CB Fry

They'll be disciplined now because there is much more of a threat from Labour which, until Thursday, wasn't there before. Both parties need discipline: Corbyn needs to heal the party and bring the moderates back in to form something that actually resembles a government in waiting rather than a sexy little protest vote. The Tories need to hold their sh it together to avoid a leadership contest or election that could see them tumble out of power. Both might succeed, both might fail.

I don't think any British ruling party has ever claimed more than 50% of the vote or anything close so that's a very odd benchmark. Whether people like it or not, the Tories are the only legitimate party with a claim to rule. Far more legitimate than Corbyn blathering about his alternative Queen's speech.

Right up the Old Kent Road.

1. Tony Blair didn't start the peace process, it started long before then. And if Corbyn wanted to be part of a government that wanted to, and did, make life better for huge numbers of people then he could have, but he chose to snipe and rebel and gripe from the sidelines, to narrow minded and arrogant actually try and drive any real change through. He could have 'sat down and talked to those he disagreed with' like Tony Blair. That way he could have got involved in the peace process rather than cheerleading one side of it in his own little bubble. He was never brave enough to play any role in any process for anything. Why bother retreating from the cosiness of the echo chamber? 2. I'm nearly 40, have voted in every election since 1997 in about six different constituencies and not once have I ever even considered voting for the Tories. So fu ck knows what May going into bed with the orangemen nutcases has got to do with me, don't support it, nothing I've ever said here suggests I would. You trying to call me a hypocrite? Nice fu cking try but I'll call the UDF/UDA/UFF a bunch of murderous cu nts all day long. Both sides exactly the same. Easy as ****ing pie. Just you swooning about the "plight of catholics" in your dreamy hero worship. He talked to the freedom fighters that St Jeremy did. Hypocrite me right up.

Patronising horsesh it. Well done you. So now you're saying Jeremy Corbyn pioneered the idea of speaking to your enemy? He didn't, and crucially they weren't his enemy when he spoken them - he was a giddy, gooey fan of them. He was on their side in the struggle against the crown. Just as crucially he had fu ck all. Nothing. Nothing at all to do with the northern Ireland peace process. No role at all. None. Just an pitifully pointless backbencher family hoping Gerry Adams might ring him while the actual grown up politicians had the guts to take the huge risks to make peace happen. You utter clown.

The absolute state of this. But Yeah, let's compare an actual leader making actual decisions and brave enough to take actual responsibility with a life long back bench irrelevance who has still yet to squeak out of his own comfortable bubble of surrounding himself with and talking to only those that completely agree with him.

This is also true. The point is May is the lamest lame duck since Huey, Dewey and Louis got hit by a giant anvil that time.

1922 Committee: yes, you can continue as Prime Minister and lead us into the most complex and important negotiations this country has ever known, but only if you are utterly emaciated by the removal of your two most trusted advisors and the people that give you unwavering support, advice and confidence. Nothing can possibly go wrong.

So just talking to the IRA is intrinsically a good thing regardless of your starting position or what you talk about or how it might balls up any process of actually trying to negotiate a ceasefire peace process? Okay. As far as I can see there is no evidence that anything Corbyn did had any impact whatsoever in delivering towards ceasefire or peace, and there are some accounts describing his intervention as being counter-productive. But any talk is just dandy.

Because Corbyn was a doe-eyed drooling fan-boy with a right-on hatred of, like, the evil empire. Thatcher was trying to stop the cu nts killing our soldiers and innocent people. This stuff is the most pathetic whataboutery I think I've ever seen. The history of the troubles and the peace process has been written. Jeremy Corbyn had fu ck all to so with it.

Well, in theory it was a fair assumption of the actual referendum result that we leave but the process lead by a remain leader - that's not an inaccurate reflection of the 52/48 result. I read this week a nice piece that compared the hard Brexit route taken by May as being akin to Cameron taking a 52/48 remain vote as being permission to sign us up for the Euro and join the Schengen area and claim it was "the will of the people" and those objecting were saboteurs. Clearly neither were really true and Mays result certainly will strengthen the soft Brexiteers in the party now. Gawd knows how the negotiations will start now as May will be walking into them a completely damaged and discredited individual with very little personal authority. Couple this with her lack of style/panache/force of personality (she's no Thatcher or Blair) then gawd help us. I think May was hoping a clear thumping majority would at least do some of the heavy lifting in the negotiations. Ironically she is the one naked in the negotiating chamber after all.

With Michaela Strachan as number two I'm in. Both I know favour utilising a fox in the box.

I actually think she would quite like to quit but she can't - she's trapped in role now. If she resigns and the Tories have 3/4 month leadership election just as the A50 negotiations kick off it's going like utterly chaotic and the electorate will not look kindly on that. And whatever people say, she won the most seats and votes so is the only credible Prime Minister. While her speech saying "let's get to work" sounded determined, really it is stoical and resigned. She effed it right up but but she's got to lie in it now. That said I have no doubt the Tory machine are trying to work out how they can switch her out in a smooth/orderly way somehow in the coming months/years.

Oh for fuc k's sake. Get on with doing something Saints.

I am thoroughly enjoying the Corbynites using the 2017 vote share as proof that Compo is actually more popular than 3 times landslide Tony Blair. Weird that, because by exactly the same logic May is more popular than Mrs Thatcher so those Tories must be dancing in the streets for having such a successful and wildly popular leader. Corbynite dins will be celebrating this pointless "victory" for a long time, in exactly the same way the skates celebrate their David Norris day "victory" over us.

Man who I said wouldn't win a general election doesn't win a general election. Oh, the egg on my face.

This is called doing a Puel. Looks good on paper but says more about the paucity of the opposition than any innate actual success.

May close to tears.

Maidenhead. Fingers crossed for Giant Elmo.

Clegg about to fall....

Fu ck off Angus Robertson you whinging jock. Well done Ruth.

Was about to post "Take a bow, Ruth Davidson". One of the best leaders in the country right now.

That Justine Greening result is pretty immense and bodes well for Corbyn, despite not quite taking the seat.

Exit poll in tatters already? The Brexit to Tory move certainly happened in Sunderland. She's going to get her majority.

What was interesting to read the other day was that May has never been front line in an election campaign - she was skulking around the background for the Brexit vote and was never front and centre in Cameron's campaigns or those before it. She was never picked to do that role. Now we can see why.