2017 General Election Thread

[SaigonSaddler]

very interesting read from the Institute of fiscal studies:

Neither Conservatives nor Labour are properly spelling out consequences of their policy proposals

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9259

They're all lying to us :shock:

Thanks saddla

Balanced report and independent

Interesting point made about tax

Corbyns taxes will affect all of our hard earned pensions as I have been saying

Not just the high net worth pensions but all private personal pensions so if you have started paying into a company group personal pension as part of the workplace pension rules recently introduced - bad luck

Let's be very clear here- he is not being a Robin Hood

He is not taking from the rich to give to the poor

When you look into it he is losing money for the people with very little pension savings and giving it to the middle and upper classes who can afford uni fees , don't need fuel allowance and can easily manage with state pension that still goes up with the cost of living.

Who is removing the triple lock on pensions? Here's a hint
Who has embarked on a sustained attack on pensions, real income and services? Here's a hint

Only the Labour party is willing to defend the well-being of ordinary working people, pensioners, the NHS and education.

I can only hope that their manifesto will have some impact, as another 5 years of Self-servative misrule will have debilitating impacts on many people.

[Cowshed]

very interesting read from the Institute of fiscal studies:

Neither Conservatives nor Labour are properly spelling out consequences of their policy proposals

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9259

They're all lying to us :shock:

Thanks saddla

Balanced report and independent

Interesting point made about tax

Corbyns taxes will affect all of our hard earned pensions as I have been saying

Not just the high net worth pensions but all private personal pensions so if you have started paying into a company group personal pension as part of the workplace pension rules recently introduced - bad luck

Let's be very clear here- he is not being a Robin Hood

He is not taking from the rich to give to the poor

When you look into it he is losing money for the people with very little pension savings and giving it to the middle and upper classes who can afford uni fees , don't need fuel allowance and can easily manage with state pension that still goes up with the cost of living.

Who is removing the triple lock on pensions? Here's a hint
Who has embarked on a sustained attack on pensions, real income and services? Here's a hint

Only the Labour party is willing to defend the well-being of ordinary working people, pensioners, the NHS and education.

I can only hope that their manifesto will have some impact, as another 5 years of Self-servative misrule will have debilitating impacts on many people.

It will have impact that's for sure

[chunkster]

very interesting read from the Institute of fiscal studies:

Neither Conservatives nor Labour are properly spelling out consequences of their policy proposals

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9259

They're all lying to us :shock:

Thanks saddla

Balanced report and independent

Interesting point made about tax

Corbyns taxes will affect all of our hard earned pensions as I have been saying

Not just the high net worth pensions but all private personal pensions so if you have started paying into a company group personal pension as part of the workplace pension rules recently introduced - bad luck

Let's be very clear here- he is not being a Robin Hood

He is not taking from the rich to give to the poor

When you look into it he is losing money for the people with very little pension savings and giving it to the middle and upper classes who can afford uni fees , don't need fuel allowance and can easily manage with state pension that still goes up with the cost of living.

Who is removing the triple lock on pensions? Here's a hint
Who has embarked on a sustained attack on pensions, real income and services? Here's a hint

Only the Labour party is willing to defend the well-being of ordinary working people, pensioners, the NHS and education.

I can only hope that their manifesto will have some impact, as another 5 years of Self-servative misrule will have debilitating impacts on many people.

At the expense of leaving us unprotected by ditching trident and opening our borders. sorry but i would gladly sacrifice my triple lock :mrgreen:

[SaigonSaddler]

Who is removing the triple lock on pensions? Here's a hint
Who has embarked on a sustained attack on pensions, real income and services? Here's a hint

Only the Labour party is willing to defend the well-being of ordinary working people, pensioners, the NHS and education.

I can only hope that their manifesto will have some impact, as another 5 years of Self-servative misrule will have debilitating impacts on many people.

At the expense of leaving us unprotected by ditching trident and opening our borders. sorry but i would gladly sacrifice my triple lock :mrgreen:[/quote]

Not only are Labour keeping trident, but no party has declared any kind of numbers on immigration, except the dubious UKIP irrelevance.

It's not just the triple lock either, the tories have bizarrely chosen to savage their core support with the cretinous dementia tax, then backtracked, and yet they still won't disclose the basic details.

Just one of the things they're hiding.

[Cully]

very interesting read from the Institute of fiscal studies:

Neither Conservatives nor Labour are properly spelling out consequences of their policy proposals

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9259

They're all lying to us :shock:

Interesting reading. Here's the labour summary:-

Labour by contrast is proposing very big increases in tax, a bigger increase in spending and, as a result, borrowing continuing around its current share of national income. They would increase spending to its highest sustained level in more than 30 years and taxes to their highest ever peacetime level. Even so the state under Labour would be no bigger than that in many advanced economies. However, their proposed plan for paying for this expansion in state activity would not work. They would not raise as much money as they claim even in the short run, let alone the long run. And there is no way that tens of billions of pounds of tax rises would affect only a small group at the very top as their rhetoric suggests. If they want the advantages of a bigger state they should be willing to candidly set out the consequences – higher taxation affecting broad segments of the population.
These are among the main conclusions of analysis by IFS researchers, funded by the Nuffield

[Cully]

Who is removing the triple lock on pensions? Here's a hint
Who has embarked on a sustained attack on pensions, real income and services? Here's a hint

Only the Labour party is willing to defend the well-being of ordinary working people, pensioners, the NHS and education.

I can only hope that their manifesto will have some impact, as another 5 years of Self-servative misrule will have debilitating impacts on many people.

At the expense of leaving us unprotected by ditching trident and opening our borders. sorry but i would gladly sacrifice my triple lock :mrgreen:

Not only are Labour keeping trident, but no party has declared any kind of numbers on immigration, except the dubious UKIP irrelevance.

It's not just the triple lock either, the tories have bizarrely chosen to savage their core support with the cretinous dementia tax, then backtracked, and yet they still won't disclose the basic details.

Just one of the things they're hiding.[/quote]

Perhaps they are all really lizards? Perhaps David Icke was right :?

[Cheesebag]

One think I concluded from watching the debates is that I wouldn't personally employ a single one of them.

[chunkster]

Who is removing the triple lock on pensions? Here's a hint
Who has embarked on a sustained attack on pensions, real income and services? Here's a hint

Only the Labour party is willing to defend the well-being of ordinary working people, pensioners, the NHS and education.

I can only hope that their manifesto will have some impact, as another 5 years of Self-servative misrule will have debilitating impacts on many people.

At the expense of leaving us unprotected by ditching trident and opening our borders. sorry but i would gladly sacrifice my triple lock :mrgreen:

Not only are Labour keeping trident, but no party has declared any kind of numbers on immigration, except the dubious UKIP irrelevance.

It's not just the triple lock either, the tories have bizarrely chosen to savage their core support with the cretinous dementia tax, then backtracked, and yet they still won't disclose the basic details.

Just one of the things they're hiding.

Perhaps they are all really lizards? Perhaps David Icke was right :?[/quote]
I think for the first time in my voting life I am going to have to vote for someone and something I don't actually believe in :(

[tinned]

One think I concluded from watching the debates is that I wouldn't personally employ a single one of them.

I bet they're no good at fitting springs!

[reedswood sadler]

It is turning into an interesting election for a change.
Both parties have manifestos that just do not add up money wise, both have good and bad promises which on past records will be forgotten when elected.
Both parties have leaders that are unpopular,May is coming over as arrogant (the thing that caused people to vote for Brexit.) and Corbyn is unelectable for many people, his own MPS have said they cannot put him on leaflets around midlands and up north because of some of his views on IRA and immigration (I await the attack by Saigon)
May called the election because she saw a chance of wiping out labour no other reason and then ruined her chance by attacking us oldies with the dementia tax, winter payments and pensions.Do not under estimate the power of the grey vote.
It will now be close with the chance of tories loosing seats instead on gaining.

[SaigonSaddler]

It is turning into an interesting election for a change.
Both parties have manifestos that just do not add up money wise, both have good and bad promises which on past records will be forgotten when elected.
Both parties have leaders that are unpopular,May is coming over as arrogant (the thing that caused people to vote for Brexit.) and Corbyn is unelectable for many people, his own MPS have said they cannot put him on leaflets around midlands and up north because of some of his views on IRA and immigration (I await the attack by Saigon)
May called the election because she saw a chance of wiping out labour no other reason and then ruined her chance by attacking us oldies with the dementia tax, winter payments and pensions.Do not under estimate the power of the grey vote.
It will now be close with the chance of tories loosing seats instead on gaining.

No attack. :wink:

But be aware that the tories campaign centred around demonising Corbyn at the expense of anything positive.
The more air-time he gets, the more credible and electable he appears to many, including large numbers of Labour voters who originally said they couldn't bear him.

This was meant to be May's coronation, but it has exposed her as flimsy. She faces even more challenges today, both from her candidate being charged with mishandling electoral expenses and her lack of leadership, verging on sycophancy towards Trump over the Paris climate change accord.

If you like your history, she's gone from Elizabeth 1st to Charles 1st in a few weeks. :wink:

[Pedagogue]

It's probably fair to say you were not aware that her dad had died a few days ago

... and so our "Strong & Stable" Prime Minister sends one of her underlings, recently bereaved and probably grieving, to face the music in a public debate in her place. She wouldn't even go on "Woman's Hour" because she might be asked questions!

Weak and wobbly Theresa won't even face the general public, let alone sympathetic journalists or - horror of horrors - politicians from other parties!!!

Yet she still thinks that she is the right person to lead negotiations with 27 EU leaders, led by Angela Merkel and the Commissioners? Do me a favour! Even her own party is starting to turn against her. Watch what happens if she doesn't get the expected huge majority in the GE. Strong and stable, my arse! :evil:

[ShyTallKnight]

Whatever happens we are DOOMED we are all DOOMED :D

[Super Gabor]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/19/tax-burden-wealthy-has-trebled-since-1970s-telegraph-analysis/

Worth checking out diagram 2.

This combined with the inconvenient truth that the lowering of corp tax rates has led to a higher tax take from the business community, by helping stimulating business growth and setting taxes at a competitive rate, should be interesting reading for the likes of John "Little Red Book" McDonnell.

[SaigonSaddler]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/19/tax-burden-wealthy-has-trebled-since-1970s-telegraph-analysis/

Worth checking out diagram 2.

This combined with the inconvenient truth that the lowering of corp tax rates has led to a higher tax take from the business community, by helping stimulating business growth and setting taxes at a competitive rate, should be interesting reading for the likes of John "Little Red Book" McDonnell.

The richest 1%?

The richest ONE PERCENT?

:D

Oh my, quick send out the emergency cash ambulance!

Neither graph takes into account non-progressive taxes like VAT and fuel duty, or the combined effects of tax and benefit changes are hitting the poorest the hardest. What's a tenner to anyone on 80+ grand a year?

Labour's asking the richest in society to pay a few 100 pounds more a year, with no-one below the top 5% paying more, in order to sustain services that everyone uses and enjoys.

Who owns the Telegraph? :wink:

[Super Gabor]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/19/tax-burden-wealthy-has-trebled-since-1970s-telegraph-analysis/

Worth checking out diagram 2.

This combined with the inconvenient truth that the lowering of corp tax rates has led to a higher tax take from the business community, by helping stimulating business growth and setting taxes at a competitive rate, should be interesting reading for the likes of John "Little Red Book" McDonnell.

The richest 1%?

The richest ONE PERCENT?

:D

Oh my, quick send out the emergency cash ambulance!

Neither graph takes into account non-progressive taxes like VAT and fuel duty, or the combined effects of tax and benefit changes are hitting the poorest the hardest. What's a tenner to anyone on 80+ grand a year?

Labour's asking the richest in society to pay a few 100 pounds more a year, with no-one below the top 5% paying more, in order to sustain services that everyone uses and enjoys.

Who owns the Telegraph? :wink:

Did you not look at the 2nd figure?

If you think Labour's proposals will involve just the richest coughing up a few extra quid and that will solve the mathematical conundrum Labour has set itself, you clearly have more unwavering faith than I do.

Telegraph issue is neither here nor there tbh with regard to the stats.

[SaigonSaddler]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/19/tax-burden-wealthy-has-trebled-since-1970s-telegraph-analysis/

Worth checking out diagram 2.

This combined with the inconvenient truth that the lowering of corp tax rates has led to a higher tax take from the business community, by helping stimulating business growth and setting taxes at a competitive rate, should be interesting reading for the likes of John "Little Red Book" McDonnell.

The richest 1%?

The richest ONE PERCENT?

:D

Oh my, quick send out the emergency cash ambulance!

Neither graph takes into account non-progressive taxes like VAT and fuel duty, or the combined effects of tax and benefit changes are hitting the poorest the hardest. What's a tenner to anyone on 80+ grand a year?

Labour's asking the richest in society to pay a few 100 pounds more a year, with no-one below the top 5% paying more, in order to sustain services that everyone uses and enjoys.

Who owns the Telegraph? :wink:

Did you not look at the 2nd figure?

If you think Labour's proposals will involve just the richest coughing up a few extra quid and that will solve the mathematical conundrum Labour has set itself, you clearly have more unwavering faith than I do.

Telegraph issue is neither here nor there tbh with regard to the stats.

Yes I did, but it is not the whole picture of the tax situation.

As I alluded, forking out 10 quid for someone on minimum wage is something to seriously think about, for someone in the top 5% (the only group targeted for rises by Labour) it's an absolutely piffling amount. Both have to fuel their cars, both have to pay for car insurance, both have to pay overpriced utility bills.

Connected to this: here's a quick comparison of corporate tax with some of the better economies in Europe:

Austria 25%
Belgium 34%
Denmark and Sweden 22%
France 33.3%
Germany 23-34%
Italy 34%

UK is on just 19%, set to FALL to 17% by 2020. :shock:

I think there's some leeway to be explored here, but why look after the poor if they're minded to keep voting tory on the wave of some jingoistic harking back to the halcyon days of empire (just forget about the slums and miserable working conditions for most).

[Super Gabor]

Saigon:

1) I actually agree with you regarding the £10 an hour minimum wage and mentioned this over a year ago. I appreciate some employers will be strongly against this additional cost but I cannot think of any task - even requiring the most basic low skills - that you wouldn't pay a tenner an hour for. If you had a cleaner in your house you'd I pay a tenner an hour so what job a warrants less reward? It also serves​ to remove some of the need for working tax credits and shifting the cost burden of subsidising low pay from taxpayer support to employer.

But

2) To then squeeze businesses by hiking up corp. tax, is going to act as a disincentive for much needed investment. The economic ramifications of Brexit are unlikely to be positive, at least in the short to medium term. We shall need entrepreneurs more than ever and give them as much help as possible over the coming months and years. Labour don't send out that signal. A corp tax rate as it stands is attractive to those looking to develop a business and create jobs and to hook potential FDI. As we know, lowering it over the past few years has led to bigger tax take from businesses. Surely a good thing?

[chunkster]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/19/tax-burden-wealthy-has-trebled-since-1970s-telegraph-analysis/

Worth checking out diagram 2.

This combined with the inconvenient truth that the lowering of corp tax rates has led to a higher tax take from the business community, by helping stimulating business growth and setting taxes at a competitive rate, should be interesting reading for the likes of John "Little Red Book" McDonnell.

The richest 1%?

The richest ONE PERCENT?

:D

Oh my, quick send out the emergency cash ambulance!

Neither graph takes into account non-progressive taxes like VAT and fuel duty, or the combined effects of tax and benefit changes are hitting the poorest the hardest. What's a tenner to anyone on 80+ grand a year?

Labour's asking the richest in society to pay a few 100 pounds more a year, with no-one below the top 5% paying more, in order to sustain services that everyone uses and enjoys.

Who owns the Telegraph? :wink:

Did you not look at the 2nd figure?

If you think Labour's proposals will involve just the richest coughing up a few extra quid and that will solve the mathematical conundrum Labour has set itself, you clearly have more unwavering faith than I do.

Telegraph issue is neither here nor there tbh with regard to the stats.

Yes I did, but it is not the whole picture of the tax situation.

As I alluded, forking out 10 quid for someone on minimum wage is something to seriously think about, for someone in the top 5% (the only group targeted for rises by Labour) it's an absolutely piffling amount. Both have to fuel their cars, both have to pay for car insurance, both have to pay overpriced utility bills.

Connected to this: here's a quick comparison of corporate tax with some of the better economies in Europe:

Austria 25%
Belgium 34%
Denmark and Sweden 22%
France 33.3%
Germany 23-34%
Italy 34%

UK is on just 19%, set to FALL to 17% by 2020. :shock:

I think there's some leeway to be explored here, but why look after the poor if they're minded to keep voting tory on the wave of some jingoistic harking back to the halcyon days of empire (just forget about the slums and miserable working conditions for most).

Slums :shock: miserable working conditions :shock: where have you been for the last 20 years? :lol: we have never had it so good :wink:

[Cowshed]

very interesting read from the Institute of fiscal studies:

Neither Conservatives nor Labour are properly spelling out consequences of their policy proposals

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9259

They're all lying to us :shock:

Interesting reading. Here's the labour summary:-

Labour by contrast is proposing very big increases in tax, a bigger increase in spending and, as a result, borrowing continuing around its current share of national income. They would increase spending to its highest sustained level in more than 30 years and taxes to their highest ever peacetime level. Even so the state under Labour would be no bigger than that in many advanced economies. However, their proposed plan for paying for this expansion in state activity would not work. They would not raise as much money as they claim even in the short run, let alone the long run. And there is no way that tens of billions of pounds of tax rises would affect only a small group at the very top as their rhetoric suggests. If they want the advantages of a bigger state they should be willing to candidly set out the consequences – higher taxation affecting broad segments of the population.
These are among the main conclusions of analysis by IFS researchers, funded by the Nuffield[/quote

The last line says it all

They should be willing to candidly set out the consequences

HIGHER TAXATION AFFECTING BROAD SEGMENTS OF THE POPULATION

Corbyn is telling lies - which doesn't surprise me - the Robin Hood act is a con

I agree with the slogan doing the rounds

CON the many not the few

Don't be conned there is not a worse feeling

[SaigonSaddler]

Saigon:

1) I actually agree with you regarding the £10 an hour minimum wage and mentioned this over a year ago. I appreciate some employers will be strongly against this additional cost but I cannot think of any task - even requiring the most basic low skills - that you wouldn't pay a tenner an hour for. If you had a cleaner in your house you'd I pay a tenner an hour so what job a warrants less reward? It also serves​ to remove some of the need for working tax credits and shifting the cost burden of subsidising low pay from taxpayer support to employer.

But

2) To then squeeze businesses by hiking up corp. tax, is going to act as a disincentive for much needed investment. The economic ramifications of Brexit are unlikely to be positive, at least in the short to medium term. We shall need entrepreneurs more than ever and give them as much help as possible over the coming months and years. Labour don't send out that signal. A corp tax rate as it stands is attractive to those looking to develop a business and create jobs and to hook potential FDI. As we know, lowering it over the past few years has led to bigger tax take from businesses. Surely a good thing?

Fair enough - all about priorities for the government as well as voters.

I'll be exploring Europe over the next few weeks (finally got around to my trip) so I'll see what they make of the political landscape of Britain, although I don't think they're that bothered. :D :wink:

[SaigonSaddler]

Slums :shock: miserable working conditions :shock: where have you been for the last 20 years? :lol: we have never had it so good :wink:

Thus my halcyon days of empire point, while Britain was ruling the waves in many corners of the globe the workers in various communities had a very raw deal. These conditions were finally improved by the post war Labour government.

And as if on cue, Britain is now the worst-performing advanced economy in the world. :|

[chunkster]

lets see if this works it is a quiz and asks questions and depending on your answers it tells you who you should be voting for, i was shocked

http://38degrees.ge2017.com/quiz?utm_so ... id_ad_gpv1

[SaigonSaddler]

lets see if this works it is a quiz and asks questions and depending on your answers it tells you who you should be voting for, i was shocked

http://38degrees.ge2017.com/quiz?utm_so ... id_ad_gpv1

Me too! :D

[chunkster]

lets see if this works it is a quiz and asks questions and depending on your answers it tells you who you should be voting for, i was shocked

http://38degrees.ge2017.com/quiz?utm_so ... id_ad_gpv1

Me too! :D

well i should be voting for the green party :lol: i honestly think everyone should take the test before voting, and it could change the face of British voting forever :mrgreen:

[Cowshed]

very interesting read from the Institute of fiscal studies:

Neither Conservatives nor Labour are properly spelling out consequences of their policy proposals

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9259

They're all lying to us :shock:

Thanks saddla

Balanced report and independent

Interesting point made about tax

Corbyns taxes will affect all of our hard earned pensions as I have been saying

Not just the high net worth pensions but all private personal pensions so if you have started paying into a company group personal pension as part of the workplace pension rules recently introduced - bad luck

Let's be very clear here- he is not being a Robin Hood

He is not taking from the rich to give to the poor

When you look into it he is losing money for the people with very little pension savings and giving it to the middle and upper classes who can afford uni fees , don't need fuel allowance and can easily manage with state pension that still goes up with the cost of living.

Who is removing the triple lock on pensions? Here's a hint
Who has embarked on a sustained attack on pensions, real income and services? Here's a hint

Only the Labour party is willing to defend the well-being of ordinary working people, pensioners, the NHS and education.

I can only hope that their manifesto will have some impact, as another 5 years of Self-servative misrule will have debilitating impacts on many people.

Labour utopia world

Saigon I can understand that the very young with maybe little life experience believe in Corbyns perfect little world full of pretty little money trees but seriously

Clearly your hearts in the right place and you want what we would all ideally like but back in the real world---

How on earth did your parents break it to you that there is no santa :D

[chunkster]

very interesting read from the Institute of fiscal studies:

Neither Conservatives nor Labour are properly spelling out consequences of their policy proposals

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9259

They're all lying to us :shock:

Thanks saddla

Balanced report and independent

Interesting point made about tax

Corbyns taxes will affect all of our hard earned pensions as I have been saying

Not just the high net worth pensions but all private personal pensions so if you have started paying into a company group personal pension as part of the workplace pension rules recently introduced - bad luck

Let's be very clear here- he is not being a Robin Hood

He is not taking from the rich to give to the poor

When you look into it he is losing money for the people with very little pension savings and giving it to the middle and upper classes who can afford uni fees , don't need fuel allowance and can easily manage with state pension that still goes up with the cost of living.

Who is removing the triple lock on pensions? Here's a hint
Who has embarked on a sustained attack on pensions, real income and services? Here's a hint

Only the Labour party is willing to defend the well-being of ordinary working people, pensioners, the NHS and education.

I can only hope that their manifesto will have some impact, as another 5 years of Self-servative misrule will have debilitating impacts on many people.

Labour utopia world

Saigon I can understand that the very young with maybe little life experience believe in Corbyns perfect little world full of pretty little money trees but seriously

Clearly your hearts in the right place and you want what we would all ideally like but back in the real world---

How on earth did your parents break it to you that there is no santa :D

They didn't and you have just spoiled it for him :lol:

[SaigonSaddler]

very interesting read from the Institute of fiscal studies:

Neither Conservatives nor Labour are properly spelling out consequences of their policy proposals

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9259

They're all lying to us :shock:

Thanks saddla

Balanced report and independent

Interesting point made about tax

Corbyns taxes will affect all of our hard earned pensions as I have been saying

Not just the high net worth pensions but all private personal pensions so if you have started paying into a company group personal pension as part of the workplace pension rules recently introduced - bad luck

Let's be very clear here- he is not being a Robin Hood

He is not taking from the rich to give to the poor

When you look into it he is losing money for the people with very little pension savings and giving it to the middle and upper classes who can afford uni fees , don't need fuel allowance and can easily manage with state pension that still goes up with the cost of living.

Who is removing the triple lock on pensions? Here's a hint
Who has embarked on a sustained attack on pensions, real income and services? Here's a hint

Only the Labour party is willing to defend the well-being of ordinary working people, pensioners, the NHS and education.

I can only hope that their manifesto will have some impact, as another 5 years of Self-servative misrule will have debilitating impacts on many people.

Labour utopia world

Saigon I can understand that the very young with maybe little life experience believe in Corbyns perfect little world full of pretty little money trees but seriously

Clearly your hearts in the right place and you want what we would all ideally like but back in the real world---

How on earth did your parents break it to you that there is no santa :D

FFS not you as well. :x

There's clearly a Santa. I've seen him! :wink:

[chunkster]

it's amazing what you get to see in Bangkok :lol:

[Cowshed]

It's probably fair to say you were not aware that her dad had died a few days ago

... and so our "Strong & Stable" Prime Minister sends one of her underlings, recently bereaved and probably grieving, to face the music in a public debate in her place. She wouldn't even go on "Woman's Hour" because she might be asked questions!

Weak and wobbly Theresa won't even face the general public, let alone sympathetic journalists or - horror of horrors - politicians from other parties!!!

Yet she still thinks that she is the right person to lead negotiations with 27 EU leaders, led by Angela Merkel and the Commissioners? Do me a favour! Even her own party is starting to turn against her. Watch what happens if she doesn't get the expected huge majority in the GE. Strong and stable, my arse! :evil:

But no one said she was weak and wobbly whilst actually doing the job of prime minister and tearing Corbin a new one in the commons week in week out. The polls wouldn't have been so strong for her if this was not true - am I wrong?

You see , and this is obviously just my opinion, bottle can manifest itself in different ways

It may be seen as brave to have a low level slanging match brown nosing the media but I would imagine any of these politicians love the attention including may. I think this is bread and butter stuff for them they love it . You may think it is brave but personally I think for them it is just another day at the office.

To keep yourself above this and hold your nerve when really you want to defend yourself from the crowd baying for your career, for me shows bottle,