Labour & Sinn Fein coalition?

[LoveCurryPies]

We might be governed by Sinn Fein in a weeks time!

[BennyD]

Good God, that would be a good time to leave. With Corbyn and Adams, both of whom hate England, at the helm we would be right royally f*cked.

[Damo]

Yeah but 4 extra bank holidays per year!

[randomclaret2]

Sinn Fein are abstentionists

[Wexford_Claret]

Sinn Féin don't take their Westminster seats- won't this make a difference?

[Spijed]

Sinn Fein are abstentionists

Considering they never take their seats at Westminster they wouldn't be able to form a coalition as it would require them to turn up and vote.

[Rowls]

Cheeky but caught out early.

Nice try.

[nil_desperandum]

Can't happen for all sorts if reasons, but the numbers couldn't add up anyway.

[1968claret]

Been reading the daily mail? Just wondering how many more scare stories they can publish over the next week!

[If it be your will]

.

[HatfieldClaret]

Shaking head. No.

[Clarets4me]

(shaking head:) Please, everyone, just vote Labour...

If Labour form a Government, MI5 & MI6 will be report directly to Diane Abbott, Labour's new Home Secretary, and Jeremy Corbyn will be chairing meetings of COBRA....

Read that sentence again, before casting your votes !

[SammyBoy]

The right wing media are really scraping the barrel now .. sigh.

[Imploding Turtle]

From social media:



Here’s what I’m really struggling to understand. All I’ve ever heard from people, for years, is:

“bloody bankers and their bonuses”
“bloody rich and their offshore tax havens “
“bloody politicians with their lying and second homes”
“bloody corporations paying less tax than me”
“bloody Establishment, they’re all in it together”
“it’ll never change, there’s no point in voting”

And quite rightly so, I said all the same things.

But then someone comes along that’s different. He upsets the bankers and the rich. The Tory politicians hate him along with most of the labour politicians. The corporations throw more money at the politicians to keep him quiet. And the Establishment is visibly shaken. I’ve never seen the Establishment so genuinely scared of a single person.

So the media arm of the establishment gets involved. Theresa phones Rupert asking what he can do, and he tells her to keep her mouth shut, don’t do the live debate, he’ll sort this out. So the media goes into overdrive with:

“she’s strong and stable”
“he’s a clown”
“he’s not a leader”
“look he can’t even control his own party”
“he’ll ruin the economy”
“how’s he gonna pay for it all?!”
“he’s a terrorist sympathiser, burn him, burn the terrorist sympathiser”

And what do we? We’ve waited forever for an honest politician to come along but instead of getting behind him we bow to the establishment like good little workers. They whistle and we do a little dance for them. We run around like hypnotised robots repeating headlines we’ve read, all nodding and agreeing. Feeling really proud of ourselves because we think we’ve came up with our very own first political opinion. But we haven’t, we haven’t come up with anything. This is how you tell. No matter where someone lives in the country, they’re repeating the same headlines, word for word. From Cornwall to Newcastle people are saying:

“he’s a clown”
“he’s a threat to the country”
“she’s strong and stable”
“he’ll take us back to the 70s”

And there’s nothing else, there’s no further opinion. There’s no evidence apart from one radio 5 interview that isn’t even concrete evidence, he actually condemns the violence of both sides in the interview. There’s no data or studies or official reports to back anything up. Try and think really hard why you think he’s a clown, other than the fact he looks like a geography teacher (no offence geography teachers) because he hasn’t done anything clownish from what I’ve seen.

And you’re not on this planet if you think the establishment and the media aren’t all in it together.

You think Richard Branson, who’s quietly winning NHS contracts, wants Corbyn in?
You think Rupert Murdoch, who’s currently trying to widen his media monopoly by buying sky outright, wants Jeremy in?
You think the Barclay brothers, with their offshore residencies, want him in?
You think Philip Green, who stole all the pensions from BHS workers and claims his wife owns Top Shop because she lives in Monaco, wants Corbyn in?
You think the politicians, both Labour and Tory, with their second homes and alcohol paid for by us, want him in?
You think Starbucks, paying near zero tax, wants him in?
You think bankers, with their multi million pound bonuses, want him in?

And do you think they don’t have contact with May? Or with the media? You honestly think that these millionaires and billionaires are the sort of people that go “ah well, easy come easy go, it was nice while it lasted”?? I wouldn’t be if my personal fortune was at risk, I’d be straight on the phone to Theresa May or Rupert Murdoch demanding this gets sorted immediately.

Because here’s a man, a politician that doesn’t lie and can’t lie. He could have said whatever would get him votes anytime he wanted but he hasn’t. He lives in a normal house like us and uses the bus just like us. He’s fought for justice and peace for nearly 40 years. He has no career ambitions. And his seat is untouchable. That’s one of the greatest testimonies. No one comes close to removing him from his constituency, election after election.

His Manifesto is fully costed. It all adds up, yes there’s some borrowing but that’s just to renationalise the railway, you know we already subsidise them and they make profit yeah? One more time… WE subsidise the railway companies and they walk away with a profit, just try and grasp the level of **** taking going on there.

Unlike the Tory manifesto with a £9 billion hole, their figures don’t even add up.

And it benefits all of us, young, old, working, disabled, everyone. The only people it hurts are the establishment, the rich, the bankers, the top 5% highest earners.

Good, screw them, it’s long overdue. #VoteLabour #ForTheManyNotTheFew !

[Imploding Turtle]

But don't you dare talk about an emergency budget during a referendum campaign because that's scaremongering.

There are a few hypocrites in this thread,

[Darthlaw]

For every bit as bad the right wing media are at giving weighted articles, the left step in with stuff on social media like the tripe quoted by IT.

The trick is to do the research yourself and find the truth between the two.

[dsr]

There's more to being a good politician than honesty. Benn and Foot were both honest as well. I reckon "cunning, crafty and competent" beats "honest and stupid" every day. Honesty is a good thing, but I'm not going to vote for someone who I believe is honestly going to lead the country into bankruptcy and other disasters.

[BleedingClaret]

Sinn Fein are already in coalition with the devil...
Whilst Diane Abbott is away with the fairies

[Imploding Turtle]

For every bit as bad the right wing media are at giving weighted articles, the left step in with stuff on social media like the tripe quoted by IT.

The trick is to do the research yourself and find the truth between the two.

So some bloke/woman on Social media is the equal and opposite to the Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, Daily Express and The Sun?



This post from social media makes a lot of sense. I'm not saying it's perfectly accurate with its numbers, but the argument that Corbyn is exactly the kind of politician we've been crying out for only to bend over for the right-wing press an vote for their preferred PM is a good one.

He's not perfect. I don't like his Falklands comments any more than you, and i'm against his opinion on Trident, but he's not going to enact any of those opinions, even if he still holds them, because he can't. He'd never get them passed in parliament. But the Tories can easily get to work on gutting the public sector some more, and privatising it some more. These Tories are a threat and they need to be kicked out. If we don't kick them out then we deserve everything that's coming to us. And i'll be sure to remind you about this chance we had to remove them, because i really, really enjoy smugly telling people "i told you so".

[dsr]

What might be interesting is if Corbyn could cobble together a coalition with the SNP, Plaid Cymru, and the Irish republicans including Sinn Fein. It's Sinn Fein's own decision to opt of of Parliament; would they reconsider if it included a guaranteed referendum (or pair of referendums, presumably - the Irish Republic would need one too) and a PM who wants Northern Ireland united with the Republic?

[Sidney1st]

If the Tories are so bloody bad why do they keep getting re-elected?
Could it possibly be because Labour just aren't as good as some of you think they are?

[Imploding Turtle]

What might be interesting is if Corbyn could cobble together a coalition with the SNP, Plaid Cymru, and the Irish republicans including Sinn Fein. It's Sinn Fein's own decision to opt of of Parliament; would they reconsider if it included a guaranteed referendum (or pair of referendums, presumably - the Irish Republic would need one too) and a PM who wants Northern Ireland united with the Republic?

I like Corbyn and most of his views, but this would lead to the biggest and fastest revolt in parliament's history and would be funny as **** to watch.

[Imploding Turtle]

If the Tories are so bloody bad why do they keep getting re-elected?
Could it possibly be because Labour just aren't as good as some of you think they are?

If Corbyn is so bloody bad why does he keep getting re-elected?
Could it possibly be because Corbyn just isn't as bad as some of you think he is?

[nil_desperandum]

If the Tories are so bloody bad why do they keep getting re-elected?
Could it possibly be because Labour just aren't as good as some of you think they are?

The answer should be obvious.
It's the FTTP system.
When did the Tories last gain more than 50% of the popular vote?
I'll let you discover that for yourself , (I know the answer, and it's not during the lifetime of any of our posters, or at least I don't think we've any posters of that age!!).

[Rowls]

Some people need to understand that adding up a sum correctly is not the same thing as a manifesto promise "adding up".

It doesn't mean you check if they carried the 1 and kept the tens and units in the right columns.It means you assess how reasonable their claims are.

The IFS have torn the Labour manifesto to shreds. They say Labour won't be able to raise anywhere near the amount they're claiming. Tax receipts will likely fall. Spending will spiral. It's the worst possible combination.

When people say Jeremy Corbyn's figures "don't add up" they don't mean that the simple sum in the manifesto is wrong - they mean his Labour party of Marxists lacks any kind of economic credibility.

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

Does the Tory manifesto add up or is it more a set of sums that add up correctly?

[DCWat]

Some people need to understand that adding up a sum correctly is not the same thing as a manifesto promise "adding up".

It doesn't mean you check if they carried the 1 and kept the tens and units in the right columns.It means you assess how reasonable their claims are.

The IFS have torn the Labour manifesto to shreds. They say Labour won't be able to raise anywhere near the amount they're claiming. Tax receipts will likely fall. Spending will spiral. It's the worst possible combination.

When people say Jeremy Corbyn's figures "don't add up" they don't mean that the simple sum in the manifesto is wrong - they mean his Labour party of Marxists lacks any kind of economic credibility.

Haven't they been as damning of both the Tory and Labour manifestos?

[Rowls]

Haven't they been as damning of both the Tory and Labour manifestos?

The damning of the Tory manifesto is different - they haven't bothered to cost it.

Labour have "costed" theirs and it "doesn't add up" **.

So we the electorate have to make a judgement call.

Do you trust Jeremy Corbyn's Marxist Labour Party who want to return to the tax and spend policies which Britain ditched after the Winter of Discontent way back in 1979 or would you rather trust the Conservatives to manage the country's economy?

It's a judgement call people have to make.

[Spijed]

The damning of the Tory manifesto is different - they haven't bothered to cost it.

Labour have "costed" theirs and it "doesn't add up" **.

So we the electorate have to make a judgement call.

Do you trust Jeremy Corbyn's Marxist Labour Party who want to return to the tax and spend policies which Britain ditched after the Winter of Discontent way back in 1979 or would you rather trust the Conservatives to manage the country's economy?

It's a judgement call people have to make.

Rowls, whatever you think of Corbyn and past allegiances, one thing that's been highlighted during the campaign is that he's a far better politician than May ever will be. It's quite telling that no-one can ever talk about Teresa May and give examples where she has done well, either as a MP or as the current PM. She's basically the "Ali Dia" of the political world - someone who wanted to be the PM but simply doesn't have the skill levels to go with it.

[dsr]

Rowls, whatever you think of Corbyn and past allegiances, one thing that's been highlighted during the campaign is that he's a far better politician than May ever will be. It's quite telling that no-one can ever talk about Teresa May and give examples where she has done well, either as a MP or as the current PM. She's basically the "Ali Dia" of the political world - someone who wanted to be the PM but simply doesn't have the skill levels to go with it.

Can you give examples of Corbyn's successes in his 34 years in Parliament, especially his record in the Cabinet and Shadow Cabinet?

[IanMcL]

Nah!

[Rowls]

Rowls, whatever you think of Corbyn and past allegiances, one thing that's been highlighted during the campaign is that he's a far better politician than May ever will be.

This is clearly just not true.

He's a much better speaker than her but frankly, a highly coordinated parrot would make a better speaker than Theresa May.

Corbyn's record speaks for itself:

30 - THIRTY! - years as a back bench MP and when the Momentum movement placed their patsy at the head of the Labour party what clips could the BBC unearth of his achievements in his 30 (THIRTY!) years in Parliament?

In fact, let's play a game! Pick a town at random (how about we go down through the Conference one team at a time?) and we'll look up the MP and if they've been standing for more than 10 years I bet that they'll have a better record than Corbyn did as a back bencher.

What were Corbyn's achievements as a back bencher? A private members bill? A campaign of some sorts which resulted in policy changes? A contribution to a manifesto? A junior minister position? A shadow cabinet role?

Hang on, what was that clip the BBC found of him when he became Labour leader?

Here it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZsYvkTw4Rg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's Jeremy defending his right to wear a jumper. This is it. Jeremy Corbyn's high point. If Momentum had been able to convince any other stooge to stand for the Labour leadership this would still be the only clip of Jeremy Corbyn the BBC kept on file.

[Rowls]

It's quite telling that no-one can ever talk about Teresa May and give examples where she has done well, either as a MP or as the current PM. She's basically the "Ali Dia" of the political world - someone who wanted to be the PM but simply doesn't have the skill levels to go with it.

Sorry spijed but this is nonsense.

She has only got to where she is by steadfast hard, competent work.

Her record as a politician is clear and there for all to see. Check it out on wikipedia.

She may have the charisma of a jellyfish and be awful at off the cuff stuff but she is competent and professional. Her mastery of her political briefs is legendary, as is her work ethic.

I don't give two hoots about her personally. She does not represent my vision of what a Conservative party should stand for very well at all.

But the tosh you've posted it that exactly - utter tosh. Sorry.

Anyway, it'll all be over soon.

[JohnMcGreal]

Theresa May has now withdrawn from interviews for the BBC's local radio network.

One week before the early election that she called.

She's an absolute farce and is nowhere near fit to be Prime Minister.

[IanMcL]

She has already been dismissed by Europe.

[Rowls]

OK.... Forest Green's MP is ....

Oh crap.

It's a Jeremy Corbyn kind of arse.

But unlike thicky Corbyn, he does have a degree and further higher education qualifications.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Drew_(politician" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

[Rowls]

Next!

Tranmere.

Constituency in Birkenhead.

MP is Frank Field.

Frank Field is capable of achieving more in one day than Jeremy Corbyn could manage in 30 years.

Frank Field's back bench record puts Jeremy Corbyn to shame. It truly, truly does.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Field_(British_politician" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

[Rowls]

Forgot Lincoln!

Lincoln = Karl McCartney (Conservative). Even though this breaks my "10 year minimum rule" this guy has already achieved more in 7 years than Jeremy Corbyn did in 30.

He's been appointed to the "Brexit Committee" and been appointed to the Conservatives influential 1922 Committee.

[Imploding Turtle]

I think we've broken our Torybot. Someone please take Rowls to the mechanic to get fixed.

[Rowls]

Dagenham = John Cruddas (Labour)

Shadow cabinet and hugely influential in the circles of ex-Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband.

[Rowls]

Aldershot = Gerald Howarth (Conservative)

Parliamentary record:

Parliamentary Private Secretary to Michael Spicer when Under-Secretary of State at the Department of Energy 1987–90, and as Minister of State, Department of the Environment in 1990

[Rowls]

So there we have it.

6 MPs picked at random and 5 out of 6 have achieved more than Jeremy Corbyn ever did.

Which is just as expected.

The man is an incompetent fool.

He was an utter nobody until Momentum propped him up and made Labour leader. He is an imbecile.

[Imploding Turtle]

6 MPs picked at random and 5 out of 6 have achieved more than Jeremy Corbyn ever did.

How many of those 6 became leader of their party?

[Spijed]

So there we have it.

6 MPs picked at random and 5 out of 6 have achieved more than Jeremy Corbyn ever did.

Which is just as expected.

The man is an incompetent fool.

He was an utter nobody until Momentum propped him up and made Labour leader. He is an imbecile.

And yet....wouldn't it have been simpler just to give examples as to why Theresa May is a much better politician, and why she'll make a good PM?

[Rowls]

And yet....wouldn't it have been simpler just to give examples as to why Theresa May is a much better politician, and why she'll make a good PM?

You can look it up on her wikipedia entry. Her record -especially as Home Secretary- speaks for itself. If you understand the challenges of that job and know how the problems the role presented were seen as surefire political poison you'll realise what a good job she did.

On the other hand, Jeremy Corbyn stood for leadership of the Labour Party because it was "his turn". The man's record is genuinely awful.

[Imploding Turtle]

You can look it up on her wikipedia entry. Her record -especially as Home Secretary- speaks for itself. If you understand the challenges of that job and know how the problems the role presented were seen as surefire political poison you'll realise what a good job she did.

On the other hand, Jeremy Corbyn stood for leadership of the Labour Party because it was "his turn". The man's record is genuinely awful.

But if it speaks for itself then why can't you speak for it? You managed to speak for 6 others' records but why not the Prime Minister's?

[Spijed]

You can look it up on her wikipedia entry. Her record -especially as Home Secretary- speaks for itself. If you understand the challenges of that job and know how the problems the role presented were seen as surefire political poison you'll realise what a good job she did.

On the other hand, Jeremy Corbyn stood for leadership of the Labour Party because it was "his turn". The man's record is genuinely awful.

I did look at Wiki...and very bland.

As for "his turn", how on earth did Teresa May get the job?...by default.

[aggi]

Sorry spijed but this is nonsense.

She has only got to where she is by steadfast hard, competent work.

Her record as a politician is clear and there for all to see. Check it out on wikipedia.

She may have the charisma of a jellyfish and be awful at off the cuff stuff but she is competent and professional. Her mastery of her political briefs is legendary, as is her work ethic.

I don't give two hoots about her personally. She does not represent my vision of what a Conservative party should stand for very well at all.

But the tosh you've posted it that exactly - utter tosh. Sorry.

Anyway, it'll all be over soon.

I checked it out on Wikipedia as you suggested.

She did good work on
minimising civil liberties (snooper's charter, David Miranda),
getting rid of many thousands of police officers,
curbing the right to protest (admittedly she was also in charge of the home office during some of the worst rioting for many years so didn't do too well),
bringing net immigration levels down (erm, kind of down) from 210,000 to 290,000 (despite promising levels of 100,000),
fabricating a story about being unable to deport someone because of a cat,
being found in contempt of court
being willing to allow someone to die "to score a political point" over the deportation of mentally ill Nigerian man Isa Muazu,
Enoch Powell-esque vans with advertising hoardings on them telling immigrants to "go home" (these were also found to be in breach of the Advertising Standards Agency due to them being untrue, not the first time that's happened for her)
overseeing a huge backlog that was allowed to build up for passport applications.

I guess maybe you just have a low bar for competent.

[Rowls]

I did look at Wiki...and very bland.

As for "his turn", how on earth did Teresa May get the job?...by default.

They are both essentially leader by default but the idea that their Parliamentary careers are in any way comparable is laughable.

Take a look at the wikipedia page. Her successes and failures are there to be judged but she lasted in the role longer than any other Home Secretary since 1892.

There is simply no contest as to who is the "better politician". It is Theresa May by a landslide.

That is my only point here.

People can -and will- decide for themselves if they think Corbyn is a suitable man to be our Prime Minister and negotiate Brexit with Diane Abbott by his side.

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

I checked it out on Wikipedia as you suggested.

She did good work on
minimising civil liberties (snooper's charter, David Miranda),
getting rid of many thousands of police officers,
curbing the right to protest (admittedly she was also in charge of the home office during some of the worst rioting for many years so didn't do too well),
bringing net immigration levels down (erm, kind of down) from 210,000 to 290,000 (despite promising levels of 100,000),
fabricating a story about being unable to deport someone because of a cat,
being found in contempt of court
being willing to allow someone to die "to score a political point" over the deportation of mentally ill Nigerian man Isa Muazu,
Enoch Powell-esque vans with advertising hoardings on them telling immigrants to "go home" (these were also found to be in breach of the Advertising Standards Agency due to them being untrue, not the first time that's happened for her)
overseeing a huge backlog that was allowed to build up for passport applications.

I guess maybe you just have a low bar for competent.

Aggi surely you are just highlighting what a strong and stable leader she is!?