The country badly needs strong leadership at the moment, to implement the changes that are the results of the referendum, is Boris the right man to do that? I'm not so sure, we need to find our way again as a country and have some clear direction and ideas of where we're going, seems to be a big political vacuum at the moment.
I think there needs to be a reality check in England. Strong leadership - not sure where that will come from. The country is divided over brexit. Two thirds of M.P.s supported remain. I'm currently in Austria and can assure you there is no mood here to accommodate the English after Brexit. Note David Cameron is to be cold shouldered at the EEC meeting next week. There appears to be a chasm between Boris Johnsons vision of our relationship with Europe and the rest of Europes view of England. Political chaos, crisis call it what you like, its a mess.
Gove has a chance as Conservative remainers will be far more bitter towards Johnson.
Gove looks like the kid that got bullied at school by the kids who got bullied. Also, his voice and delivery are all wrong. It should be about policies, but very few people who aren't true blue will vote for Gove as PM.
Gove has a chance as Conservative remainers will be far more bitter towards Johnson.
Gove looks like the kid that got bullied at school by the kids who got bullied. Also, his voice and delivery are all wrong. It should be about policies, but very few people who aren't true blue will vote for Gove as PM.
Dave took his eye off the ball and made schoolboy errors.
4m people voted UKIP 13 months ago - so it was unlikely that they would change their mind in the interim.
He promised net migration in the "tens of thousands", and then tried to distance himself from the implied meaning, resorting to spin in true Blair style.
He went to the EU in Feb to get a few carrots to dangle, but came away empty - he should have been back there again the following week rucking.
Then he led a campaign based on fear and negatives instead of highlighting the benefits of EU membership.
Corbyn did the Remain camp no favours by staying so quiet - but he is a principled guy who was dropped into a conflict of ideals.
Finally - Dave should have taken the rostrum head to head with Farage, instead of doing the sneaky pre-recorded thing. If he truly had answers to Farage's points, then he had nothing to fear.
So you agree that Callum and Jack actually had no point at all, right?
Probably, however that didn't stop an awful lot of Tories and their supporters bleating on about the same thing when Brown was parachuted in as PM did it. Right?
Dave took his eye off the ball and made schoolboy errors.
4m people voted UKIP 13 months ago - so it was unlikely that they would change their mind in the interim.
He promised net migration in the "tens of thousands", and then tried to distance himself from the implied meaning, resorting to spin in true Blair style.
He went to the EU in Feb to get a few carrots to dangle, but came away empty - he should have been back there again the following week rucking.
Then he led a campaign based on fear and negatives instead of highlighting the benefits of EU membership.
Corbyn did the Remain camp no favours by staying so quiet - but he is a principled guy who was dropped into a conflict of ideals.
Finally - Dave should have taken the rostrum head to head with Farage, instead of doing the sneaky pre-recorded thing. If he truly had answers to Farage's points, then he had nothing to fear.
He put the Tory party first and foremost and not the best thing for the country. Simply went chasing UKIP votes last spring and it has come back to bite him on the arse. Whether that decision bites the rest of us on the arse time will tell but niether Cameron not the majority of his MP's thought it was the best thing for the country, yet he'd painted himself into a corner in a bid to get his party back into power, nothing more, nothing less.
One of Cameron's biggest problems was his migration pledge - it was obviously undeliverable in the EU and in fact damaging to a growing economy if it could have been. The Brexiters are caught in a similar bind and know it, which In turn is likely to lead to even more disillusionment among voters.
We have often had new PM's put in office by their party, most recently in 1963, 1976, 1990 and 2007. Of those four only Major in 1992 eventually secured a mandate at the subsequent general election, but there's nothing wrong with it constitutionally.
So you agree that Callum and Jack actually had no point at all, right?
Probably, however that didn't stop an awful lot of Tories and their supporters bleating on about the same thing when Brown was parachuted in as PM did it. Right?
So you agree that Callum and Jack actually had no point at all, right?
Probably, however that didn't stop an awful lot of Tories and their supporters bleating on about the same thing when Brown was parachuted in as PM did it. Right?
So two wrongs make a right these days?
Macmillan replaced Eden in office in 1957 - midway between the 1955 and 1959 elections; Douglas-Home then took over from Macmillan a year before the 1964 election; Callaghan succeeded Wilson in 1976 and served three years before losing in 1979; Major replaced Thatcher in late 1990 and delayed the subsequent until May 1992; Brown replaced Blair as above.
Churchill and Lloyd George replaced Chamberlain and Asquith in wartime without an election; Chamberlain had himself replaced Baldwin in 1937 without an election. Asquith had replaced Henry Campbell-Bannerman in 1908, the latter having died - he'd replaced Arthur Balfour in 1905 without an election (one was held in 1906).
It's custom and practice in the British system and has been for centuries. If it's "wrong" it's not even arguably a question of "two" wrongs making anything!
Invariably the only people who moan about 'unelected politicians' in these circumstances are when the politician in question belongs to the party you hate.
So you agree that Callum and Jack actually had no point at all, right?
Probably, however that didn't stop an awful lot of Tories and their supporters bleating on about the same thing when Brown was parachuted in as PM did it. Right?
So two wrongs make a right these days?
Macmillan replaced Eden in office in 1957 - midway between the 1955 and 1959 elections; Douglas-Home then took over from Macmillan a year before the 1964 election; Callaghan succeeded Wilson in 1976 and served three years before losing in 1979; Major replaced Thatcher in late 1990 and delayed the subsequent until May 1992; Brown replaced Blair as above.
Churchill and Lloyd George replaced Chamberlain and Asquith in wartime without an election; Chamberlain had himself replaced Baldwin in 1937 without an election. Asquith had replaced Henry Campbell-Bannerman in 1908, the latter having died - he'd replaced Arthur Balfour in 1905 without an election (one was held in 1906).
It's custom and practice in the British system and has been for centuries. If it's "wrong" it's not even arguably a question of "two" wrongs making anything!
What's unusual is that the sitting PM isn't standing down/kicked out several years into as term, but only a year after being elected. It's extraordinary for someone to lead their party to victory and cock it up so quickly afterwards.
So you agree that Callum and Jack actually had no point at all, right?
Probably, however that didn't stop an awful lot of Tories and their supporters bleating on about the same thing when Brown was parachuted in as PM did it. Right?
So two wrongs make a right these days?
Macmillan replaced Eden in office in 1957 - midway between the 1955 and 1959 elections; Douglas-Home then took over from Macmillan a year before the 1964 election; Callaghan succeeded Wilson in 1976 and served three years before losing in 1979; Major replaced Thatcher in late 1990 and delayed the subsequent until May 1992; Brown replaced Blair as above.
Churchill and Lloyd George replaced Chamberlain and Asquith in wartime without an election; Chamberlain had himself replaced Baldwin in 1937 without an election. Asquith had replaced Henry Campbell-Bannerman in 1908, the latter having died - he'd replaced Arthur Balfour in 1905 without an election (one was held in 1906).
It's custom and practice in the British system and has been for centuries. If it's "wrong" it's not even arguably a question of "two" wrongs making anything!
What's unusual is that the sitting PM isn't standing down/kicked out several years into as term, but only a year after being elected. It's extraordinary for someone to lead their party to victory and cock it up so quickly afterwards.
I know, what an absolute turkey. Was calling a referendum a mistake? No. Was calling it without having any kind of a plan to win it a mistake? Abso-fucking-lutely. Destroyed any hope of having a legacy worth mentioning.
So you agree that Callum and Jack actually had no point at all, right?
Probably, however that didn't stop an awful lot of Tories and their supporters bleating on about the same thing when Brown was parachuted in as PM did it. Right?
So two wrongs make a right these days?
Macmillan replaced Eden in office in 1957 - midway between the 1955 and 1959 elections; Douglas-Home then took over from Macmillan a year before the 1964 election; Callaghan succeeded Wilson in 1976 and served three years before losing in 1979; Major replaced Thatcher in late 1990 and delayed the subsequent until May 1992; Brown replaced Blair as above.
Churchill and Lloyd George replaced Chamberlain and Asquith in wartime without an election; Chamberlain had himself replaced Baldwin in 1937 without an election. Asquith had replaced Henry Campbell-Bannerman in 1908, the latter having died - he'd replaced Arthur Balfour in 1905 without an election (one was held in 1906).
It's custom and practice in the British system and has been for centuries. If it's "wrong" it's not even arguably a question of "two" wrongs making anything!
What's unusual is that the sitting PM isn't standing down/kicked out several years into as term, but only a year after being elected. It's extraordinary for someone to lead their party to victory and cock it up so quickly afterwards.
I know, what an absolute turkey. Was calling a referendum a mistake? No. Was calling it without having any kind of a plan to win it a mistake? Abso-fucking-lutely. Destroyed any hope of having a legacy worth mentioning.
Calling a referendum, when you want to maintain the status quo...
I can't see any other politicians doing that in our lifetime!
So you agree that Callum and Jack actually had no point at all, right?
Probably, however that didn't stop an awful lot of Tories and their supporters bleating on about the same thing when Brown was parachuted in as PM did it. Right?
So two wrongs make a right these days?
Macmillan replaced Eden in office in 1957 - midway between the 1955 and 1959 elections; Douglas-Home then took over from Macmillan a year before the 1964 election; Callaghan succeeded Wilson in 1976 and served three years before losing in 1979; Major replaced Thatcher in late 1990 and delayed the subsequent until May 1992; Brown replaced Blair as above.
Churchill and Lloyd George replaced Chamberlain and Asquith in wartime without an election; Chamberlain had himself replaced Baldwin in 1937 without an election. Asquith had replaced Henry Campbell-Bannerman in 1908, the latter having died - he'd replaced Arthur Balfour in 1905 without an election (one was held in 1906).
It's custom and practice in the British system and has been for centuries. If it's "wrong" it's not even arguably a question of "two" wrongs making anything!
I entirely agree, which is why I thought the original quoted tweet was a ton of crap. People who think they vote for a PM really should have paid more attention at school.
So you agree that Callum and Jack actually had no point at all, right?
Probably, however that didn't stop an awful lot of Tories and their supporters bleating on about the same thing when Brown was parachuted in as PM did it. Right?
So two wrongs make a right these days?
Macmillan replaced Eden in office in 1957 - midway between the 1955 and 1959 elections; Douglas-Home then took over from Macmillan a year before the 1964 election; Callaghan succeeded Wilson in 1976 and served three years before losing in 1979; Major replaced Thatcher in late 1990 and delayed the subsequent until May 1992; Brown replaced Blair as above.
Churchill and Lloyd George replaced Chamberlain and Asquith in wartime without an election; Chamberlain had himself replaced Baldwin in 1937 without an election. Asquith had replaced Henry Campbell-Bannerman in 1908, the latter having died - he'd replaced Arthur Balfour in 1905 without an election (one was held in 1906).
It's custom and practice in the British system and has been for centuries. If it's "wrong" it's not even arguably a question of "two" wrongs making anything!
What's unusual is that the sitting PM isn't standing down/kicked out several years into as term, but only a year after being elected. It's extraordinary for someone to lead their party to victory and cock it up so quickly afterwards.
I suppose the closest parallel is Wilson standing down in March 1976, having been re-elected in October 1974. I remember the shock that caused but not anyone calling for a general election (although at 13 I may have missed it!).
I'll say again that there should be a general election before any negotiation re withdrawal from the EU starts .. 4 out of 5 MPs were/are in favour of remain .. How can we expect this biased self interested lot to play fair and oversee the UK's withdrawal in the correct manner ? .. all candidates should make clear before the election what is their position on Europe and be made to stick to it .. also, I have no time whatever for Boris Johnson .. however, given his skillset for negotiation and administration, he's the best of a VERY poor bunch to act as PM after Cameron goes .. he can be replaced later but not, please by Theresa May, the poor man's carbon copy of Thatcher
I'll say again that there should be a general election before any negotiation re withdrawal from the EU starts .. 4 out of 5 MPs were/are in favour of remain .. How can we expect this biased self interested lot to play fair and oversee the UK's withdrawal in the correct manner ? .. all candidates should make clear before the election what is their position on Europe and be made to stick to it .. also, I have no time whatever for Boris Johnson .. however, given his skillset for negotiation and administration, he's the best of a VERY poor bunch to act as PM after Cameron goes .. he can be replaced later but not, please by Theresa May, the poor man's carbon copy of Thatcher
Sorry, you're presenting Boris as a good negotiator and administrator? I think the deal for the Olympic stadium suggests otherwise.
I'll say again that there should be a general election before any negotiation re withdrawal from the EU starts .. 4 out of 5 MPs were/are in favour of remain .. How can we expect this biased self interested lot to play fair and oversee the UK's withdrawal in the correct manner ? .. all candidates should make clear before the election what is their position on Europe and be made to stick to it .. also, I have no time whatever for Boris Johnson .. however, given his skillset for negotiation and administration, he's the best of a VERY poor bunch to act as PM after Cameron goes .. he can be replaced later but not, please by Theresa May, the poor man's carbon copy of Thatcher
Sorry, you're presenting Boris as a good negotiator and administrator? I think the deal for the Olympic stadium suggests otherwise.
who knows what were his motives during those negotiations ? .. for all we know he got exactly what he wanted
I'll say again that there should be a general election before any negotiation re withdrawal from the EU starts .. 4 out of 5 MPs were/are in favour of remain .. How can we expect this biased self interested lot to play fair and oversee the UK's withdrawal in the correct manner ? .. all candidates should make clear before the election what is their position on Europe and be made to stick to it .. also, I have no time whatever for Boris Johnson .. however, given his skillset for negotiation and administration, he's the best of a VERY poor bunch to act as PM after Cameron goes .. he can be replaced later but not, please by Theresa May, the poor man's carbon copy of Thatcher
But the EU are making it pretty clear that they want the process to begin now in order to end the uncertainty as soon as possible - and they have no interest in delaying in order to help out the UK in any way.
I'll say again that there should be a general election before any negotiation re withdrawal from the EU starts .. 4 out of 5 MPs were/are in favour of remain .. How can we expect this biased self interested lot to play fair and oversee the UK's withdrawal in the correct manner ? .. all candidates should make clear before the election what is their position on Europe and be made to stick to it .. also, I have no time whatever for Boris Johnson .. however, given his skillset for negotiation and administration, he's the best of a VERY poor bunch to act as PM after Cameron goes .. he can be replaced later but not, please by Theresa May, the poor man's carbon copy of Thatcher
But the EU are making it pretty clear that they want the process to begin now in order to end the uncertainty as soon as possible - and they have no interest in delaying in order to help out the UK in any way.
tell Juncker to go fuck himself .. this is our game and we decide the procedure
Cameron's irresponsibility is going to bring about the secession of Scotland, the impoverishment of many of the millions who voted for Brexit, violent unrest when leavers realise they are getting none of what they were promised they were voting for, the re-igniting of the Irish troubles, and that's just for starters. He will be remembered as the worst PM in British history.
Cameron's irresponsibility is going to bring about the secession of Scotland, the impoverishment of many of the millions who voted for Brexit, violent unrest when leavers realise they are getting none of what they were promised they were voting for, the re-igniting of the Irish troubles, and that's just for starters. He will be remembered as the worst PM in British history.
at the very least ((:>) .. cheer up could be worse
Comments
Strong leadership - not sure where that will come from.
The country is divided over brexit.
Two thirds of M.P.s supported remain.
I'm currently in Austria and can assure you there is no mood here to accommodate the English after Brexit.
Note David Cameron is to be cold shouldered at the EEC meeting next week.
There appears to be a chasm between Boris Johnsons vision of our relationship with Europe and the rest of Europes view of England.
Political chaos, crisis call it what you like, its a mess.
Theresa May should step up
4m people voted UKIP 13 months ago - so it was unlikely that they would change their mind in the interim.
He promised net migration in the "tens of thousands", and then tried to distance himself from the implied meaning, resorting to spin in true Blair style.
He went to the EU in Feb to get a few carrots to dangle, but came away empty - he should have been back there again the following week rucking.
Then he led a campaign based on fear and negatives instead of highlighting the benefits of EU membership.
Corbyn did the Remain camp no favours by staying so quiet - but he is a principled guy who was dropped into a conflict of ideals.
Finally - Dave should have taken the rostrum head to head with Farage, instead of doing the sneaky pre-recorded thing. If he truly had answers to Farage's points, then he had nothing to fear.
We have often had new PM's put in office by their party, most recently in 1963, 1976, 1990 and 2007. Of those four only Major in 1992 eventually secured a mandate at the subsequent general election, but there's nothing wrong with it constitutionally.
Churchill and Lloyd George replaced Chamberlain and Asquith in wartime without an election; Chamberlain had himself replaced Baldwin in 1937 without an election. Asquith had replaced Henry Campbell-Bannerman in 1908, the latter having died - he'd replaced Arthur Balfour in 1905 without an election (one was held in 1906).
It's custom and practice in the British system and has been for centuries. If it's "wrong" it's not even arguably a question of "two" wrongs making anything!
I don't know whether she'll benefit from this, or it will be seen as cowardice, sitting on the fence and hoping to avoid the flak.
I can't see any other politicians doing that in our lifetime!
Toffee nosed Eton cunt!
also, I have no time whatever for Boris Johnson .. however, given his skillset for negotiation and administration, he's the best of a VERY poor bunch to act as PM after Cameron goes .. he can be replaced later but not, please by Theresa May, the poor man's carbon copy of Thatcher
Sorry, you're presenting Boris as a good negotiator and administrator? I think the deal for the Olympic stadium suggests otherwise.