• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Corbyn to take part in TV debate"

Collapse

  • OwlHoot
    replied
    Originally posted by contractorinatractor View Post
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Originally posted by contractorinatractor View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • contractorinatractor
    replied
    Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladyuk
    replied
    Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post
    A bit like going to court and offering no defence...
    Or diminished responsibility.

    Leave a comment:


  • BrilloPad
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladyuk View Post
    So given the circumstances, it is good judgment to bottle the debate.
    A bit like going to court and offering no defence...

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladyuk
    replied
    Originally posted by oscarose View Post
    Seems like very poor judgement around. All this 'strong' BS talk and hasn't even the bottle to appear in a debate....

    She looked very edgy on TV yesterday and bumbling her words on the radio - looks on the verge of a mental breakdown <placeholder> and way out of her depth.

    So given the circumstances, it is good judgment to bottle the debate.

    Leave a comment:


  • BrilloPad
    replied
    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
    Just heard Amber Rudd is grieving because her father recently passed away so May's response put her in front of the TV cameras instead of going herself llnky May is fecking bitch.

    Leave a comment:


  • oscarose
    replied
    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
    Just heard Amber Rudd is grieving because her father recently passed away so May's response put her in front of the TV cameras instead of going herself llnky May is fecking bitch.
    Seems like very poor judgement all-round. All this 'strong' BS talk and hasn't even the bottle to appear in a debate....

    She looked very edgy on TV yesterday and bumbling her words on the radio - looks on the verge of a mental breakdown <placeholder> and way out of her depth.

    Last edited by oscarose; 1 June 2017, 09:40.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladyuk
    replied
    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
    Just heard Amber Rudd is grieving because her father recently passed away so May's response put her in front of the TV cameras instead of going herself llnky May is fecking bitch.
    But it's politics. May looks bad for not participating, but it could have been catastrophic if she had, given her performance so far this election.

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Just heard Amber Rudd is grieving because her father recently passed away so May's response put her in front of the TV cameras instead of going herself llnky May is fecking bitch.

    Leave a comment:


  • xoggoth
    replied
    Just skipping through looking for something to watch and saw about 10 seconds of it when Tim Faron was speaking. Thought I was watching LIve at the Apollo for a moment, somebody with a face like that has to be a comedian.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bluenose
    replied
    Originally posted by MarillionFan View Post
    Only Corbyn getting cheered on this debate.
    The shouty left with their pitchforks and pyres, it happened at the last set of TV debates.

    The same lot ready to kick-off no doubt after a drubbing at the polls next Friday with ski masks and the odd molotov cocktail.

    Leave a comment:


  • grabri
    replied
    Originally posted by original PM View Post
    Ah yes the 'crazies' e.g. those people who do not share your point of view?

    The 'Remainers' the proportion of the population who just expected to get their own way - because that's what Blair's labour sold them?

    Change is good - problem is some people never seem to understand it is not just something that has to happen to other people.
    Yes, no & not always.

    Leave a comment:


  • No2politics
    replied
    Is it a coincidence that yesterday was the end of may?

    Leave a comment:


  • original PM
    replied
    Originally posted by grabri View Post
    Nonsense, Cameron did it to quell an increasingly vocal group of crazies within his own party and to put a stop to the the UKIP bandwagon. For some reason though, the remainers didn't take the threat seriously enough - and completely underestimated the stupidity of the populace to not answer the question on the referendum but to use it to air all sorts of other unrelated grievances.
    Ah yes the 'crazies' e.g. those people who do not share your point of view?

    The 'Remainers' the proportion of the population who just expected to get their own way - because that's what Blair's labour sold them?

    Change is good - problem is some people never seem to understand it is not just something that has to happen to other people.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X