- 29,059
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
Britain - The Official Thread
- Thread starter Ross
- 13,173 comments
- 578,653 views
UKMikey
Premium
- 17,824
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
No, that's Katie Hopkins (dayum, treed by @Touring Mars)
- 3,070
- Norway
Yeah, that's the one I was thinking of.
Last edited:
UKMikey
Premium
- 17,824
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Diane_Abbott
I had no idea she was alleged to have been involved in a relationship with Jeremy Corbyn. Shades of the Edwina Currie - John Major affair.
I had no idea she was alleged to have been involved in a relationship with Jeremy Corbyn. Shades of the Edwina Currie - John Major affair.
- 15,994
- United Kingdom
- haitch40
- Xbox?
Ok ok I am a Labour member not just supporter and I thought she had to go, I just felt that Corbyn didn't want to replace her at this point as changing your front bench this late in the game isn't exactly going to get voters to be confident in you.
Now though... Dear god 1 part of me is glad she is gone 1 part of me smells treason, the timing could not be worse.
Now though... Dear god 1 part of me is glad she is gone 1 part of me smells treason, the timing could not be worse.
- 86,366
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
*insert own punchline about booty calls*
I think there are far bigger catastrophes in Labour than Abbott - although she was a fairly prominent one as shadow Home Secretary. I republished my own local MP's (technically they're not MPs at the moment, but you know what I mean) absolutely poisonous damnation of Corbyn when she resigned from his shadow cabinet during the night of the long knives earlier on in this thread. She is, of course, still standing as a Labour MP this time around and trying to bring the policies of a man she stated would never be capable of leading the Labour Party to a general election victory, and I'm sure that she isn't alone given than two-thirds of them resigned at the same time.
Aside from that and well-known plane crash Red Ken (who is currently suspended from the Labour Party), they still have someone who may well be the worst person in professional politics in the UK today, Keith Vaz.
ExigeEvan
Premium
- 17,192
I can't find the stat through my phone, but a BBC article points out that JC has mostly visited Labour seats, many considered safe, whilst TM has visited many more Labour marginal seats.
That is pretty much how I see the election going, a strong voter turn out for Labour, but ultimately only in areas where they were already strong.
Breaking news that she's be replaced as shadow home secretary.
That is pretty much how I see the election going, a strong voter turn out for Labour, but ultimately only in areas where they were already strong.
Oh no she isn't!
Breaking news that she's be replaced as shadow home secretary.
UKMikey
Premium
- 17,824
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
By Lyn Brown the former shadow policing minister, it looks like.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ral-election-2017-jeremy-corbyn-a7776491.html
- 6,838
- Europe
- GTP_Slim
- PzR Slim
Only have the Greens over and above what you have. However, Newcastle Central is a very safe Labour seat so no matter who I vote for it won't impact the vote either way. I often think PR is the way to go to ensure that every vote counts when it comes to electing the government.Do you at least have enough candidates to make it a better choice than the big three and the racists? I don't
I guess I feel like this because I'm a centrist in reality which has been pretty good in recent times as all the three major parties have been pretty central as well which made it fairly easy to choose. I've voted for all three main parties in my time based on what I thought was best for the country at that specific time. However, we now have Labour moving fairly hard left and the Tories moving fairly hard right and a vote for Lib Dem is a bit of a waste looking at their prospects.
So I'm left with a few policies from each party which are attractive but a whole load more from each that I don't like. Still genuinely undecided about what to do tomorrow. If any three of the leaders I could see being a good leader that would probably decide it for me but I not sure any of them would make a good leader. I did think May would make a good leader but she has been appalling in the campaign and Corbyn whilst being good when he's on message soon falls apart if the debate moves away from the party line. I've been most impressed by the way Farron has spoken but his parties chances dissuade me from putting my X with them.
- 29,059
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
- 29,503
- Bratvegas
- GTP_Liquid
Do you at least have enough candidates to make it a better choice than the big three and the racists? I don't
We have Plaid. Better being a relative term, of course. It's a different choice at the very least.
Is there no very minor English Devolution Party or Yorkshire Party standing or anything like that or do you only have the typical four parties' candidates? No MRLP?
UKMikey
Premium
- 17,824
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
Abbott's condition is apparently long-term and serious. I'll try and be nice and give her the benefit of the doubt and hope this isn't another Mo Mowlam style situation.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...rom-serious-long-term-condition-a7777231.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...rom-serious-long-term-condition-a7777231.html
- 23,846
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
Do you at least have enough candidates to make it a better choice than the big three and the racists? I don't
We have Natalie Bennett for the Greens, who actually has a fair chance in our constituency, Sheff Central, which has been a safe Labour seat for a long time. She stopped and chatted to us a few weeks back and comes across as someone who does actually care for the community rather than just wanting to sit in Parliament.
I disagree with an awful lot of the Greens policies, but this isn't about getting the Greens into power, it's about who has your areas best interests in mind.
It leaves me with a tough choice, especially with things looking closer overall than they were a month ago.
- 86,366
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Our choices are a little less stark and a lot more frightening.
In essence you had an absolutely insane buffoon or a woman who almost certainly committed at least one pretty significant crime that the FBI would not prosecute. One, at least, was a politician, but with baggage so immense that, despite her claiming that her opponent was the worst Presidential candidate ever, couldn't beat a self-aggrandising man who openly mocked disabilities, women, immigrants, Muslims and was recorded making some quite rapey comments. And despite three other choices, more than 95% of you who expressed a preference thought that there was no better option than one of those two.
Our choices are broader, with two leading parties like yours, but three other well-known national parties and a wide range of regional ones. Our two main choices are still politicians, but one seems to be positioning herself as literally the most evil human being who ever lived, but has actually done the job she's looking for while the other has serious question marks over his competence to the point that he had to go to court to get the chance to get his job back after two-thirds of his hand-picked management team quit and wrote awful things about him and he was unable to get enough support from the people's representatives of the party.
On the trends set by the US Presidential Election, Corbyn should win
Nope. We have blue, red, yellow and No Blacks.
That's almost certainly a better way of looking at it. You don't vote for parliament or a Prime Minister, you vote for a representative. The person who'll represent you best is the person you should choose.
There's a few points to consider.
You have one vote.
It can only be cast for someone, not against them.
It is not divisible.
It cannot be cast for some of someone's policies but not others from the same person.
Your vote is a mandate of power, in favour of all the things that the person you vote for said they would do.
It is not a mandate of power in favour things they have not said they would do, or have said they wouldn't do but then do.
Ultimately a vote should go only to someone with whom you agree totally. If that's not possible, it should go only to someone with whom you do not disagree, with the occasional thing you are not totally sure of but do not object to.
If that's not possible, you should spoil your ballot. But always vote.
Tired Tyres
Premium
- 12,508
- West Yorkshire
- Tired_Tyres
- Tired Tyres
I don't know if I'm going to vote for one candidate yet. (If in doubt put a cross in all boxes) but I suspect I may vote Liberal Democrat. They have a leader with some amazing religious views. I can't imagine what could go wrong. 
Yuck. What has happened to my favourite website forum? There is nothing I like about this change.
Yuck. What has happened to my favourite website forum? There is nothing I like about this change.
Tired Tyres
Premium
- 12,508
- West Yorkshire
- Tired_Tyres
- Tired Tyres
- 5,588
- Dahlonega, GA
- ryzno
I was talking about the last two words. No Blacks. I might be missing something, a joke? A party color?
UKMikey
Premium
- 17,824
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
This is RationalWiki's take on the British National Party:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/British_National_Party
