Jump to content

UK General Election: Jeremy Corbyn Or Theresa May Who Do You Think Will Win?


genie
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

everyone knows that Blair was a tory in a red tie , I mean the guy admitted to idolising Maggie T. May has given EU bureaucrats cause for elation because they know she has no backbone, does things in secret not telling her team , is easy to manipulate, has no capacity of thinking on her feet.  

Juncker is very pleased.

But we realise that May is not a leader, she is a follower.

My own perception was that she was someone that more like a safe pair of hands (like an administrator ), granted that she did not do much in her 6 years as Home minister but I was wrong. 

She did not do any of the debates and seems quite uncomfortable in front of camera. She seems to be quite unhinged in some ways and cracks under pressure.

Compare her to Corbyn who seems to stand his ground, seems to be very comfortable in his own skin. And he also never shouts and does not seem to crack under pressure.

I am not a fan of either him or May but I have to begrudgingly have to give qudos to Corbyn.

But in the end of the day Labour still lost and we still have a Tory led government. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

You think too highly of the people, hehe.

But, yes, I think Britain is a lot more cynical now in that regard. The virtue-signalling liberal Marxists will be angling for a British Obama to highlight how incredibly tolerant and forward-looking they are, or even a female leader, whilst the Tories could go for another photogenic Cameron-type figure, or equally an older and wiser head. It depends what conclusions they draw from this election.

People seem to like the fresh faced young energetic types.

Like I may have mentioned before elections are popularity contests and people vote on perception rather than mandates and policies.

If people vote on policies it would be something very simple or superficial like less taxes, less immigration, no tuition fees. They are more like bribes and incentives.

We vote these types in and at the end of the term they look all haggarded and worn out.

If you compare Obama from 2009 to 2017, he has considerably aged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

You think too highly of the people, hehe.

But, yes, I think Britain is a lot more cynical now in that regard. The virtue-signalling liberal Marxists will be angling for a British Obama to highlight how incredibly tolerant and forward-looking they are, or even a female leader, whilst the Tories could go for another photogenic Cameron-type figure, or equally an older and wiser head. It depends what conclusions they draw from this election.

Another thought.

The Tories are going into coalition with the DUP. 

They are anti-gay marriage,  anti-abortion. 

The virtue-signalling liberal Marxists are going to love that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ranjeet01 said:

The virtue-signalling liberal Marxists are going to love that.

One of the first articles the Guardian rushed to print yesterday - when the deal between the DUP and Tories was made - was a scaremongering piece about the DUP being anti-Gay, anti-abortion, and anti whatever else these people consider to be important. It was as if some people in Britain were about to be rounded up and transported to the gulags for liquidation. 

Funnily enough, the likes of the Guardian have to tread very carefully around the issue of the traditionalism of the DUP,  because if they go too hard on the Tories' new allies, it would suggest almost a tacit support of the IRA and their policies. Although, with the likes of the Guardian's apologetics regarding Islamic terrorism, an inadvertent supportive stance for the IRA isn't too much of a stretch for them. But of course one important difference is the whiteness of the IRA, lol; white terrorist privilege, hehe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

One of the first articles the Guardian rushed to print yesterday when the deal between the DUP and Tories was finalised was a scaremongering piece about the DUP being anti-Gay, anti-abortion, and anti whatever else these people consider to be important. It was as if some people in Britain were about to be rounded up and transported to the gulags for liquidation. 

Funnily enough, the likes of the Guardian have to tread very carefully around the issue of the traditionalism of the DUP,  because if they go too hard on the Tories' new allies, it would suggest almost a tacit support of the IRA and their policies. Although, with the likes of the Guardian's apologetics regarding Islamic terrorism, an inadvertent supportive stance for the IRA isn't too much of a stretch for them. But of course one important difference is the whiteness of the IRA, lol; white terrorist privilege, hehe. 

What is very interesting I find is that the DUP have 10 seats in Northern Ireland. 

Their total amount of votes is several hundred thousand. Which is unbelievable considering they have won more seats with less votes than other parties.

For example UKIP won 4 million votes in 2015 (even more than SNP) but with no seats. 

I think coalition politics makes strange bedfellows.

But I think it could be a very dangerous thing.

Just suppose there is an Islamic based party ( similar to Respect Party) who had won certain seats in certain places like Luton, Bradford, East London and Birmingham where there are high proportion of muslims. In theory if there was a hung parliament where Labour had the largest share could join hands with these types.

You don't have to win many seats to make a difference. 

Just something to ponder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Just suppose there is an Islamic based party ( similar to Respect Party) who had won certain seats in certain places like Luton, Bradford, East London and Birmingham where there are high proportion of muslims. In theory if there was a hung parliament where Labour had the largest share could join hands with these types.

You don't have to win many seats to make a difference. 

Just something to ponder. 

It's inevitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

It's inevitable.

The DUP is being targeted by the left because they are anti-gay, anti-abortion etc.

I wonder how the left will justify it's reasoning if there was Labour government in coalition with an Islamist type party. 

The Labour party is pro-diversity and inclusive, pro LGBT rights etc. If they had to have cabinet they would love to have a gay cabinet minister and definitely some female ministers. What would happen if the Islamist cabinet minister will not even shake hands with the other cabinet ministers because they believe that women should not be allowed to be in politics in the first place or that gays should be thrown off buildings.

What happens if the government tries to implement some new law for LGBT and the Islamists in the cabinet will not vote for it because it's against their beliefs.

These are hypothetical situations but these are questions people on the political left will have to answer for themselves.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your UK Islamic party scenario is something I'd never previously considered, but the more I think about it the more it makes sense. Once their numbers swell to a certain percentage, they aren't going to be content with the classic Tory/Labour situation. They will want their own political party. What a prospect, lol. The support and potential votes they'll garner is not in doubt. Give it another 30 years.

The banner of the crescent moon and the star will be flying over Downing Street, inshallah! 

Jagsaw will be so pleased, won't you, Jagsaw?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Your UK Islamic party scenario is something I'd never previously considered, but the more I think about it the more it makes sense. Once their numbers swell to a certain percentage, they aren't going to be content with the classic Tory/Labour situation. They will want their own political party. What a prospect, lol. The support and potential votes they'll garner is not in doubt. Give it another 30 years.

The banner of the crescent moon and the star will be flying over Downing Street, inshallah! 

Jagsaw will be so pleased, won't you, Jagsaw?

Democracy is a useful tool. Increase your numbers and get into power.

Then once into power, discard democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Democracy is a useful tool. Increase your numbers and get into power.

Then once into power, discard democracy.

The nihilist in me wants there to be a second general election in the autumn. I want Labour to win. I hope Brexit is reversed. I pray the doors are swung open to the millions of African migrants amassing on the shores of Europe as we speak. Let's speed things up a bit!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use