Poll: Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Mk II

[TheBiznes]

@StriderX
Caused by Gordon Brown removing regulatory constraints in the markets in 2007 that led up to the crash. Hence reason Labour should take responsibility.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-13032013

BTW please ask him where are gold reserves are?

 

[Cosimo]

So much for not electioneering today and showing some respect. Labour turned up at our door so I tore up their leaflet and told him to take a long walk. My wife has just done the same to the Con man... I guess that we won't be voting for either.

 

[CREATIVE!11]

That wasnt the question. Though people seem to have a hard on for 2008 and blaming a sub-prime market crash on Labour.

Yep.

Didn't you get the memo, 2008 was Labours fault.

 

[StriderX]

So much for not electioneering today and showing some respect. Labour turned up at our door so I tore up their leaflet and told him to take a long walk. My wife has just done the same to the Con man... I guess that we won't be voting for either.

So if a terrorist attack occurs every day of an election trail, we should just not bother huh?

 

[Caged]

Local campaigning was always going to continue, the national campaigns were suspended - sort of - there are a lot of people who think TM went a bit party political in the second half of her speech this morning.

 

[antijoke]

So much for not electioneering today and showing some respect. Labour turned up at our door so I tore up their leaflet and told him to take a long walk. My wife has just done the same to the Con man... I guess that we won't be voting for either.

Local campaigning carried on only national campaigning took a break.

 

[Caged]

@StriderX
Caused by Gordon Brown removing regulatory constraints in the markets in 2007 that led up to the crash. Hence reason Labour should take responsibility.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-13032013

BTW please ask him where are gold reserves are?

He does take responsibility, in that article that you linked. But the 2008 financial crisis didn't start here, and the Conservatives were not opposed to the regulatory changes.

In reference to gold sales, see https://www.ft.com/content/5788dbac-7680-11e0-b05b-00144feabdc0

 

[atpbx]

He does take responsibility, in that article that you linked. But the 2008 financial crisis didn't start here, and the Conservatives were not opposed to the regulatory changes.

In reference to gold sales, see https://www.ft.com/content/5788dbac-7680-11e0-b05b-00144feabdc0

Gordon is also responsible for crashing the private pensions of millions of pensioners as well.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ruinous-tax-wrecked-retirements-millions.html

It's the mail, but it contains a little more detail than their usual "labor are a bunch of incompetent communists" spiel.

 

[StriderX]

Gordon is also responsible for crashing the private pensions of millions of pensioners as well.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ruinous-tax-wrecked-retirements-millions.html

It's the mail, but it contains a little more detail than their usual "labor are a bunch of incompetent communists" spiel.

You mean the pension system we can't afford anyway?

 

[Caged]

They're private pensions in fairness

 

[Freakbro]

And Brown did rob them...

 

[delta0]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...licy-if-terrorists-are-attacking-Britain.html
I wasn't voting for him anyway but I can't see how anyone can support him on this.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Looking at the chart it looks like to me there was a huge acceleration from 2008 to 2010 when Labour were the government,

My memory is poor, but I'm sure something happened in 2008 that cause that, and it wasn't Labours fault............

 

[stewski]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...licy-if-terrorists-are-attacking-Britain.html
I wasn't voting for him anyway but I can't see how anyone can support him on this.

You'd rather not allow highly trained individuals in specific, complex, unfolding circumstances make their own decisions?
If an armed police officer kills a terrorist, no one is saying they shouldn't have, heck on average even in tragic circumstances they have and will continue to get a weighting in their favour for balance of evidence, what on earth good does a policy/ruling do?

 

[Deleted member 66701]

of course you dont need factual research, as factual research says its reduced drastically...

So the Tories have managed to reduce it to the same level that Labour had it at prior to the 2008 crash - good show!

 

[Deleted member 66701]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...licy-if-terrorists-are-attacking-Britain.html
I wasn't voting for him anyway but I can't see how anyone can support him on this.

Sounds like a perfectly rational and well reasoned stance to me.

I agreed with his statement 19 months ago and I still agree with it.

Oh and:-

I wasn't voting for him anyway

I didn't realise you lived in his constituency?

 

[delta0]

You'd rather not allow highly trained individuals in specific, complex, unfolding circumstances make their own decisions?
If an armed police officer kills a terrorist, no one is saying they shouldn't have, heck on average even in tragic circumstances they have and will continue to get a weighting in their favour for balance of evidence, what on earth good does a policy/ruling do?

Exactly. Corbyn's view of taking away the decision of shoot to kill from the officers is terrible. After what happened yesterday what on earth could they have done. Taser them? Let them continue on their rampage!? I can not support him on this approach to terrorism. Action needs to be swift and abrupt in these situations.

Sounds like a perfectly rational and well reasoned stance to me.

I agreed with his statement 19 months ago and I still agree with it.

Your kidding? It is indefensible to support ending shoot to kill of terrorists by the police.

 

[Caged]

Sounds like a perfectly rational and well reasoned stance to me.

I agreed with his statement 19 months ago and I still agree with it.

Oh and:-



I didn't realise you lived in his constituency?

That wasn't even his statement and IIRC Kuenssberg got into trouble over it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-38666914

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Exactly. Corbyn's view of taking away the decision of shoot to kill from the officers is terrible. After what happened yesterday what on earth could they have done. Taser them? Let them continue on their rampage!? I can not support him on this approach to terrorism. Action needs to be swift and abrupt in these situations.

Erm, the shoot to kill policy in question (which the Tories never implemented in the end) would do exactly that - the proposed policy mandated that firearms officers MUST shoot to kill when engaging terrorists, rather than letting the firearms officers make that call.

I can not support him on this approach to terrorism.

It'd probably help if you actually understood what his approach to terrorism is.

That wasn't even his statement and IIRC Kuenssberg got into trouble over it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-38666914

Exactly - see above.

 

[stewski]

Exactly. Corbyn's view of taking away the decision of shoot to kill from the officers is terrible. After what happened yesterday what on earth could they have done. Taser them? Let them continue on their rampage!? I can not support him on this approach to terrorism. Action needs to be swift and abrupt in these situations.


Your kidding? It is indefensible to support ending shoot to kill of terrorists by the police.

You are misrepresenting him and to do so you entirely ignored my post.
NO ONE has said police cannot shot to kill terrorists!

In my opinion a POLICY of shoot to kill removes the highly trained officers right to make on the ground operational decisions!