Holding the public with contempt?

M

Marb

Journeyman
Joined
Mar 8, 2016
Messages
7,716
Regardless of who you vote for, are people really happy and accepting of a totally unelected new Prime Minister just one year after a general election after all the carry on over the E.U vote?

This isn't like when Tony Blair handed over to Gordon Brown in 2008, as Blair had served as PM for 11 years, and everyone knew in 2005 that we were going to get Gordon Brown at some point in the duration of the 2005-2010 parliament and that happend in 2008. Gordon Brown should have actually called an election upon his annointment too, but even so, I'm just saying the circumstances were very different.

We were told absolutely nothing about Theresa May being Prime Minister when we voted for David Cameron last year, and using the "don't want to disturb the economic markets" argument as a way of depriving the British electorate of a vote or getting a democratic mandate for her reign, is disingenuous, self-serving, and an establishment stitch up I'm afraid.
 
Last edited:
Change of PM between elections is not unusual: Major, Callaghan, Douglas-Home and Macmillan were cases in point, none of whom sought a mandate from the electorate

On his appointment as PM Eden did call an immediate election but I'd hazard a guess he was an exception, if delving further back in history


It doesn't bother me anyway. We elect a government not a PM, though if May were to call a snap election soonish the Tory majority would probably increase by upwards of 100, given the state of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition

This majority may be very slightly less if Theresa chucks it all in and makes Larry the Downing Street cat PM
 
Last edited:
Never heard such a fake insincere speech from may,totally plastic and patronizing doesn't comes across natural at all cringeworthy i'd be amazed if she remains a popular primeminister for long trying to do a tony blair but not in the same league as an orator utter twaddle..
 
Its that bad that if Jimmy Saville were PM he would still win the next election under the Tory banner

Having an election now would be pointless imo..a glove puppet could win under tory banner..an early election will also destroy Labour in a similar way to how the lib dems bombed last time

Labour want to pray for a full term ..it probably won't make any difference with Corbyn in there..but a quick election will be certain deathnell for Labour..whereas given full term he has chance to try and persuade people he is a leader..can't see it mesen..but last thing they need is a quick election.

At least the daft UKIP have took a bit of heat away from the Labour leadership debacle by having an even more disastrous election...i can't believe anyone can think UKIP are anything but a series of train crashes..what a fiasco..Farage..he's in..then out..then in..then out...they should make a UKIP leadership cuckoo clock with him popping out every hour..it would represent the party perfectly
 
Last edited:
Its not like she'd have to call an election tomorrow, EC1. She could easily call it for next summer. She'd be strong favourite to win of course, but winning it is besides the point.

I am uncomfortable with the notion that a Tory instigated E.U vote, a year after a general election, has led to a new Prime Minister, new cabinet, and policy making team, which wasn't in their last manifesto.

As for this Autobiography recently written about David Cameron, does anyone believe a word that's been written?

Only last night I caught an LBC presenter stating that the testimony of this spin doctor or 'communications advisor' in a book, means that the Conservative party didn't want the E.U vote?!!

Come on, of course they bloody did, they put it in their 2015 election manifesto, they put it to the public in 2016.

90 percent or more of Conservative grassroots would have been for leaving the E.U.
Only the 'Disreali' centre ground, (May, Cameron etc), at the top of the party wanted to give the general public a different idea of things.

As for David Cameron.... he did ten or more years at the top of politics, if you include the fact he was leader of the party in 2006. Struck me as a bloke who was young enough to go in, get what he wanted out of it, and then make off. The idea he or his family are deeply upset or troubled he resigned after 6 years as Prime Minister seems to me to forget the psychology of the man. He can earn a lot more money elsewhere too.

I understand I've adopted this harsh tone on the Tories at present but I think its justified.
 
Last edited:
Marble said:
Its not like she'd have to call an election tomorrow, EC1. She could easily call it for next summer. She'd be strong favourite to win of course, but winning it is besides the point.

I am uncomfortable with the notion that a Tory instigated E.U vote, a year after a general election, has led to a new Prime Minister, new cabinet, and policy making team, which wasn't in there last manifesto.

As for this Autobiography recently written about David Cameron, does anyone believe a word that's been written?

Only last night I caught an LBC presenter stating that the testimony of this spin doctor or 'communications advisor' in a book, means that the Conservative party didn't want the E.U vote?!!

Come on, of course they bloody did, they put it in their 2015 election manifesto, they put it to the public in 2016.

90 percent or more of Conservative grassroots would have been for leaving the E.U.
Only the 'Disreali' centre ground, (May, Cameron etc), at the top of the party wanted to give the general public a different idea of things.

As for David Cameron.... he did ten or more years at the top of politics, if you include the fact he was leader of the party in 2006. Struck me as a bloke who was young enough to go in, get what he wanted out of it, and then make off. The idea he or his family are deeply upset or troubled he resigned after 6 years as Prime Minister seems to me to forget the psychology of the man. He can earn a lot more money elsewhere too.

I understand I've adopted this harsh tone on the Tories at present but I think its justified.
Click to expand...

Dave underestimated the chav vote on the EU in a big way...he claearly had no idea of the level of numptyism some of the existances i spot on me travels and viewing TV have sunk to..or just don't know any better.

deary me some of the folk they spoke to before the vote in June that they showed on our news was scarey...i didn't really make out much they said..i were to busy reading the tattoos. I spotted some of the lowest forms of intelligence interviewed in vox pops about why they were voting out..it fookin sacred me tbh. No wonder a party like UKIP has gained support...they are a measure of chavness in society..and its large.

aye i can see where you are coming from re the election but it wouldn't change the government..and to be fair..the least times they ask the general public anything these days the better with a large % borderline learning difficulty in some of the towns up here.
 
Last edited:
From a 'democratic mandate' point of view a rather greater concern is the appointment of Shami Chakrabati as Attorney General

Legged-up into the Lords by Corbyn because, it seems now, this was a method - a familiar one at that - of bringing an unelected MP into the Shadow Cabinet

Stinking hypocrisy of the highest rank
 
I am more concerned with the very real likeness between our new Prime Minister and the enormously evil fictional character Emperor Palpatine.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • download.jpg
    download.jpg
    4.8 KB · Views: 43
I found this sentence in the BBC article on the Tesco/Unilever cost argument article to be interesting.

"Who should absorb the increase in costs as a result of the weaker pound?"

Perhaps we could have personal "how did you vote?" data linked to Clubcards, with the price rise only affecting those who voted to leave.
 
Unilever appear to be trying it on though according to what i have heard on the news..their goods are reported to be produced/gleaned from here... so the £ level wouldn't be affecting them. Tesco have done the right thing imo..if that is the case.

i think this will be the trend now..people jumping on the bandwagon to hike up prices using Brexit as the excuse.

I wonder how long it will take for those who voted out..on the immigration issue alone...to realise that nothing in that area will change..but that their wallets are significantly going to be lighter

and when the crying about cost increases goes out..the answer will be from politicians..nowt to do with us..you lot voted for it

what a pup people have been sold imo..whether it is a right or wrong decision to leave ...any price rises in any area will now be blamed on us voting out..we will see it more and more in the coming months
 
Last edited:
simmo said:
I'm never buying Marmite again if that's what it's made from.
Click to expand...

There was a 'limited edition' a few years ago made from Guinness effluent which was reputed to have a whiff of the Liffey about it. Never tried it but I know what they mean :)
 
Last edited:
just caught on news..its been resolved

might have gone something like

tesco..fook off you greedy chancing barstewards

unico..well you have to try..you know how thick our customers are..they would have paid up


fuckin disgusting imo..and shows what we are up against in the future..any chance of wringing the extra buck through any means is what we are up against as consumers

it makes no difference brexit or not to us..either way it would have been some old excuse..as it is..its like an open goal for anyone selling to the consumer

well done Tesco for standing up to greedy areseholes..you get tired of this profit under any guise as you get older

i don't like marmite but will make sure i avoid all their other products in future..and hope others feel the same..doubt it though
 
Last edited:
Back
Top