General Election - 4th July 2024

Who will you be voting for in the General Election?

  • Labour

    Votes: 266 56.8%

  • Conservative

    Votes: 12 2.6%

  • Liberal Democrat

    Votes: 40 8.5%

  • Reform

    Votes: 71 15.2%

  • Green Party

    Votes: 28 6.0%

  • Other

    Votes: 51 10.9%
  • Total voters
    468
kaz7 said:
Beth was awful , spent the starmer time interupting and panicing on time , spent six mins on corbyn, we want to know what he would do after this election now he is in charge ffs, stank of an agenda to me , she didnt treat sunak the same and let him do a full monalogue on immigration with no interuption
Click to expand...

The emphasis on Corbyn was odd. I think the aim was to draw attention to his character as there is nothing to really hang anything on him. I am satisfied with that as it has been a while since we have had a Prime Minister who is a solid character.
 
Magicpole said:
Just watching the news. A young woman called out that Tory MI5 plant Starmer and his policies as Tory, she was right. They cunts get to feather their nests, he wants to allow them to keep their feathers and cut services to working class people. I fucking detest that ****. Labour, you are traitors to the people who founded you to look after our interests. This election is probably the worst I have ever witnessed.

We have a Tory lite shambles of cowards.

He won’t raise taxes, so that means across every aspect of working class people’s lives, we pay for those incompetent lying Tory scum.

So, fuck you Starmer. I hope your battle bus runs you over, you utter ****.
Click to expand...
Ill put you down as undecided
 
Manc in London said:
The emphasis on Corbyn was odd. I think the aim was to draw attention to his character as there is nothing to really hang anything on him. I am satisfied with that as it has been a while since we have had a Prime Minister who is a solid character.
Click to expand...
It wasn't odd though was it? It might have been if Starmer hadn't evoked the ghost of Corbyn in his reaction to the Tory manifesto .... like a day before.

If your attention span is that short no wonder you can post that last sentence with a straight face.
 
Postman Pep said:
It wasn't odd though was it? It might have been if Starmer hadn't evoked the ghost of Corbyn in his reaction to the Tory manifesto .... like a day before.

If your attention span is that short no wonder you can post that last sentence with a straight face.
Click to expand...

With reference to Corbyn. Yes, it was odd. The economy, health service, housing market, criminal justice service, infrastructure.....I could go on.....are in a mess but spent a substantial proportion of the interview talking about his views on Corbyn. I presume you thought it was. That makes you odd or just lacking any understanding of proportionally and relevance.

The second paragraph makes no contribution. It's just an insult. Please be mindful that we are adults on this thread having an adult conversation x
 
Manc in London said:
With reference to Corbyn. Yes, it was odd. The economy, health service, housing market, criminal justice service, infrastructure.....I could go on.....are in a mess but spent a substantial proportion of the interview talking about his views on Corbyn. I presume you thought it was. That makes you odd or just lacking any understanding of proportionally and relevance.
Click to expand...
Simple question do you seriously believe Rigby would have gone there if Starmer hadn't re-opened that can of worms just a day earlier? Once you have worked it out then ask yourself why he didn't attack them on all those important things instead of slaying the evil jam man?
Manc in London said:
The second paragraph makes no contribution. It's just an insult. Please be mindful that we are adults on this thread having an adult conversation x
Click to expand...
Lol.
 
Doubt Starmer particularly wants to talk about Corbyn but probably feels he has to because it’s the Tories number 1 talking point when it comes to going on about Starmer. Personally think he’d be better off ignoring it but presumably he gets advice from people who think differently.
 
Postman Pep said:
Simple question do you seriously believe Rigby would have gone there if Starmer hadn't re-opened that can of worms just a day earlier? Once you have worked it out then ask yourself why he didn't attack them on all those important things instead of slaying the evil jam man?

Lol.
Click to expand...

"Can of worms"? There you go again with the lack of proportionality. Do you honestly think the audience were interested in that discussion? Really?

There were many more important issues she could have asked about that would have produced far more useful insight. Any potential response to the question would never have moved the needle in terms of vote share. Yet there were many more issues that could have been asked about that would have influenced people's votes.

Beth Rugby could have asked as it a cheeky question and moved on but she persisted.
 
Starmer can talk about Corbyn if he wants Rigby was going to bring him up anyway, the media have thrown Corbyn into the mix from the start of the election campaign and before it.
Starmer is going to have to deal with references along with all the other accusations such as raising tax rates, borrowing to fund the Labour manifesto promises. Nothing from the media about Johnson and the conservatives police investigation that’s all forgotten has Sunak been questioned about Truss.
No of course they have not dealt any awkward questions to Sunak
 
Manc in London said:
"Can of worms"? There you go again with the lack of proportionality. Do you honestly think the audience were interested in that discussion? Really?
Click to expand...
No. I'm questioning your lack of understanding of the sequence of events. Surely as an adult you understand the concept of time?
Manc in London said:
There were many more important issues she could have asked about that would have produced far more useful insight. Any potential response to the question would never have moved the needle in terms of vote share. Yet there were many more issues that could have been asked about that would have influenced people's votes.

Beth Rugby could have asked as it a cheeky question and moved on but she persisted.
Click to expand...
I will reframe my previous question. Do you agree that Starmer should have highlighted all those important issues in his response a day earlier?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top