Jump to content

JonnyF

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    12,335
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by JonnyF

  1. 3 hours ago, RayC said:

    I don''t support many of Abbott's causes and think that she is too gaff-prone to be an effective frontline politician. However, I do think that she has a point about Starmer 'culling' the Labour Party of left-wingers.

     

    Since his election as leader, Starmer has  tried to remake the party in his image. It leaves me with the impression that  "broad church" only extends to worshipping in the 'Temple of Keir"

     

    You will have to wait until they are elected before you see how loony left the Labour Party still are.

     

    Starmer is trying to present them as electable. Abbott is a massive liability and I hope she gets as much coverage as possible. 

     

    Her toxicity and bitterness oozes from every pore. Fortunately she is unable to keep her mouth shut so we are able to witness it in all it's glory. 

     

    Her son is even worse than Hunter Biden. I guess parenting skills do not rank high on  "liberals" priorities as they climb the greasy pole to power on the back of fake virtuosity and lies. 

  2. 1 hour ago, placeholder said:

    So, you think that there's no significant statistical connection between local elections and general elections. The Tories just happened to suffer a major loss because of ??????????

    Because Bristol is like a far left socialist republic. 

     

    Look at what happened there during BLM. They all crawled out from under their rocks to vandalize and riot. Bristol is an outlier. The suburbs are centre right but fall under other areas like Gloucestershire.

     

    Don't get your hopes up for the general election. 

    • Agree 2
  3. 39 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

    Trump wasn’t convicted in less than twelve hours, the trial went on for weeks.

     

    The jury deliberated for less than 12 hours. Almost like they had already made their minds up. 

     

    39 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

     

    I do accept that you might not be used to the rich and powerful being held accountable to the law, but holding a rich and powerful criminal accountable to the law in open court of law and judged by a jury is the polar opposite of ‘Banana Republic’ behavior.

     

     

     

     

    Of course the rich and powerful can be convicted. It depends if they are on the wrong side of the political divide. 

     

    Look at Thailand for example, Thaksin (like Trump) was removed. In fact Thailand now has many similarities to the USA in terms of removing popular politicians via kangaroo courts.

    • Like 1
    • Confused 1
  4. 50 minutes ago, jvs said:

    No just long over due,from time to time laws need to be amended.

    Nobody has foreseen a thing like this would ever happen but it has to be dealt with,just to keep up with the times.

    Don't you agree?

     

    No I don't agree that the laws should be changed to exclude people with a criminal conviction a day after Trump is convicted of all 34 out of 34 charges in less than 12 hours.

     

    That's the type of thing that happens in banana republics. Despite recent events, I'd like to think America is still above that type of thing.  

    • Confused 2
    • Sad 1
    • Agree 1
  5. 9 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

    Chalk and cheese. There's legal precedent for a second referendum vote.

     

    Not before implementing the first one.

     

    9 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

     

     

     

    There's none for throwing out an election result because you don't agree with it.

     

    Which is what they were trying to do.

     

    9 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

    In fact in some countries a first referendum is sometimes ratified by a second one. I think Denmark and Ireland have done this.

     

    Agreed beforehand. They wouldn't have been demanding a second vote if they had won the first.

  6. 9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

    Yep, that’s democracy.

     

    It isn't if you try to oveturn the original vote before it has been implemented.

     

    Would it be democratic for Trump to demand another vote in December if he loses in January? Of course not, yet you wanted another vote on Brexit before the result of the first one had been implemented.

     

    So asking for people's acceptance of votes/verdicts seems a bit of a stretch for you. The hypocrisy is not surprising though...

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
×
×
  • Create New...