• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Whomsoever the Conservative party decide to install as their leader should not be referred to as Prime Minister.

Something like Brevet Prime Minister or Relief First Minister would be good just to differentiate them from an individual with a mandate.

And in no way should the appointment process be referred to as an election.
 
johnola said:
Whomsoever the Conservative party decide to install as their leader should not be referred to as Prime Minister.

Something like Brevet Prime Minister or Relief First Minister would be good just to differentiate them from an individual with a mandate.

And in no way should the appointment process be referred to as an election.
Click to expand...

So Churchil wasn't Prime Minister between 1940-45? Seeing as Baldwin won the election, and Chamberlain also came in in-between them.

The 1892-5 parliament had 4 PMs - 2 liberal and 2 conservative

I just don't understand where all the presidential thinking has suddenly come from, except politics hasn't been taught enough in schools.
 
Christ i really despair. UK right wing politics whipping the temperature up for Boris. A serial lier. Someone whom, after having two weeks off of work, has gone on a two week holiday and a £150,000 speech. An absolute chancer.

And people want this guy to run the country. Arseholes.
 
Gutter Boy said:
So Churchil wasn't Prime Minister between 1940-45? Seeing as Baldwin won the election, and Chamberlain also came in in-between them.

The 1892-5 parliament had 4 PMs - 2 liberal and 2 conservative

I just don't understand where all the presidential thinking has suddenly come from, except politics hasn't been taught enough in schools.
Click to expand...

The point is they are not elected. Everyone knows Churchill was a wartime leader in a coalition government this is not the same.

I left school in 1987 and there was no politics taught anyway least of all from a 100 years prior.
 
@monkeybarry sorry for late reply. Been very busy.

The Norwegian style arrangement probably should have been the brexit we had. With such a small winning margin the was no mandate for anything bigger. For the majority that voted for brexit, immigration control was the main reason and that would have settled that.

For me personally no it is not enough. You see though pretty much no one on here agrees with my position. I think the EU would only be a hood thing if it were purely a trading block. Not the ever closer Union.

I feel I should be respectful of others views and maybe have not always in the past. I dislike the EU for its controlling and bullying nature, same reason I won't vote Conservative actually.

To understand a person's views you need to understand their outlook. Despite some maybe mocking me at times on here. I have always throughout my life been on the side of the under dog. The only claim against that would be a zero tolerance on illegal immigration. But I actually feel that protects genuine refugees. Even the Conservatives say they would still settle refugees in this country every year going forward.

My dislike for the EU is different from every other leaver that I know. But would add the ones I know don't have racist views. But don't also have my hatred of authority.

It might not come across in my posts as I try to keep things light. But I hate authority.
 
The point is they are not elected with a clear mandate. We do vote for people now there are head to heads on TV where every facial expression and sartorial choice is analysed to the nth degree. Everyone knows Churchill was a wartime leader in a coalition government this is not the same.

I left school in 1987 and there was no politics taught anyway least of all from a 100 years prior.
 
johnola said:
The point is they are not elected with a clear mandate. We do vote for people now there are head to heads on TV where every facial expression and sartorial choice is analysed to the nth degree. Everyone knows Churchill was a wartime leader in a coalition government this is not the same.

I left school in 1987 and there was no politics taught anyway least of all from a 100 years prior.
Click to expand...

We don't get to vote for government. We get to vote for a local mp who will represent you in parliament. Parliament then decides who is in government.
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
@monkeybarry sorry for late reply. Been very busy.

The Norwegian style arrangement probably should have been the brexit we had. With such a small winning margin the was no mandate for anything bigger. For the majority that voted for brexit, immigration control was the main reason and that would have settled that.

For me personally no it is not enough. You see though pretty much no one on here agrees with my position. I think the EU would only be a hood thing if it were purely a trading block. Not the ever closer Union.

I feel I should be respectful of others views and maybe have not always in the past. I dislike the EU for its controlling and bullying nature, same reason I won't vote Conservative actually.

To understand a person's views you need to understand their outlook. Despite some maybe mocking me at times on here. I have always throughout my life been on the side of the under dog. The only claim against that would be a zero tolerance on illegal immigration. But I actually feel that protects genuine refugees. Even the Conservatives say they would still settle refugees in this country every year going forward.

My dislike for the EU is different from every other leaver that I know. But would add the ones I know don't have racist views. But don't also have my hatred of authority.

It might not come across in my posts as I try to keep things light. But I hate authority.
Click to expand...
This was the issue with the vote imo, the choice was stay as is or spin the wheel for 'something else'.

There was no honest presentation of what a Brexit would look like.

It would have been unfair to divide the choice further between the leave options in the initial vote but if the will of the people was such an important factor then it would have been reasonable to have a further vote on the framework of the next stage.

It was a little like Brian Clough asking players to sign a blank piece of paper and filling in the contract details after, except by most accounts he looked after the recipients!
 
MKSpur said:
This was the issue with the vote imo, the choice was stay as is or spin the wheel for 'something else'.

There was no honest presentation of what a Brexit would look like.

It would have been unfair to divide the choice further between the leave options in the initial vote but if the will of the people was such an important factor then it would have been reasonable to have a further vote on the framework of the next stage.

It was a little like Brian Clough asking players to sign a blank piece of paper and filling in the contract details after, except by most accounts he looked after the recipients!
Click to expand...

If labour had done that in their manifesto they might have won the last election. Instead they wanted a vote on the deal, a no deal brexit or remain. Trying to split the leave vote and remain by the back door. Voters saw through it and tories won.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back