **** you to the Tories - if they don't start addressing that, it will rightly in part contribute to their downfall. And another thing - people can mock young voters for supporting 'Santa Corbyn' all they like, but there is a whole swathe of vacuous members of the electorate who believe that the economy can be equated to a household budget, that Labour caused the financial crash, that immigrants and benefit claimants must pay the price for cutting the deficit, that austerity is necessary and not ideologically motivated, and so on and so forth. Mock young people all you wish, but the truth is that the large majority of the electorate are completely uninformed.

Basically if you don't agree it's uninformed. Actually no it's opinion - just as your words are opinion, despite the way you persistently try to present them as fact.

[DemolitionRed]

Ah, you see here you made two fundamental mistakes. Firstly, you wrongly assumed I am a Corbynista. I voted for the man twice, first time because I believed it was time to shift the Labour Party back to its traditional, progressive, anti-austerity, left position and no other candidate offered any kind of transformative post-Miliband vision. The second time I voted for him because Owen Smith was even more 'unelectable' than Corbyn. I have on several occasions however had and expressed reservations about his leadership and his lack of condemnation and clarity on certain issues - some of which were addressed in that post. The party and the movement is bigger than one man, it's just that he is and was the only person offering a vision of what I want Labour to stand for. In future, my preference is for Clive Lewis to be the leader.

The other mistake you made - and this is common on TiBB - is not reading my post properly. My issue with Theresa May is primarily the policy platform that she stood on, coupled with her disdain for and arrogant complacency with the electorate. Oh, and the fact she and her advisors wanted to opportunistically turn the UK into a one-party state. I find that disgraceful and struggle to see how others don't. So rather than my issue being with her character or own personal values per se (as it is for Corbyn's detractors and what you've just responded to me with), it is rather with the current state of her party (of which she is the leader). As I noted in the post you quoted, I may have disliked Cameron and his policies, but certainly not as much as her's and I at least recognised his statemanlike abilities. A competent Prime Minister she is not.

I am interested in policies, and her's (or rather the Conservatives) are repulsive. It's worth pointing out however that it was she and her advisors who sought to turn this election campaign into a presidential one (which spectacularly backfired), so for people to criticise others for attacking her is really quite laughable. She made her bed and now she will lie in it.

Finally, on the matter of yet another patronising smear of younger voters - the Self Servatives and their supporters need to learn that while ever they continue to mock and take young people for granted, you will be doing your party a disservice. For years people have denigrated young people for not voting, well now they have - and they've said a massive **** you to the Tories - if they don't start addressing that, it will rightly in part contribute to their downfall. And another thing - people can mock young voters for supporting 'Santa Corbyn' all they like, but there is a whole swathe of vacuous members of the electorate who believe that the economy can be equated to a household budget, that Labour caused the financial crash, that immigrants and benefit claimants must pay the price for cutting the deficit, that austerity is necessary and not ideologically motivated, and so on and so forth. Mock young people all you wish, but the truth is that the large majority of the electorate are completely uninformed.

:clap1:

[jet]

Ah, you see here you made two fundamental mistakes. Firstly, you wrongly assumed I am a Corbynista. I voted for the man twice, first time because I believed it was time to shift the Labour Party back to its traditional, progressive, anti-austerity, left position and no other candidate offered any kind of transformative post-Miliband vision. The second time I voted for him because Owen Smith was even more 'unelectable' than Corbyn. I have on several occasions however had and expressed reservations about his leadership and his lack of condemnation and clarity on certain issues - some of which were addressed in that post. The party and the movement is bigger than one man, it's just that he is and was the only person offering a vision of what I want Labour to stand for. In future, my preference is for Clive Lewis to be the leader.

The other mistake you made - and this is common on TiBB - is not reading my post properly. My issue with Theresa May is primarily the policy platform that she stood on, coupled with her disdain for and arrogant complacency with the electorate. Oh, and the fact she and her advisors wanted to opportunistically turn the UK into a one-party state. I find that disgraceful and struggle to see how others don't. So rather than my issue being with her character or own personal values per se (as it is for Corbyn's detractors and what you've just responded to me with), it is rather with the current state of her party (of which she is the leader). As I noted in the post you quoted, I may have disliked Cameron and his policies, but certainly not as much as her's and I at least recognised his statemanlike abilities. A competent Prime Minister she is not.

I am interested in policies, and her's (or rather the Conservatives) are repulsive. It's worth pointing out however that it was she and her advisors who sought to turn this election campaign into a presidential one (which spectacularly backfired), so for people to criticise others for attacking her is really quite laughable. She made her bed and now she will lie in it.

Finally, on the matter of yet another patronising smear of younger voters - the Self Servatives and their supporters need to learn that while ever they continue to mock and take young people for granted, you will be doing your party a disservice. For years people have denigrated young people for not voting, well now they have - and they've said a massive **** you to the Tories - if they don't start addressing that, it will rightly in part contribute to their downfall. And another thing - people can mock young voters for supporting 'Santa Corbyn' all they like, but there is a whole swathe of vacuous members of the electorate who believe that the economy can be equated to a household budget, that Labour caused the financial crash, that immigrants and benefit claimants must pay the price for cutting the deficit, that austerity is necessary and not ideologically motivated, and so on and so forth. Mock young people all you wish, but the truth is that the large majority of the electorate are completely uninformed.


I did read your post with attention.
On your first point, it is to your credit imo that you would prefer a Labour leader other than Corbyn. But he is the leader and you still vote for him? Despite his reputation, because his policies suit you. Fair enough, but I couldn't personally do that, I'd rather abstain until a leader I respected was in the driving seat.
On your second point, surely a leaders policies and how successful those policies are will be a reflection of their beliefs? their morals? their fitness to lead? the respect their party members have for the leader? Corbyn would score low on all of these essentials.
Finally, you don't think that some young voters would only vote for him to get free student education? The emphasis on some. Of course they did/would. Not everyone is as interested in politics as you are; they hear 'free ed., more money in their pockets and its "he's my man".
Delivering would be another matter.
If I lived in the UK mainland I would vote for neither Con. or Labour by the way, I'm neutral in that respect, but I'm certainly not neutral about Corbyn's awful morals, lack of integrity and his proclivity for befriending and worshipping terrorists. Horrible, disgusting, dangerous man.

[Mystic Mock]

I feel sorry for her a little bit as the party turns on all of it's leaders once they're not useful to them anymore.

May joins a list that involves, Cameron, Thatcher, Major, and she won't be the last leader to get turned on by the nasty party who come up with half of these ideas.

Although May is apart of this party, and was generally incompetent at actually standing up for herself, and she just wasn't cut out for the job.

[Mystic Mock]

I think people who feel sorry for her forget that she can step down at any point. She can actually step down and have her whole party benefit greatly. Its a win/win situation, and shes chooses the weird third option.

Tbf I've read on DS a few days ago that May does want to step down but the party won't let her.

How true this is I don't know, but in such an horrific time for the country it's probably best not to have another leader change with all of these Brexit talks.

[lewis111]

Y'all wouldn't be feeling sorry if it was Corbyn

You would just be blaming it all on him because he's a "terrorist sympathiser" or whatever


It's her job, no one forced her to be PM if she can't handle it, step down

[Mystic Mock]

I did read your post with attention.
On your first point, it is to your credit imo that you would prefer a Labour leader other than Corbyn. But he is the leader and you still vote for him? Despite his reputation, because his policies suit you. Fair enough, but I couldn't personally do that, I'd rather abstain until a leader I respected was running.
On your second point, surely a leaders policies and how successful those policies are will be a reflection of their beliefs? their morals? their fitness to lead? the respect their party members have for the leader? Corbyn would score low on all of these essentials.
Finally, you don't think that some young voters would only vote for him to get free student education? The emphasis on some. Of course they did/would. Not everyone is as interested in politics as you are; they hear 'free ed., more money in their pockets and its "he's my man".
Delivering would be another matter.
If I lived in the UK mainland I would vote for neither Con. or Labour by the way, I'm neutral in that respect, but I'm certainly not neutral about Corbyn's awful morals, lack of integrity and his proclivity for befriending and worshipping terrorists. Horrible, disgusting, dangerous man.

Tbf we're trapped in this country, it was either have May put her Manifesto forward with no opporsition trying to stop her, or have a hung parliment, I personally think the UK picked the better choice.

[Jack_]

All what Jack_ said for me.

The Woman has security,they would have kept her safe, for crying out loud the Queen in her nineties managed it.

Just who does May think she is.
Pathetic is what she is and I'll reserve my sympathy for the victims of these tragedies and most certainly not for an ice cold fish like Mrs May.

I agree Joey, the very idea I must feel sorry for this woman is a joke. She put herself forward to be nominated for the job, her problem.

Basically if you don't agree it's uninformed. Actually no it's opinion - just as your words are opinion, despite the way you persistently try to present them as fact.

Do you realise how hypocritical you sound? You've spent the last week mocking young voters, making out that they are naive, don't know what they're voting for and therefore uninformed. Practice before you preach comes to mind.

And actually no I don't think that, because as I've said on several occasions over the last week or so (which again, if you'd read them properly you'd have known), the majority of the electorate - on all sides - are uninformed. I really don't know why anyone tries to contest this, because the majority of the electorate aren't political buffs that read and research political ideologies and the like, they think about politics in the five minutes on the way to the ballot box. My point is that people can mock younger voters for being naive and uninformed all they like, but they will almost certainly be a part of a much larger, generally uninformed electorate on all sides - including those who buy into notions that I listed, which are perpetuated by the tabloid press.

Finally, of course I think my opinions are fact. Wouldn't be much of an opinion if I didn't believe it, would it?

[Brillopad]

I agree Joey, the very idea I must feel sorry for this woman is a joke. She put herself forward to be nominated for the job, her problem.



Do you realise how hypocritical you sound? You've spent the last week mocking young voters, making out that they are naive, don't know what they're voting for and therefore uninformed. Practice before you preach comes to mind.

And actually no I don't think that, because as I've said on several occasions over the last week or so (which again, if you'd read them properly you'd have known), the majority of the electorate - on all sides - are uninformed. I really don't know why anyone tries to contest this, because the majority of the electorate aren't political buffs that read and research political ideologies and the like, they think about politics in the five minutes on the way to the ballot box. My point is that people can mock younger voters for being naive and uninformed all they like, but they will almost certainly be a part of a much larger, generally uninformed electorate on all sides - including those who buy into notions that I listed, which are perpetuated by the tabloid press.

Finally, of course I think my opinions are fact. Wouldn't be much of an opinion if I didn't believe it, would it?

That last sentence is true I guess - it does of course work all ways.

[Jack_]

I did read your post with attention.
On your first point, it is to your credit imo that you would prefer a Labour leader other than Corbyn. But he is the leader and you still vote for him? Despite his reputation, because his policies suit you. Fair enough, but I couldn't personally do that, I'd rather abstain until a leader I respected was in the driving seat.
On your second point, surely a leaders policies and how successful those policies are will be a reflection of their beliefs? their morals? their fitness to lead? the respect their party members have for the leader? Corbyn would score low on all of these essentials.
Finally, you don't think that some young voters would only vote for him to get free student education? The emphasis on some. Of course they did/would. Not everyone is as interested in politics as you are; they hear 'free ed., more money in their pockets and its "he's my man".
Delivering would be another matter.
If I lived in the UK mainland I would vote for neither Con. or Labour by the way, I'm neutral in that respect, but I'm certainly not neutral about Corbyn's awful morals, lack of integrity and his proclivity for befriending and worshipping terrorists. Horrible, disgusting, dangerous man.

But I don't vote for him? I don't live in Islington North, so I vote for my local Labour candidate in the (very, very long) hope that they are elected to parliament, as an extra number in a larger Labour government. Despite however much the Tories tried to make this election campaign a presidential one, we still do not elect a Prime Minister directly. Like I said, I'm interested in policies - and I want the Labour programme enacted, a biffa bin could be the PM for all I care.

I don't agree with policies having to strictly align with the values of the leader in all honesty. Certainly the general ideology and direction of travel will in part be steered by the leader of a party, but the argument against this can be seen in two examples. Firstly, Corbyn's views on trident are well known - but the large majority of the PLP are in favour of its renewal, so that commitment was in the manifesto. As he said in his interview with Jeremy Paxman, he is a leader not a dictator - and that's exactly how manifestos and policy platforms should be put together, with contributions and consensus across the party (contrast this with the Tories' manifesto that post-election almost the entire party have criticised). Secondly, I drew attention earlier to Theresa May's inaugural speech last July where she was trying to position herself as a moderate, centrist Conservative looking to help the 'just about managing' - and yet the manifesto she campaigned on couldn't have been further from this, even attacking their core base of voters. One has to wonder what her personal values actually are, or whether she just chops and changes depending on which way the wind is sailing or how far right she thinks she can get away with being elected on.

Of course they would, I don't deny that at all - but is that such a bad thing? I'm not going to get into a debate about the specifics of that policy because it's been done ad nauseum during the campaign, but what I will say is that not every country in the world charges tuition fees so it clearly can work. Isn't it a good thing to have a bit of hope anyway? Instead of the bitter continual misery the Tories were promising? Why on earth would many young people - who have been ignored for years by political parties and yet criticised for not voting - vote for that? If he ever became PM and didn't do what he said he would, I'm sure he'd face the same fate as Nick Clegg, but until then what's wrong with giving it a shot? You never know until you try, and many people (students or otherwise) are quite clearly fed up with austerity. What I will point out however is that from my perspective a lot more young people are politically engaged than you might realise, certainly moreso than your average member of the electorate. Until the Tories actually start offering something to young people instead of attacking and ignoring them, they will continue to be seen for the Nasty Party that they are.

Finally, you say that you like neither Labour nor the Tories which is fine but it seems to me like you direct all your criticism at Corbyn and none at Theresa May. Her record in the Home Office is a disgrace (particularly on abuse in detention centres, and her reckless cuts to the police), as it is on LGBT rights (idc if she voted for equal marriage quite frankly), she indirectly funds terrorism by selling arms to the Saudis, and wants the poor and the disabled to pay for an international crisis they didn't cause. I find that just as horrible, disgusting and dangerous to be honest.

[jet]

But I don't vote for him? I don't live in Islington North, so I vote for my local Labour candidate in the (very, very long) hope that they are elected to parliament, as an extra number in a larger Labour government. Despite however much the Tories tried to make this election campaign a presidential one, we still do not elect a Prime Minister directly. Like I said, I'm interested in policies - and I want the Labour programme enacted, a biffa bin could be the PM for all I care.

I don't agree with policies having to strictly align with the values of the leader in all honesty. Certainly the general ideology and direction of travel will in part be steered by the leader of a party, but the argument against this can be seen in two examples. Firstly, Corbyn's views on trident are well known - but the large majority of the PLP are in favour of its renewal, so that commitment was in the manifesto. As he said in his interview with Jeremy Paxman, he is a leader not a dictator - and that's exactly how manifestos and policy platforms should be put together, with contributions and consensus across the party (contrast this with the Tories' manifesto that post-election almost the entire party have criticised). Secondly, I drew attention earlier to Theresa May's inaugural speech last July where she was trying to position herself as a moderate, centrist Conservative looking to help the 'just about managing' - and yet the manifesto she campaigned on couldn't have been further from this, even attacking their core base of voters. One has to wonder what her personal values actually are, or whether she just chops and changes depending on which way the wind is sailing or how far right she thinks she can get away with being elected on.

Of course they would, I don't deny that at all - but is that such a bad thing? I'm not going to get into a debate about the specifics of that policy because it's been done ad nauseum during the campaign, but what I will say is that not every country in the world charges tuition fees so it clearly can work. Isn't it a good thing to have a bit of hope anyway? Instead of the bitter continual misery the Tories were promising? Why on earth would many young people - who have been ignored for years by political parties and yet criticised for not voting - vote for that? If he ever became PM and didn't do what he said he would, I'm sure he'd face the same fate as Nick Clegg, but until then what's wrong with giving it a shot? You never know until you try, and many people (students or otherwise) are quite clearly fed up with austerity. What I will point out however is that from my perspective a lot more young people are politically engaged than you might realise, certainly moreso than your average member of the electorate. Until the Tories actually start offering something to young people instead of attacking and ignoring them, they will continue to be seen for the Nasty Party that they are.

Finally, you say that you like neither Labour nor the Tories which is fine but it seems to me like you direct all your criticism at Corbyn and none at Theresa May. Her record in the Home Office is a disgrace (particularly on abuse in detention centres, and her reckless cuts to the police), as it is on LGBT rights (idc if she voted for equal marriage quite frankly), she indirectly funds terrorism by selling arms to the Saudis, and wants the poor and the disabled to pay for an international crisis they didn't cause. I find that just as horrible, disgusting and dangerous to be honest.

Thanks for replying - I'm an avid reader who likes the longer, well thought out post, and you make your personal position very clear. I always squirm when someone has taken the trouble to post a thoughtful and interesting response like yours and all they get in return is a sarcastic one liner.
I take all your opinions on board as very valid for you, and I respect your ideals, but personally I don't agree with voting to get a party into power whose current leader's very dubious morals and association with terrorists cause me to feel sick to my stomach.
He is untested, too. He can't deliver all the promises he has made willy - nilly to all and sundry, and surely we are not that daft to think his policies are going to make a fantastic difference, that this time it's all going to be all right.
If he was a strong, moral figure, with no awful past history, whose own party members exuded sincere trust in, then I would feel hope, because it doesn't matter to me whether we have a gov. of Cons or Labour, I'm in the middle. But we've been down the road of disappointment too many times for me to think that THIS man in particular is going to deliver.
How could I when I personally loathe him and what he has stood for? Yes, apart from all the above, he is the man who supported the IRA terrorists in my home N.Ireland who murdered and maimed my beloved friends, who sympathised with the terrorists who indiscriminately murdered innocent woman and children out shopping or attending a fun run event. He spoke at IRA rallies, he attended commemorations for their dead, he was an integral part of a terrorist publication which promoted violence. He was doing all this in the 70's (as well as later)before he even became an MP. We in N.Ireland know of him of old, probably when many of you were just kids or not even born.

He lies and tries to talk his way out of it by saying he was trying to promote peace, when he actually opposed the peace agreement and he NEVER, at any time, took part in anything to do with the Good Friday Agreement. He places McDonnell, another despicable IRA apologist at the same time, in a prominent position in Gov.
That is why May is not on my radar in the same way. But apart from my personal feelings, she is nowhere in Corbyns league when it comes to actively supporting and being an apologist for murderers.
HE supported those who destroyed the lives of so many families in my community.
I tried to think - maybe he's changed and regrets his past activities. He seems mellower. But even now he baulks at condemning the IRA outright and their reign of terror instead of them fighting their battle democratically. He has other dubious links too which cannot be just brushed under the carpet.
But I understand that you don't have those personal prejudices and experiences so therefore can't feel the same passions as I do.
But I could never, ever, consider such a man as the Prime Minister of my country, however attractive his policies and promises appear. I fear him. Not for his strength, but for his weakness and fascination for those that yield power through terror.

[the truth]

Manchester, London Bridge, Brexit, the election, the Grenfell...the list goes on. She has had a terrible time and she has the queens speech thing. She would hardly have any free time or sleep :(

How sorry for her do you feel right now, your heart must go out to her?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/11_04/theresamayPA_468x717.jpg

nice rack for an old fossil

[JTM45]

nice rack for an old fossil

Is that what it is ?
I thought it was some kinda' saddle-bag/belt contraption she was wearing!:laugh:

[smudgie]

Thanks for replying - I'm an avid reader who likes the longer, well thought out post, and you make your personal position very clear. I always squirm when someone has taken the trouble to post a thoughtful and interesting response and all they get in return is a sarcastic one liner.
I take all your opinions on board as very valid for you, and I respect your ideals, but personally I don't agree with voting to get a party into power whose current leader's very dubious morals and association with terrorists cause me to feel sick to my stomach.
He is untested, too. He can't deliver all the promises he has made willy - nilly to all and sundry, and surely we are not that daft to think his policies are going to make a fantastic difference, that this time it's all going to be all right.
If he was a strong, moral figure, with no awful past history, whose own party members exuded sincere trust in, then I would feel hope, because it doesn't matter to me whether we have a gov. of Cons or Labour, I'm in the middle. But we've been down the road of disappointment too many times for me to think that THIS man in particular is going to deliver.
How could I when I personally loathe him and what he has stood for? Yes, apart from all the above, he is the man who supported the IRA terrorists in my home N.Ireland who murdered and maimed my beloved friends, who sympathised with the terrorists who indiscriminately murdered innocent woman and children out shopping or attending a fun run event. He spoke at IRA rallies, he attended commemorations for their dead, he was an integral part of a terrorist publication which promoted violence. He was doing all this in the 70's (as well as later)before he even became an MP. We in N.Ireland know of him of old, probably when many of you were just kids or not even born.

He lies and tries to talk his way out of it by saying he was trying to promote peace, when he actually opposed the peace agreement and he NEVER, at any time, took part in anything to do with the Good Friday Agreement. He places McDonnell, another despicable IRA apologist at the same time, in a prominent position in Gov.
That is why May is not on my radar in the same way. But apart from my personal feelings, she is nowhere in Corbyns league when it comes to actively supporting and being an apologist for murderers.
HE supported those who destroyed the lives of so many families in my community.
I tried to think - maybe he's changed and regrets his past activities. He seems mellower. But even now he baulks at condemning the IRA outright and their reign of terror instead of them fighting their battle democratically. He has other dubious links too which cannot be just brushed under the carpet.
But I understand that you don't have those personal prejudices and experiences so therefore can't feel the same passions as I do.
But I could never, ever, consider such a man as the Prime Minister of my country, however attractive his policies and promises appear. I fear him. Not for his strength, but for his weakness and fascination for those that yield power through terror.

Well said Jet.
If all the above isn't enough to turn your stomache then nothing will.
Trying to overturn a democratic decision and organise a march to try and bring down the government is out of order as well.
Desperate to get in at any price.

[jet]

Well said Jet.
If all the above isn't enough to turn your stomache then nothing will.
Trying to overturn a democratic decision and organise a march to try and bring down the government is out of order as well.
Desperate to get in at any price.

Thanks Smudgie.
Yes, undemocratic then, undemocratic still. The leopard hasn't changed its spots.

[Scarlett.]

She is a terrible Prime Minister, and a terrible politician, but I do feel a slight bit sorry for her, as she is still human and is under massive amounts of pressure.

[Kizzy]

I did read your post with attention.
On your first point, it is to your credit imo that you would prefer a Labour leader other than Corbyn. But he is the leader and you still vote for him? Despite his reputation, because his policies suit you. Fair enough, but I couldn't personally do that, I'd rather abstain until a leader I respected was in the driving seat.
On your second point, surely a leaders policies and how successful those policies are will be a reflection of their beliefs? their morals? their fitness to lead? the respect their party members have for the leader? Corbyn would score low on all of these essentials.
Finally, you don't think that some young voters would only vote for him to get free student education? The emphasis on some. Of course they did/would. Not everyone is as interested in politics as you are; they hear 'free ed., more money in their pockets and its "he's my man".
Delivering would be another matter.
If I lived in the UK mainland I would vote for neither Con. or Labour by the way, I'm neutral in that respect, but I'm certainly not neutral about Corbyn's awful morals, lack of integrity and his proclivity for befriending and worshipping terrorists. Horrible, disgusting, dangerous man.

We have no proof that any other leader would do anything any different to Corbyn do we? I to was impressed by Clive Lewis but even he jumped ship risking shaking the security of the party so for that reason he lost my respect.
I'm not sure why a leader would be a reason not to vote for a party if you agree with their ideology, manifesto and policies it seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face to me.. I don't like the man so I and the nation may have to suffer 5yrs of the conservatives?... :/

[Kizzy]

Gurl bai

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-leadership-challenge-queens-speech-brexit-boris-johnson-amber-rudd-david-davis-a7795556.html

[the truth]

She showed a lot of balls to take on a poisoned chalice unlike dapper dave, grubby gove and bonking boris

[Kizzy]

The conschadenfreuders are all cut from the same cloth.

[the truth]

The conschadenfreuders are all cut from the same cloth.

discrimination cant group all people the same :nono:

[jet]

We have no proof that any other leader would do anything any different to Corbyn do we? I to was impressed by Clive Lewis but even he jumped ship risking shaking the security of the party so for that reason he lost my respect.
I'm not sure why a leader would be a reason not to vote for a party if you agree with their ideology, manifesto and policies it seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face to me.. I don't like the man so I and the nation may have to suffer 5yrs of the conservatives?... :/

How many times do I have to say it...he supported and lauded terrorists who MURDERED my friends. I'll never see them again. Their families lives are destroyed. Along with the families of the other thousands they murdered.
I don't care what his f'king promise the earth manifesto or policies are. He can give me a million pounds upfront and I'd throw it back into his terrorist - loving gob.

[Kizzy]

discrimination cant group all people the same :nono:

Then explain your constant reference to the 'PC brigade'

[Kizzy]

Tick tock...

Theresa May is facing a landmark legal challenge over her proposed deal with the Democratic Unionist party on the grounds that it breaches the Good Friday agreement.

An experienced legal team, which has been involved in constitutional challenges, is planning to apply for a judicial review of the deal once it is announced, the Guardian has learned.

High court judges would be asked to examine whether the pact breaches the British government’s commitment to exercise “rigorous impartiality” in the Good Friday agreement.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/20/theresa-may-faces-legal-challenge-proposed-deal-dup