Um Hillary got the majority, and around 40% didn't bother to even vote. If they had Hills woulda won both popular and electoral votes.

Edited May 31, 20178 yr by Yeasty Clutch

Um Hillary got the majority, and around 40% didn't bother to even vote. If rhat had Hills woulda won both popular and electoral votes.

 

But the contest is decided on an electoral college, not the popular vote - and the only conclusion you can draw about abstainers in *any* election, is that they didn't care enough to vote.

The whole situation is like Brexit, and the US Presidential Election...

 

Loud voices may get media attention, but it was the silent majority who decided both contests, to the disbelief of those who prefer volume to votes...

Did you adopt a deliberate policy of not looking at the front pages in the referendum campaign? They were far from silent on the matter and were overwhelmingly biased in one direction.

Did you adopt a deliberate policy of not looking at the front pages in the referendum campaign? They were far from silent on the matter and were overwhelmingly biased in one direction.

 

You're right - since I'd long since made up my mind to vote Leave, I did indeed pay very little attention to the campaign.

 

 

 

 

You're right - since I'd long since made up my mind to vote Leave, I did indeed pay very little attention to the campaign.

So why did you claim that the quieter side won? It's simply not true.

So why did you claim that the quieter side won? It's simply not true.

 

Sorry, I was assuming you referred to the general public, rather than the media & establishment...

In other news, it has been confirmed that Corbyn will be taking part in tonight's election debate! I think that's a good idea as he has been coming across very well with recent media appearances.

In other news, it has been confirmed that Corbyn will be taking part in tonight's election debate! I think that's a good idea as he has been coming across very well with recent media appearances.

 

A certain German leader from 1933-45 was a very smooth talker too, and look how that turned out... :teresa:

Sorry, I was assuming you referred to the general public, rather than the media & establishment...

 

A lot of the Establishment wanted out so as to control the UK easier, you numpty.

A certain German leader from 1933-45 was a very smooth talker too, and look how that turned out... :teresa:

 

 

Just stop.

ffs, say all you want about him but he's not f***ing Hitler

Increasing taxation wouldn't raise anything like the money he's proposing to spend, so he'd have to borrow massively too - and debts eventually have to be repaid...

I agree with what your words are but not the implication.

 

I think it's important to break the link between household debt and national debt. They aren't the same thing so we shouldn't treat them that way when we think of them.

 

I disagree with borrowing to cover day to day spend. That should be costed from taxation and expected tax take. However, I am very much in favour of borrowing to invest in infrastructure and our economy. We can borrow, as a country, very cheaply. If we can source and contract effectively then I'm really in favour of investing in new schools and new hospitals and railways and bridges etc. These big projects typically have strong benefits for the economy during construction supporting jobs and then have an economic uplift afterwards which drives economic growth for the future

A certain German leader from 1933-45 was a very smooth talker too, and look how that turned out... :teresa:

Godwin's Law klaxon

Godwin's Law klaxon

 

Of course, but my point was that a smooth-talking politician does not necessarily make a good PM.

 

Personally, I wouldn't trust Corbyn to run a corner shop, let alone a whole country!

But you trust May???

 

Is it not possible that you don't trust him precisely because he comes from a different social class to most lwaders? Hence why papers laughed off pig gate, how droll, but attacked over Corbyn's tie and had journos out with tape measures every time he bowed?

But you trust May???

 

Is it not possible that you don't trust him precisely because he comes from a different social class to most lwaders? Hence why papers laughed off pig gate, how droll, but attacked over Corbyn's tie and had journos out with tape measures every time he bowed?

 

It's more a matter of choosing the lesser of two evils, as in the US election.

 

Yes, we don't vote directly for a PM here, but whichever party you do vote for, there are still only two people who could be PM.

 

In my case, I'm going to have to find a minor party to vote for, as none of the main 3 are acceptable choices to me.

So Ukip.

Of course, but my point was that a smooth-talking politician does not necessarily make a good PM.

 

Personally, I wouldn't trust Corbyn to run a corner shop, let alone a whole country!

Equally, the strongest leaders in the last century were people such as Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mussolini etc. Not a very impressive list really.

 

BTW, I wouldn't trust May to run a tea stall at a fete,

She actually reminds me of Maggie from Little Britain at the tea fayres, puking when non upper class people made the food!

So Ukip.

 

Given that the only other choice is the 'Hippy' party, it looks like it'll have to be UKIP.