The General Election Thread

[Paul Lake's Left Knee]

GDM serenades rascal

<a class="postlink" href="http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSs3A550hVT7QA4U1B4iA5;_ylu=X3oDMTEzcXU0Zmo5BGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwMyBHZ0aWQDR0xJVEVNXzEEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1430869945/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.youtube.com%2fwatch%3fv%3diMpu3zNY-wk/RK=0/RS=vMg5MIIgxPMxst8_VDGyzXKI_ic-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSs3A5 ... GyzXKI_ic-</a>

GDM is nothing like Cartman, he wouldnt wear such a common hat as that, more like a top hat and monocle.

 

[urmston]

Latest.

Labour defend sex segregation at its recent election meeting in Birmingham

There was no forced segregation

Everyone was together in one room and all were treated equally and respectfully.

So Labour doesn't mind segregation at its meetings so long as everyone is treated equally and respectfully.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-defends-rally-men-women-5640059" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/la ... en-5640059</a>

Would you have had Labour force them to sit boy girl boy girl, like school kids, or are they allowed to sit how they like? I haven't heard anyone from the meeting complaining, only people who hate Labour trying to shit stir. Elections are tedious

It was Labour's meeting.

They should have called it off when they saw that the audience was segregated.

Labour has now shown it condones segregation at its meetings - hardly a mark of a modern, inclusive and diverse party.

More the mark of a party which panders to prejudice, discrimination and intolerance if it thinks it'll bring in a few votes.

 

[blueinsa]

Latest.

Labour defend sex segregation at its recent election meeting in Birmingham





So Labour doesn't mind segregation at its meetings so long as everyone is treated equally and respectfully.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-defends-rally-men-women-5640059" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/la ... en-5640059</a>

Would you have had Labour force them to sit boy girl boy girl, like school kids, or are they allowed to sit how they like? I haven't heard anyone from the meeting complaining, only people who hate Labour trying to shit stir. Elections are tedious

It was Labour's meeting.

They should have called it off when they saw that the audience was segregated.

Labour has now shown it condones segregation at its meetings - hardly a mark of a modern, inclusive and diverse party.

More the mark of a party which panders to prejudice, discrimination and intolerance if it thinks it'll bring in a few votes.

It would have taken you seconds to then call them racist as well you know.

Nothing story it really is.

 

[denislawsbackheel]

you tedious Tory tosspots.

Is that really the best you can do?

 

[The perfect fumble]

I agree the Conservatives would vote with the majority of Labour and Trident will get through in Parliament but I'd be interested to know why it wouldn't be I. The Queens speech, which after all is a statement of the governments intentions and what it will deliver... Isn't it?

It is, but it is not necessary to have all legislation in the Queen's speech. The whips can work together to get a back bench sponsored bill through.

Never in a million years. It would make Labour's front bench a laughing stock.

Why?

 

[malg]

you tedious Tory tosspots.

Is that really the best you can do?

Just got in from work. What posts are you on about?

 

[Paulpowersleftfoot]

you tedious Tory tosspots.

Is that really the best you can do?

Just got in from work. What posts are you on about?

Can't mention work
It's seen as incitement by beakers mob

 

[law74]

Would you have had Labour force them to sit boy girl boy girl, like school kids, or are they allowed to sit how they like? I haven't heard anyone from the meeting complaining, only people who hate Labour trying to shit stir. Elections are tedious

It was Labour's meeting.

They should have called it off when they saw that the audience was segregated.

Labour has now shown it condones segregation at its meetings - hardly a mark of a modern, inclusive and diverse party.

More the mark of a party which panders to prejudice, discrimination and intolerance if it thinks it'll bring in a few votes.

It would have taken you seconds to then call them racist as well you know.

Nothing story it really is.

What i wish to see is how Urmston has achieved all his (or her) wealth without any interference of us undesirables that have been blighted in one way or another by those who are motivated by anything other than personal gain

 

[malg]

you tedious Tory tosspots.

Is that really the best you can do?

Just got in from work. What posts are you on about?

Can't mention work
It's seen as incitement by beakers mob

Just read the last and I'm guessing it's the stuff about their segregation?

 

[urmston]

Would you have had Labour force them to sit boy girl boy girl, like school kids, or are they allowed to sit how they like? I haven't heard anyone from the meeting complaining, only people who hate Labour trying to shit stir. Elections are tedious

It was Labour's meeting.

They should have called it off when they saw that the audience was segregated.

Labour has now shown it condones segregation at its meetings - hardly a mark of a modern, inclusive and diverse party.

More the mark of a party which panders to prejudice, discrimination and intolerance if it thinks it'll bring in a few votes.

It would have taken you seconds to then call them racist as well you know.

Nothing story it really is.

A nothing story that's in plenty of newspapers.

Segregation at public meetings might be unimportant to you. Or you might even approve of it for all I know.

If that's the case you'll have no problem with voting Labour.

 

[law74]

It was Labour's meeting.

They should have called it off when they saw that the audience was segregated.

Labour has now shown it condones segregation at its meetings - hardly a mark of a modern, inclusive and diverse party.

More the mark of a party which panders to prejudice, discrimination and intolerance if it thinks it'll bring in a few votes.

It would have taken you seconds to then call them racist as well you know.

Nothing story it really is.

A nothing story that's in plenty of newspapers.

Segregation at public meetings might be unimportant to you. Or you might even approve of it for all I know.

If that's the case you'll have no problem with voting Labour.

Can I ask when you are going to answer any of the questions I have asked of you, or failing that, state why you feel unable to debate with a member that has a different opinion

 

[urmston]

It would have taken you seconds to then call them racist as well you know.

Nothing story it really is.

A nothing story that's in plenty of newspapers.

Segregation at public meetings might be unimportant to you. Or you might even approve of it for all I know.

If that's the case you'll have no problem with voting Labour.

Can I ask when you are going to answer any of the questions I have asked of you, or failing that, state why you feel unable to debate with a member that has a different opinion

How can anyone seriously argue in favour of segregation at a meeting organised by one of the UK's two main political parties?

 

[blueinsa]

It was Labour's meeting.

They should have called it off when they saw that the audience was segregated.

Labour has now shown it condones segregation at its meetings - hardly a mark of a modern, inclusive and diverse party.

More the mark of a party which panders to prejudice, discrimination and intolerance if it thinks it'll bring in a few votes.

It would have taken you seconds to then call them racist as well you know.

Nothing story it really is.

A nothing story that's in plenty of newspapers.

Segregation at public meetings might be unimportant to you. Or you might even approve of it for all I know.

If that's the case you'll have no problem with voting Labour.

The seating plan would have been the same for the Tories, Lib Dems or anyone else as well you know.

 

[urmston]

It would have taken you seconds to then call them racist as well you know.

Nothing story it really is.

A nothing story that's in plenty of newspapers.

Segregation at public meetings might be unimportant to you. Or you might even approve of it for all I know.

If that's the case you'll have no problem with voting Labour.

The seating plan would have been the same for the Tories, Lib Dems or anyone else as well you know.

What a slur, with no evidence to back it up whatsoever.

Labour freely chose to hold a public meeting in front of a segregated audience, something which is genuinely shocking in modern Britain.

 

[blueinsa]

A nothing story that's in plenty of newspapers.

Segregation at public meetings might be unimportant to you. Or you might even approve of it for all I know.

If that's the case you'll have no problem with voting Labour.

The seating plan would have been the same for the Tories, Lib Dems or anyone else as well you know.

What a slur, with no evidence to back it up whatsoever.

Labour freely chose to hold a public meeting in front of a segregated audience, something which is genuinely shocking in modern Britain.

Cant be arsed to to discuss this or any other issue with a wum such as you.

 

[urmston]

The seating plan would have been the same for the Tories, Lib Dems or anyone else as well you know.

What a slur, with no evidence to back it up whatsoever.

Labour freely chose to hold a public meeting in front of a segregated audience, something which is genuinely shocking in modern Britain.

Cant be arsed to to discuss this or any other issue with a wum such as you.

I am unsurprised by your inability to defend segregation at a Labour party meeting in a rational manner.

The only sensible approach for Labour party supporters about such a horrendous gaffe is silence - that's why we've heard nothing about the matter from Labour's usual women's equality people such as Harriet Harman.

 

[law74]

A nothing story that's in plenty of newspapers.

Segregation at public meetings might be unimportant to you. Or you might even approve of it for all I know.

If that's the case you'll have no problem with voting Labour.

Can I ask when you are going to answer any of the questions I have asked of you, or failing that, state why you feel unable to debate with a member that has a different opinion

How can anyone seriously argue in favour of segregation at a meeting organised by one of the UK's two main political parties?

Again I will ask, how have you managed to achieve your undoubted personal wealth and success with zero interference fro those pesky public sector employees?

 

[urmston]

Can I ask when you are going to answer any of the questions I have asked of you, or failing that, state why you feel unable to debate with a member that has a different opinion

How can anyone seriously argue in favour of segregation at a meeting organised by one of the UK's two main political parties?

Again I will ask, how have you managed to achieve your undoubted personal wealth and success with zero interference fro those pesky public sector employees?

Stop trying to change the subject from Labour condoning segregation at one of their election meetings.

 

[law74]

How can anyone seriously argue in favour of segregation at a meeting organised by one of the UK's two main political parties?

Again I will ask, how have you managed to achieve your undoubted personal wealth and success with zero interference fro those pesky public sector employees?

Stop trying to change the subject from Labour condoning segregation at one of their election meetings.

far from changing the topic, I am returning to points you have consistantly raised, do you wish to answer the question asked (as I am not a member of, nor a supporter of the Labour party, i cannot tell them how to conduct their campaign, thought unlike some, I appreciate the benefits that migrant workers have brought to the UK )

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Ed Balls is a ****.


That is all.