SD on 9/6/2017 at 15:09
I can't see May being allowed to fight another general election. She somehow achieved the feat of losing seats to the worst opposition in living memory. She has managed to make things even more chaotic than they were before, which I didn't think possible.
One has to enjoy the irony that, after slamming Corbyn as a terrorist sympathiser, she has to go cap in hand to the terrorist-supporting DUP for a majority.
Vivian on 9/6/2017 at 15:16
Actually I thought Corbyn and Labour were great. Credible, unified opposition with a sensible and plausible manifesto. Although If you'd asked me even a month or so ago I would definitely not have said that. This has been a real karate-kid moment for Corbs.
SD on 9/6/2017 at 15:52
Corbyn has acquitted himself well, but that doesn't alter what he is, nor does it make his fantasy wishlist of policies any more realistic or affordable.
I find the whole thing profoundly hilarious.
Starker on 9/6/2017 at 19:39
Here's an unapologetically leftist recap of the whole thing:
[video=youtube;dVbC0jASJYA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVbC0jASJYA[/video]
Slasher on 9/6/2017 at 20:07
Could someone explain to a dumb (also lazy) American why Sinn Fein isn't taking their seats?
Starker on 9/6/2017 at 20:17
Sinn Fein is a nationalist party whose goal is united Ireland. To take part in British politics would somewhat undermine their goal of not taking part in British politics.
Really, though, it's just a form of protest.
SubJeff on 10/6/2017 at 06:52
Quote Posted by SD
Corbyn has acquitted himself well, but that doesn't alter what he is, nor does it make his fantasy wishlist of policies any more realistic or affordable.
I thought the whole thing was fully costed and validated by over 120 academic economists. Was the Lib Dem manifesto costed? Don't be a bitter yellow SD, Lib Dems did alright and Tim, despite being a nobody coming into this, did really well (imho) especially in the debates.
None of this matters though - the Tories are the only game in town \o/
It's not the leader that matters so much (see Labour for the prime example) but the policies.
SD on 12/6/2017 at 14:18
Quote Posted by SubJeff
I thought the whole thing was fully costed and validated by over 120 academic economists. Was the Lib Dem manifesto costed? Don't be a bitter yellow SD, Lib Dems did alright and Tim, despite being a nobody coming into this, did really well (imho) especially in the debates.
None of this matters though - the Tories are the only game in town \o/
It's not the leader that matters so much (see Labour for the prime example) but the policies.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies said that neither Labour nor the Tories were being honest about their tax and spending plans. The IFS thought that Labour's plans wouldn't raise anything like as much as the £50bn they were claiming, and if you know anything at all about what HMRC calls behavioural impact, you would have to agree with their conclusions.
Like I said, fantasy economics.
The Economist endorsed the Lib Dems in the election, so nuff said there.
I am not bitter, just enjoying the complete hash of things the Tories are making without the Lib Dems around to make them look competent. The 2010-2015 coalition is already looking like a golden age of stability and good government.
caffeinatedzombeh on 14/6/2017 at 17:59
Quote Posted by SD
Like I said, fantasy economics.
It's other people's money so it doesn't matter.
and the magic money tree is absolute fact, not fantasy.
