What's that smell!

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Refusing to take part in a live TV debate is cowardice, a sign of a person running scared of the opposition

That's one way of looking at it. The other is that it's pointless and it is. Many seem to have forgotten JC's new politics, including him.  A better use of that time is a q and a I believe and much more grown up.  The debates become a slanging match which helps none of us.

[not on facebook]

Talking live on tv with a Kay burley type of tv presenter trying to up her/his protocall is sick .

Like I said before it's a yank custom and any idiot out here that falls for it will be turning up at the KMS car park hours well before kick off ,setting up untold bar bee Qs with a boot full of Budweiser having a cold one > shouting ' yeeeee harrr go rovers go '

How can you judge any PM via a tv debate ffs

[Mike_F]

My ideal party would be one that tries to serve the whole electorate rich, middling and poor. I don't want people punished for doing well but i also don't want disabled people getting their benefits stopped if they are genuine. I want a government that is fair with all.

I also think the liberals are just too wishy washy

You've just described the party you want then dismissed the one with that exact manifesto as "too wishy washy".

I think I can see what you're trying to get at and it's one of the reasons I joined; to influence from within rather than stand outside moaning.

I've consistently given feedback that I absolutely believe that everybody is born with equal rights regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion or lack thereof etc. etc. That respect for freedom and a broader respect for a freedom of choice and thought is a core principal of liberalism. The flipside to that feedback is that I have just as consistently said that we must be very tough on those who willingly do things to endanger the freedom of others. Criminals, terrorists, fundamentalists and the like are enemies of the libertarian society and have made the decision to give up their rights. They cannot and must not be tolerated. The party needs to make efforts to overcome the common perception that they are all for the rights of the perpetrators whilst forgetting the victims of crime and criminality.

If you don't think a party out there represents you, join the one that is nearest to your ideal and do something about it!

[Glyn_Wigley]

Talking live on tv with a Kay burley type of tv presenter trying to up her/his protocall is sick .

Like I said before it's a yank custom and any idiot out here that falls for it will be turning up at the KMS car park hours well before kick off ,setting up untold bar bee Qs with a boot full of Budweiser having a cold one > shouting ' yeeeee harrr go rovers go '

How can you judge any PM via a tv debate ffs

By what they say of course. It's not exactly difficult to grasp.

As for it being a Yank custom, I take it you've never heard the word hustings before?

[Glyn_Wigley]

Refusing to take part in a live TV debate is cowardice, a sign of a person running scared of the opposition

It's someone with nothing to say and afraid of being shown as having nothing to say live on national tv. Her mantra this election is obviously going to be 'strong and stable government', which means sod all. I'd rather have a shambolic government going in the right direction than a strong one going in the opposite direction.

[roversdude]

I don't think there is much to be scared off tbh

[Filo]

I don't think there is much to be scared off tbh

Plenty to be scared of when you don't know what to say when the opposition parties challenge her policies

[wilts rover]

Although perhaps it should be a requirement to have a public debate, the fact that it's isn't means that she is quite within her rights not to take part in one. And why should she? Why would she risk what is considered to be a massive lead over her opponents for the sake of giving them a chance to seduce the public by no doubt talking fantasy about what they intend to do should they get in?

It would be like a double or quit scenario where Corbyn has everything to gain, and May has everything to lose.

If you can't face difficult questions from an invited and vetted tv audience - how on earth are you going to conduct difficult negotiations with European leaders/major world politicians/big business leaders?

If you claim to be so concerned about the country and people's fears - why wont you listed to their issues outside your own handpicked meetings?

Those are the questions Mrs M has to manage - does look a weaker leader not facing questions in a debate - or facing them and not being able to answer them?

[wilts rover]

Surely PR would produce Governments without too much extremism ?

I know they can be unstable producing many many elections for some Countries (Italy) but we would end up with a more middle of the road approach and get fairer representation for so called minority Parties who might get 10% of the votes cast Nationwide but 0% of Seats in Parliament

I know the First past the Post system suits the big 2 Parties and so they wont be like Turkeys and vote for Christmas AND they did manage to "squash" the latest attempt for us to vote for it BUT we as a nation need to keep going going going till it is our way of voting

This is supposed to be a Democratic country as people keep telling those who voted Remain. Scottish Krankie despite losing the Independence Vote (a once a lifetime vote supposedly) will keep going and going till she / they get their way - and of course the Anti Europe people fought over 30 years for an exit from EEC and finally won. If they had lost they would have continued on and on - so I say lets head towards PR and keep on going till we get it (though too late for me I suspect)

Didn't we have a referendum about that which hardly anyone bothered to vote in?

[Bentley Bullet]

Just because she chooses not to have a TV debate doesn't necessarily mean she can't, it's more likely to mean that she doesn't need to. So I'll ask you again, if she doesn't need to, why should she, After all, she hardly going to convince you to vote for her is she?

[tommy toes]

I'd like her to do it just to see if she can think on her feet. So far she's gone on about a strong and stable government and nowt else.

[Bentley Bullet]

So would I, Tommy.

[wilts rover]

Do I miss something here ,where does it say that what ever class you are it's set in stone that your left or right wing or just sat on the fence.

I class myself as working class so what will that make me?

What political stance will a upper class person have ?

And what side of the fence will a middle class chap stand on?

As for the Labour Party they for sure don't seem to have a working class backbone anymore at all ,half fvthe fcukers are sending their kids to private schools .

How can you determine anybody's political stance via their class ?

I pointed out that Labour are so far left that if they was in a swimming pool they be going round in a circle, and that they was no longer working class party as they all seem/want to be middle class .

So you are saying that you can't be middle class and left wing at the same time ?

Yes you can be middle class and left wing - but what you can't be is a left wing party persuing policies that benefit the middle class.

In the UK left wing and right wing relate to economic policies and standpoints. Broadly speaking the left want a strong state, workers rights, a narrowing of the gap between rich and poor and high taxation for the rich. The right want a small state, individual freedom to earn what you want (for an employer like Mike Ashley to pay his workers below minimum wage whilst making huge profits for himself for instance) and low taxes.

Again broadly speaking: the upper class are the people at the top end of the social scale, the people with the most wealth and the means of gaining ever more wealth. They dont necessarily work as we would define it - but may. The middle class are professionals, shopkeepers, teachers - those with a middle income. The working class are people who work for someone else for a living - or depend on an income provided by someone else.

So you see there, yes you can be middle class and left wing - you are persuing policies that benefit those worse off than you. You can be working class and right wing - that is supporting policies which benefit those better off than you (if that's what you want to do). But what you can't be is a left wing party persuing policies for the middle class because that isn't left wing.

Here it is in a bit more detail
www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2113204

We'll start with the Right: On a social level, the right generally believes that a hierarchy in society is natural and normal. For them, the idea of a class system whereby the richer employ the poorer in a triangle is healthy because everybody benefits and it has historically been the natural order of things.
Their economic policy (generally speaking) complements this, by promoting a form of capitalism which gives more economic freedom to big businesses. This means fewer regulations and lower taxes. They argue that as big businesses grow they create jobs for the working class and gradually everyone gets richer.

The left on the other hand is more keen to reduce the gaps in society between the rich and the poor. They believe society should work together to help everybody, with schemes like the NHS and Benefits. They argue the rich should pay for this through taxes, thus reducing the gap between rich and poor.
To do this, economically, they need to raise taxes. They also prefer to regulate 'the Market', which means distributing the wealth created on the stock market and in banks so that it does not all end up in the pockets of millionaires but some of it goes to the country's problems.

The easiest way to think about it is the idea of 'State vs. Market'. The state is the government, using its power to solve problems that only the government can; healthcare, policing, schools etc. Those departments are the 'public sector'. The market is the capitalist force which creates wealth, such as business transactions and banking. This is the 'private sector'.

The left wants more state control and less market freedom. The right wants less state control and more market freedom.

The centre is a mixture.

So in UK politics, it is generally seen as being the Conservatives on the right, the Lib Dems in the centre, and Labour on the left. However, all of these are central compared to the extreme right of UKIP (Little state control, little sympathy for immigrants and a dislike of Europe) and the extreme left of Communism (State controls everything). We don't have a large communist party in Britain but the Greens are probably 'socialist' which is on the left and is a different system altogether to capitalism.

In the US it's different, there left and right relate to social policies, equal rights, gun control, abortion, immigration and health care, both main parties have similar economic ideas. I dont know about Norway.

[wilts rover]

Just because she chooses not to have a TV debate doesn't necessarily mean she can't, it's more likely to mean that she doesn't need to. So I'll ask you again, if she doesn't need to, why should she, After all, she hardly going to convince you to vote for her is she?

Only the result on 8th June will give you the answer to that. I have given you my opinion in my reply above - if you think differently fine.

[Herbert Anchovy]

The left wing support the working class, the right wing support the upper class. The middle class are, at best, an afterthought to both sides.

[not on facebook]

Talking live on tv with a Kay burley type of tv presenter trying to up her/his protocall is sick .

Like I said before it's a yank custom and any idiot out here that falls for it will be turning up at the KMS car park hours well before kick off ,setting up untold bar bee Qs with a boot full of Budweiser having a cold one > shouting ' yeeeee harrr go rovers go '

How can you judge any PM via a tv debate ffs

By what they say of course. It's not exactly difficult to grasp.

As for it being a Yank custom, I take it you've never heard the word hustings before?

I find it predictable that like minded just like you allways dig up a fact .statement,bye law,and
present it by stepping out of your bubble and then back into to said bubble on another fact,statement,bye law sortie.

Tommy top it comes to mind .

Iam not even going to think about tracking around trying to find out WTF the word hustings means ,as some glow worm will have apply time and effort to do so

[tommy toes]

If you're referring to me Oslo, I can't be bothered to reply most of the time.
As for class, I've always considered mesen working class despite having a middle class career.
For the record I love your posts, great entertainment, but completely disagree with your views on absolutely everything.
I wholeheartedly support Corbyn. He won't win the election but he'll have a ball fighting it and maybe do better than people think.

Hustings are when candidates share a platform, argue, present their credentials in front of the voters who then vote. They were a feature of elections for hundreds of years.

[not on facebook]

Tommy you miss red what I said

Tommy top  it > is a person who allways tops whatever you did

1...... if you did a foot long shit > tommy top it did a 2 ft long shit.

2......you held your breath under water for 3 mins > tommy top it did it for 7 mins.

3..... you earn £200 a week > tommy top it says he earns £ 350 a week .

4.....you drank 8 pints last night > tommy top it drank 13 pints.

Fcuk knows what you was rambling on about in those two paragraphs fella ,but I have a fealings you don't either > but tommy top it will

[tommy toes]

Ah. Never heard of Tommy top sorry.

[BobG]

And there I was thinking Tommy might have taught you a useful new word there Oslo!

Oh well

Cheers

BobG

[not on facebook]

Nowt to be sorry about fella ,as your reaction  post had me gob smacked and then in stitches of laughter mate.

Keep up the good work > far too many people have to proof read what they post on a forum thread instead of  posting what comes straight into their heads straight away



> > > see how I have set me sen up their for the lurking backlash -> >>

[not on facebook]

And there I was thinking Tommy might have taught you a useful new word there Oslo!

Oh well

Cheers

BobG

Bob  > tommy top it  knew what the new word was as he told me so