I don't think there are any good reasons for getting rid of May. It would only destabilise the party and raise further concerns about the Tories' capacity to deliver on Brexit.
Sick, older lady is handed a P45 during a public speech at work!
- Thread starter Avenged7Fold
- Start date
I don't think there are any good reasons for getting rid of May. It would only destabilise the party and raise further concerns about the Tories' capacity to deliver on Brexit.
think it's hilarious and ironic that she was ripping corbyn this year for a 'coalition of chaos' and when he had people in his party trying to revolt and oust him but now its all happening to her.
Coalition of chaos with the dup and her own cabinet trying to get her out. As a labour voter i hope she stays as she hand the election over to us.
Coalition of chaos with the dup and her own cabinet trying to get her out. As a labour voter i hope she stays as she hand the election over to us.
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. There can be good reasons to do something and other good reasons to not do it.
He walked out of his own volition with the security detail, there was no need for the police to then subsequently intervene and arrest him. Do we really need police action taken after every incident of heckling?
Oh please, they are at the governments beck and call, the number of people arrested for victimless crimes at the behest of MP's are all the assurances I need.
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
The police side of things were handled fine. Its not like anyone, especially the party, would benefit from slapping the guy with anything but a stern word.
If they people just heckle and ruin these speeches, we would end up being run by whoever can talk the most smack... like the US
If they people just heckle and ruin these speeches, we would end up being run by whoever can talk the most smack... like the US
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
I am mixed on whether she should go or not.
The stability argument is a terrible one when you talk about putting a replacement in. Stability rarely comes with dramatic political change. It is laughable if you think that calling for someones head every bad year will lead to stability. Enabling a political culture where you are rewarded with a chance at the top for throwing your own party leader under the bus is just asking for trouble.
Every time she has tried to build or solidify power, it has been done by capitalising on our desperation for stability. Replacing her the same way hardly solves the problem, it just swaps the person and reinforces this kind of politics.
Apart from the obvious and selfish bad decisions she has made for power, has she done terribly badly? Well, imo she seems disconnected and self serving but i cant think of any other viable candidate that will replace her which isn't to be honest. If I had my wish, as unpopular as the opinion would be, i would still have Dave here.
The stability argument is a terrible one when you talk about putting a replacement in. Stability rarely comes with dramatic political change. It is laughable if you think that calling for someones head every bad year will lead to stability. Enabling a political culture where you are rewarded with a chance at the top for throwing your own party leader under the bus is just asking for trouble.
Every time she has tried to build or solidify power, it has been done by capitalising on our desperation for stability. Replacing her the same way hardly solves the problem, it just swaps the person and reinforces this kind of politics.
Apart from the obvious and selfish bad decisions she has made for power, has she done terribly badly? Well, imo she seems disconnected and self serving but i cant think of any other viable candidate that will replace her which isn't to be honest. If I had my wish, as unpopular as the opinion would be, i would still have Dave here.
Isn't that a good reason?
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
Not really, it is all about appearances. Whether you are pro brexit or not, a change in Tory leaderships is bad for how the outside world view us. If we continue to seem unstable with an ever changing government, it just puts doubt in investors and gives companies a second thought about sticking around. It is headlines of like companies looking to strike deals before committing to stay, that hurt us and our economy. I doubt the Tory plan would change with the leadership whoever got put in front. Actually i doubt negotiations would be any different if Cameron were still around.
I am not pro-brexit, not pro TM and not a fan of the current Tory offerings but i dont see any benefit of getting rid of her and dont like the fact that people are just waiting for their leader to stack it so they can sell them out for a chance at wearing the crown. It creates such toxic politics with no incentive to make a hard decision for a long term benefit
Last edited:
I'd be amazed if any other country thought the "strong & stable" thing was based on reality.
She's backpeddled on so many things she said the tories had planned.
If, as news feeds show, tories in the party are all set for booting her out, no doubt the unstable part there is already a major problem.
Perhaps maybot's replacement may (hehe) do better, may do worse, but leaving someone in power that's clearly making a mess of everything isn't a good idea.
She's backpeddled on so many things she said the tories had planned.
If, as news feeds show, tories in the party are all set for booting her out, no doubt the unstable part there is already a major problem.
Perhaps maybot's replacement may (hehe) do better, may do worse, but leaving someone in power that's clearly making a mess of everything isn't a good idea.
She's surrounded by pro-brexit and anti brexit Mp's within the same party. It will be a massive mess you will see, especially with Hammond trying to stick his nose in it.
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
You think removing the top dog and letting the rest of the pack fight over the bone will be less of a mess?
It will only lead to them selling each other out at every opportunity. You may even have the party support split as a result of the in fighting after she leaves and labour may soak up some support, which will no doubt be followed by more in fighting as you have a push for a change in labour leadership with these swing voters coming over to that side.
Things can most definitely get messier. I don't see anyone who is going to do a better job.
It will only lead to them selling each other out at every opportunity. You may even have the party support split as a result of the in fighting after she leaves and labour may soak up some support, which will no doubt be followed by more in fighting as you have a push for a change in labour leadership with these swing voters coming over to that side.
Things can most definitely get messier. I don't see anyone who is going to do a better job.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,552
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Dave was a far superior PM. May is a terrible orator, writes(or has written for her) poor speeches, cheap catch phrases that almost always seem to backfire, constant policy u turns and seemingly poor leadership. When the country needs a united front, she is saying we need to stand united, nothing she says or does indicates that is the case.
The police would have looked rather silly if they'd just let him walk out without doing any further checks. They did exactly as much as they needed to do and released him as soon as it was appropriate to.
Hilarious. You're clearly completely out of touch with the policing in your own country if you actually believe that.
So we arrest a heckler for appearances sake, wonderful, just what we need. The common sense thing would have been to just let him leave and be done with it.
It's called empirical evidence. The police have been a scourge to many, arresting people for things like drug possession as people like May bring in new laws to criminalise people. The new bill criminalising designer drugs saw tax paying businesses shut down and people forced to turn to the black market, it was shocking.
Last edited:
They probably needed to find out who he was and how he got in. It's beyond laughable, into the realms of insane, that you think the police are looking to do TM any favours. They weren't doing TM a favour - they were doing their job and they dealt with it at the lowest level possible. He was briefly arrested to find out who he was and how he got in, then released very soon afterwards.
A) The police don't get to make the rules of the country, that is up to the public, politicians and top level legal experts to devise. The police enforce the rules of the land, no matter who they were brought in by, with the end goal being for the good of the general populous.
B) The fact you are arguing against criminalising legal highs shows you know nothing about the social problems they cause, the chemistry behind them or the laws that allowed these "tax paying businesses", as you put it, to operate with impunity. Their continued operation was a technicality of law, which was written decades ago when these sorts of modern adaptations to drug compounds weren't even envisaged, let alone for legislation to be drawn with them in mind. Laws need modernising every so often to allow them to keep up with how society is - right from the menial ones, to the very important ones.
If you believe in decriminalising drugs, then use your rights as a free citizen of this country to campaign for decriminalisation. You may even be surprised by the number of "pigs" who agree or partially agree with you...
No, the old gem that I posted a well thought out, coherent response to your points and all you could do is respond with absolutely nothing of substance.
I think that says it all.