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.

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...

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.

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

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.

It was on the news.

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.

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

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.

:love:

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

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

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.

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.

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.

:clap1:

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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:

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.

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.

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?... :/

Gurl bai

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7795556.html

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

The conschadenfreuders are all cut from the same cloth.

discrimination cant group all people the same :nono:

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.