norwaysaint

Yes, they are influenced greatly by that alongside many other factors. Then they get to vote for their local MP.

You only get to vote for your local MP. That's just a fact. The person leading the party that a candidate belongs to might influence you, but you still only choose your MP. You can't really argue this one. It's not an opinion.

Both of those PMs were elected to parliament by their constituencies. That's the only electing the people ever do for PM in the UK. The party have always chosen their own leader. The people didn't choose Blair or Cameron for PM either. Most people didn't get to vote for either of those two.

Can I ask why you attack May for her negotiating, but not Boris? They've achieved much the same. I see plenty of left and centre people criticising their leaders when they get it wrong, but I notice that, like Trump, Boris gets a bye to do pretty much anything from his supporters. It's a little bit cultish to just announce everything he does as a "blinder" and never admit he gets it wrong sometimes, which he clearly does. Why don't you hold BJ accountable for his shortcomings? I can find fault with all the major leaders in the UK and the US. Pretending every action is part of some kind of infallible masterplan is a little naive.

Jeez, he's a bit of a tit, but that is just odious. Take a look at yourself mate, but until then, can't you do this sneering and bullying stuff on that special thread you guys made?

Haven't seen so much name calling from that side. It seems like a mostly right wing thing, like with Trump. "Lib dumbs" was the obvious one on this thread. It all seems a bit weak.

Is the name calling mainly a right wing thing? I don't seem to see it as much from the left or centre. Come on guys, get involved! This is how we debate in 2019. You have to call them conserva-divs, or Snories/bories. Then you chuckle to yourself.

Are all of the fake Tories out of the party now?

This seems about right. The opposition kind of rely on being opposition so that they can unite, but nobody backs either sufficiently for them to take control and they don't really work as coalition partners. Labour have a leader that is too unpalatable for most and the Libdems are still a distance from shaking their "unelectable third party" tag, meaning they will get a big proportion of the vote, but actually win very few seats.

For me, I don't like the idea of an election (I don't get to vote anyway and don't think I should, as I don't pay taxes there). It would divide an opposition that has managed to unite several parties with different ideologies who just want to stop BJ doing the wrong thing for his own agenda (I don't get the impression he cares about Brexit or the British people at all, this is just about his own ego and making a mark on history, which makes him similar to many political leaders). I guess this is why the conservatives want the election, to get rid of the united front that is keeping them in check, which is of course also the reason the opposition don't want it, because they only have power while they are working together to check the government. However, after a while, when the country is frustrated with both leadership and opposition, it feels like they have to have an election.

Of course he did, that's why you got one. You do seem to be a bit ashamed, but you really don't need to be, like Duckhunter said above, everyone knows he didn't want to, so it doesn't affect his position. I don't get why it upsets you. He still has the same position, he was just forced by the law.

Again, don't be silly. We both know he asked for an extension and it was given. He didn't sign it, but he did it. Don't embarrass yourself by hanging onto something clearly so weak. It's okay to back Boris, but don't run and hide from what we all know.

Don't be silly. It's not even just in the UK. Everyone in Europe and the UK is aware that Boris had to apply for an extension despite his previous statement. It's not necessary to be embarrassed by it. We know it was a legal obligation, but it's silly to pretend he avoided it, just by not signing the letter. He didn't want to apply, he had to anyway, he doesn't like it. Everyone understands that. A fair hope now is that the opposition parties really should accept an election now and the conservatives, despite not being a majority, will probably still be the single biggest party and can maybe get back enough votes to take control again. Labour and the Libdems really are split more evenly than ever, with a large part unable to see past Labour as the accepted opposition and the rest not wanting Corbyn. I think the libdems are the best bet, but the country probably isn't able to get behind them as a credible opposition yet and all of this gives the Conservatives hope of getting stronger, despite their own mess. Boris will probably still end up at the top of the ****heap.

No, he was allowed to resign too.

Let's not sneer at that too much though. Even at our peak in this PL run, a huge proportion of content in this forum was just obsession over Portsmouth and how they were getting on. It's our greatest compliment to them that no matter how far below us they got, they were always just as important to many of our fans.

I agree with most here. Of course we can survive, but will we survive because our problems have been meaningfully addressed, or will we survive because we patched things up, got a few lucky results or because someone was even worse than us? There's not much to celebrate if we survive and nothing has really improved.

Again, it's not about ability. It's about charisma. Blair had it and won elections, Brown didn't and lost, despite just being a continuation of the same goverbment. Johnson has it, May didn't and was unpopular, despite delivering basically the same deal as Boris. It's not about how good a leader you are, it's about how well you can present yourself as a leader. It may be stupid, it may not make logical sense, but it's how things work. People are people and this is how they function. If you have charisma and people see you as someone to get things done, they will forgive all kinds of crap (including alleged anti-semitism and alleged sympathy for terrorists), just like Boris and Trump (alleged racism, sexism, sympathy for terrorists and so much more).

And STILL she beat Corbyn. The country will not accept him as PM.

I think that's an unrealistic aim. Even in a coalition, I don't think the libdems or the public would accept Corbyn as PM. He's a problematic, divisive and unpopular figure. It's okay to be idealistic, but you also have to be realistic and accept that a leader needs charisma.

I don't know or care much about how misguided Corbyn's involvement with talks in the NI peace process were, but what's it's place in the Brexit discussion? Or are we going off an a tangent, because there's nothing new to discuss? It feels so bleak to think of either of these two guys as being the only options to lead the UK for years to come.

I would say that we are now due to drop down. We have a poor squad, no particular character or identity as a club, no great players coming through, no money. There must be better, more interesting clubs who could replace us and be better for football. I don't know much about football, but I don't see much potential in what we have. Surely changing this will take years and will be done in a lower division? Am I being over-dramatic?

I kind of feel that Labour have really lost their connection to the kind of people who want to vote for a credible opposition. I don't know if that's them changing as a party, or them not changing as the needs of the population change around them, but opposition would probably be better served if the general public felt that the Libdems had become the main opposition party now and that they were credible to vote for. I don't mean that I think there's anything particularly wonderful about the libdems, I just think it's healthier for a country to have a credible alternative to its government. When the governing party can behave in a way so many people dislike, but their opposition is still losing popularity, you have to hope that we can change our outlook on who the opposition is. Maybe if the libdems begin to edge aboove labour, it will encourage more people to back them as a credible alternative.

Yes please, move all of the dull, obsessive bickering of this little group to its own thread!

Quite. It's generally agreed by both sides that the country will be economically worse off after Brexit. The pro-Brexit argument is that it's worth the hit, just to be self governing again. Unbelievably there was somebody on here arguing that the working class population will be better off with Brexit. (Scally?) Anyone who believes that the wealthier population will take the brunt of a poorer economy is kidding themselves. That never happens. If business suffers, brances close, people are laid off. Lack of expansion and not being attractive to foreign business means that fewer working class jobs will be created. It will be a hard time for the man on the street. Choosing Brexit is a valid and reasonable choice for many people, but it makes me uneasy when the decision is based on a complete lack of understanding about what it will mean. Everybody will take some kind of financial hit, but it won't be the wealthy getting the worst of it.

As far as I have understood, the EU don't have to give an extension and are reluctant to, having offered about as good a deal as there is likely to be. Isn't that what we are hearing is the current situation or have I misunderstood?