Quote: Hercules Grytpype Thynne @ 18th April 2017, 2:54 PM

Now what did she have to go and do that for.

View original

Mrs May knows the incumbent party is only going to become less popular. She knows negotiating Brexit is a poisoned chalice, for which she will get the blame. So this move might slow Sturgeon and Labour up. Ironically we need to be United (Kingdom) to stand our best chance negotiating Brexit.

Would be nice if she just got on with honouring the Brexit pledges, such as making Britain the new Neverland, instead of pushing the blame around. Now if we could export blame to new markets... Just realised, that explains why Boris is foreign secretary.

When Broxtowe MP Anna Soubry heard about the general election she said "I'll drink to that!" Though to be fair that is her response to almost anything...

Quote: A Horseradish @ 18th April 2017, 5:01 PM

If the calendar had gone backwards when Eric Morecambe died and then gone forward again at the end of the second world war, it would now be 1949 and there wouldn't be a general election because there wasn't one in 1949.

View original

Better yet, if the calendar had gone backwards when Ernie Wise died in 1999 and then gone forward again from Charles and Diana's wedding, it would now be 1981 and we could be enjoying "fresh" episodes of Minder in another election-free year.

'Violation of emoluments clause' . . . I am steadily increasing my vocabulary given all this Trump business, so he has given me something positive at least, as I'd never heard the word 'recuse' or even 'impeach' before.

But he no longer has excuse that he is 'under audit' or that 'no-one is interested' in order to refrain from releasing his tax returns, so if he still doesn't, even his supporters have to conclude that he clearly has something to hide.

It is not compulsory, so not illegal to withhold, but when something is so strongly in the public interest there has to be a good enough reason not to or it jeopardises his whole position . . . and therefore legal eagles sense no smoke without fire - and apparently, he could be in violation of emoluments clause, in breach of constitution, have conflicts of interest etc. etc. in addition to paying too little in tax - so insulting the legal profession was perhaps a little unwise as they could be after him now.

You don't become immune and 'above the law' as either a POTUS or a mere tycoon . . . but his believing he is could be the very thing that trips him up, just like the contradictions on Twitter that have come back to haunt him and even have his Trumpeteers rattled.

But all we really need to prove how shifty and dodgy a character he is is to remember that story Charlie Sheen told on Graham Norton's show. Not perhaps the most reliable source for information, but he's not that great an actor either so when he told the story about the fake cuff links:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dp6BIDCZRic

. . . and there must be staff at the IRS who need to unburden themselves before long because of what they may know.

What next? He wears lary underpants and maybe a bra. I conclude he is a pervert and not fit to run office.

Supposition is not fact. It's fake news

Quote: Stephen Goodlad @ 19th April 2017, 10:12 AM

What next? He wears lary underpants and maybe a bra. I conclude he is a pervert and not fit to run office.

View original

That didn't stop Ted Heath or Margaret Thatcher. Trump gives as good as he gets when it comes to talking stupid, insulting crap.

So much political news from the UK, but it's all just Trump, Trump, Trump. I have whiplash from shaking my head in disbelief.

Remedied: Some Trump-free UK news: http://www.lep.co.uk/your-lancashire/preston/preston-brides-devastated-after-sudden-wedding-shop-closure-1-8498897

Our politicians are boring DaButt. Same grey people, same policies just different faces from time to time.
You have a character in charge..........and we love a character - or at least we are ambivalent about them.

Quote: Stephen Goodlad @ 19th April 2017, 12:28 PM

You have a character in charge..........and we love a character

View original

You are literally the only one.

Sorry.

'The Story of Trump and the Invisible Armada.'

Maybe, bearing in mind that Theresa May was never an advocate for "Brexit" in the first place, and she now realises what an impossible task she has in front of her, she is relying on the election leaving her in no stronger a position than she is already. She can then claim that the election has not provided the requisite mandate for continued "Brexit" negotiations and will use that as an excuse to abandon the process...

Quote: Billy Bunter @ 19th April 2017, 10:56 PM

Maybe, bearing in mind that Theresa May was never an advocate for "Brexit" in the first place, and she now realises what an impossible task she has in front of her, she is relying on the election leaving her in no stronger a position than she is already. She can then claim that the election has not provided the requisite mandate for continued "Brexit" negotiations and will use that as an excuse to abandon the process...

View original

That would be nice. You have now won the Optimist of the Year Award.

Brexit, election, brexit, brexit, election, brexit, election, election, election, brexit . . . at least we'll only be bombarded with supposition about election until June, but damn brexit will go on and on and on . . .

But in my humble opinion, I think Theresa May either wants out as she's in over her head, or she at least wants the credibility of being elected. She has a massive job as it is, so it must be an added issue in the commons relentlessly if she's thinking others consider her PM by default (and therefore less worthy of respect) rather than on her own merits.

She's losing support by opting out of TV debates though, so perhaps this is a strategy?

All I know for sure is we're so tired of hearing about stuff we cannot change - and though the election will of course be democratic, the fatigue has already set in so vote will be based on indifference, which will make it about as valid as EU referendum which was based on misleading people, was won by a tiny margin and was only advisory . . . so in my opinion, regardless of which way I voted, it should have been ruled null and void and postponed until a later date by which time we could have been fed a little more information that was at least more honest.

But I am currently developing a new button on my remote which will filter my TV channels so that if I stumble onto one with people talking about any of this shit (I also now hate the word rhetoric - as it's basically just another word for lies) the screen will just go blank and skip to the next . . .