jamie wrote: Dan Harwood wrote: jamie wrote:
I think that 100 were mainly against him because they assumed that his policies and leadership would make the Labour Party unelectable. Pretty much the same as everyone else thought and were all proved wrong.
I think we can assume they will take a slightly different stance after the last election results.
Jamie, they lost?
Only just. If it hadn't been for the fucking shambles of the SNP then they would have won. And if the Grenfall Tower had happened a week sooner then I really think they would have won even more of the vote.
The last few months have raised the awareness of him hugely - so much so that even the Daily Mail have backed off him.
They may have lost but you can bet that with the amount of people that voted for them and the way the populus swung towards Labour over recent weeks, that any decisions that the Tories try to impliment will be a lot less harsh than before for fear of losing even more votes.
To me it's laughable that we just have 2 parties which trade places here and there. One appears to like spending money we don't have and the other likes to cut to protect the middle/ upper classes.
We go round and round and round doing the same shit. Blair is the neew messiah oh no he's not he's a baby killer.
Cameron is cleaning up the mess. Oh no he's not he's taken us into brexit the cunt.
Then there is may. Jesus Christ. When will all this shit end. When will we actually have a decent run and actually have a process that reflects 2017. The fact we can't vote online says it all. They are all (including Corbyn) a bunch of political cunts that haven't earned my trust. Give a straight answer ffs.
The next election should be run on binary only questions and at the hit of a button online. Fu k off.
As an aside under who's watch was the cladding installed? Does anyone know that?
Republik of Saddleworth