Corbyn to take part in TV debate

[contractorinatractor]

I will be applauding and eating popcorn from afar whilst the UK does a Venezuela.

No way I'm going to be dragged down to poverty by the likes of Corbyn and Abbopotomus.

Judging by the illogical ill-considered posts you propagate on this forum, I would be very surprised if they changed anybody's thoughts.

Labour's policies are almost entirely an amalgamation of Germany and Scandinavia, with a hint of French on top.

Scare-mongering with a comparison to Venezuela shows you have nothing credible left in your arsenal, if there ever was any. You do realise that it is this very illogical thought process, scattered throughout your reasoning on many posts, that negates your continued point of views distributed throughout this forum that only enhances my above comment and doesn't, as you intend, make people think: "Wow, this gent is correct!"

People don't fall for: deficit still hugely high, lower tax for corporations and extreme rich (with only easily avoidable measures implemented to the extreme rich thus far), yet disabled people and deserving welfare recipients derogated beyond belief - for such a modern and feature-rich country. The conservatives haven't done a good job the past 7 years.

Oh, and before you moan about New Labour of the past; this lot aren't the same. Where I come from intra party squabbling is deemed healthy and a sign of democracy.

In the UK it seems that people are addicted to the notion of a single leader steering the ship, when a party leader can't actually do this - the UK is not authoritarian. Also, the tories vote for their leader in a very different way to most other UK parties: a few people are entitled to a vote - how backwards of them. They're scared of providing membership a vote; because they are based on the concept of elitism.

Why vote for the opposite of a meritocratic notion?

Ignore this DimPrawn chap; he is well beyond his capability on matters of logic.

[SueEllen]

Judging by the illogical ill-considered posts you propagate on this forum, I would be very surprised if they changed anybody's thoughts.

Labour's policies are almost entirely an amalgamation of Germany and Scandinavia, with a hint of French on top.

Scare-mongering with a comparison to Venezuela shows you have nothing credible left in your arsenal, if there ever was any. You do realise that it is this very illogical thought process, scattered throughout your reasoning on many posts, that negates your continued point of views distributed throughout this forum that only enhances my above comment and doesn't, as you intend, make people think: "Wow, this gent is correct!"

People don't fall for: deficit still hugely high, lower tax for corporations and extreme rich (with only easily avoidable measures implemented to the extreme rich thus far), yet disabled people and deserving welfare recipients derogated beyond belief - for such a modern and feature-rich country. The conservatives haven't done a good job the past 7 years.

Oh, and before you moan about New Labour of the past; this lot aren't the same. Where I come from intra party squabbling is deemed healthy and a sign of democracy.

In the UK it seems that people are addicted to the notion of a single leader steering the ship, when a party leader can't actually do this - the UK is not authoritarian. Also, the tories vote for their leader in a very different way to most other UK parties: a few people are entitled to a vote - how backwards of them. They're scared of providing membership a vote; because they are based on the concept of elitism.

Why vote for the opposite of a meritocratic notion?

Ignore this DimPrawn chap; he is well beyond his capability on matters of logic.

Actually the Tory party does allow their membership to vote for the leader but only when the parliamentary party has agreed which of the two candidates they could themselves can cope with as a leader.

Otherwise both they and the membership would tell that person to step aside like they did with Iain Duncan Smith.

If there are not two candidates, which happens frequently, the only candidate is chosen like in the case of May.

[OwlHoot]

Judging by the illogical ill-considered posts you propagate on this forum, I would be very surprised if they changed anybody's thoughts.

Labour's policies are almost entirely an amalgamation of Germany and Scandinavia, with a hint of French on top.

Scare-mongering with a comparison to Venezuela shows you have nothing credible left in your arsenal, if there ever was any. You do realise that it is this very illogical thought process, scattered throughout your reasoning on many posts, that negates your continued point of views distributed throughout this forum that only enhances my above comment and doesn't, as you intend, make people think: "Wow, this gent is correct!"

People don't fall for: deficit still hugely high, lower tax for corporations and extreme rich (with only easily avoidable measures implemented to the extreme rich thus far), yet disabled people and deserving welfare recipients derogated beyond belief - for such a modern and feature-rich country. The conservatives haven't done a good job the past 7 years.

Oh, and before you moan about New Labour of the past; this lot aren't the same. Where I come from intra party squabbling is deemed healthy and a sign of democracy.

In the UK it seems that people are addicted to the notion of a single leader steering the ship, when a party leader can't actually do this - the UK is not authoritarian. Also, the tories vote for their leader in a very different way to most other UK parties: a few people are entitled to a vote - how backwards of them. They're scared of providing membership a vote; because they are based on the concept of elitism.

Why vote for the opposite of a meritocratic notion?

Ignore this DimPrawn chap; he is well beyond his capability on matters of logic.

Oh God, the windbag is back