There you go, yet another assumption you've cast upon someone. Not doing very well today are you Sal?

You've heard the old adage not to assume as you can make an ass of yourself.

Callaghan was a nightmare

Blair, although he had some very good years, stayed at the helm too long and he will never be forgiven for having Bush's hand up his backside and Brown took a poisoned chalice.
Clearly, Blair never wanted Brown to succeed him and he was doomed to fail, which he spectacularly did.

I think that my powers of comparison are way ahead of the blinkered view's who can see no wrong with their own favoured party, similar to RL fans who can never see that a call against their side can ever be the correct call.

One of the few things that I agree with Corbyn on is that you need to listen to all views, even when they are different to your own but, apart from that, his plans are fundamentally flawed.

Mind you, with the spectre of Brexit almost upon us, little of our own politics matters as we will have so much crap to deal with over the next 3-5 years that domestic decisions will matter little.

When you listen to all sides, apart from the wild optimist's (who's number is getting fewer), we are in for some difficult years and that is without Tory austerity (if it still exists) or, Corbyn's spend, spend, spend.

The point I was trying to make is you can't say someone is the worst ever without qualifying it otherwise it has no context - compared to what?

I have said repeatedly she is a terrible leader and the sooner she goes the better.

The Tories are far from perfect but the do at least look after the wealth generators. Whether you agree with that or not is a mute point. In any society you will get winners and losers everyone is not equal and they never will be. If you want wealth generation it isn't going to happen by restricting the potential gains the wealth generators can make otherwise what is the incentive - altruism isn't an realistic incentive for very many to risk a lot and work really hard.

Most philanthropists/altruists have made/inherited fortunes BEFORE becoming generous, it's easy to give away $25m when you have $3bn

So for our resident diehard Tories - how did the queen's speech play for you? All of the big ticket items in the already flimsy manifesto were omitted or watered down - and she still doesn't have a deal with the DUP, which leaves her totally hamstrung. Latest reports are that the Barnett consequentials resulting from their demands for funding for NI would be eye-watering sums of money - so that deal is still far from done. Meanwhile, Philip Hammond is openly contradicting her on Brexit, and she has to start her tenure post a disastrous election, with an admission that the state failed the victims of a disaster, while thousands of people took to the streets of London to demand her resignation.

To top off the indignity, even her maj trolled Mrs May, by wearing a Euro-hat instead of her crown. Ouch.

To be fair, once a German, always a German

The final straw was Boris being interviewed on R4 tonight - I bet he will not forget the mauling he got from Eddie Mair - all down to a silly little girl. She cannot last beyond the summer.

The saving grace is the DUP hate Labour even more than the Tories so May knows she is safe - she needs to hope bi-elections are in safe Labour seats.

Nothing on reduced austerity so not all conceded - Labour must be looking forward to the next 12 months in opposition - but as May pointed out Labour were soundly beaten and as such have little to crow about.

And yet they are - and Mr Corbyn appears more... prime ministerial with each passing day, don't you agree?

I think the only thing keeping her alive right now is that most MP's realise that if they off her now and Boris takes over, the party will fall harder than the Lib Dems did when Clegg sold his soul to become David Cameron's tea bitch.

The one sure thing at the moment is that, should there be a re-run of the GE, the Tories would come second, which, considering where we were 3 months ago, is unbelievable.
This does beg the question, is she the worst prime minister ever ?

(The Queen's Speech, wasn't worth everybody's time in getting dressed up and with the rumours that there wont be one next year (as there wont be time, due to Brexit), what are we paying our MP's for.
They should be on half salaries

Not at all Corbyn looks more like a Blair with everyday - stage managed, vacuous, insincere and in denial.

On Newsnight the Labour shadow minister suggested Labour were going to press forward with their manifesto!! until Evan pointed out they lost the election - Labour are in complete denial they got beat by 1m votes and 60 seats not a small defeat.

That's the daftest thing you've said in a while; the qualities that have won Corbyn so much support are that he's the opposite of stage managed, vacuous or in denial - he's natural, easy with real people, and he actually believes what he's saying - the latter being so rare in politics, that it's engaged many people who were previously disenfranchised.

Meanwhile, Boris does an interview on R4 and is harshly reminded by Eddie Maer that running the country is not a Bullingdon Club wheeze; if he's the best they've got to offer as an alternative, there is little wonder that the PM is being held against her will in no 10.

Labour may not be technically able to deliver their manifesto - but the election result has already forced the Tories to drop a lot of the egregious policies that their expected landslide would have allowed them to enact; and Labour will continue to frustrate them in parliament, particularly if Theresa keeps pi$$ing off the DUP.

I don't like to say I told you so - [url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/21/exclusive-dup-broke-talks-tories-36-hours-week-demand-2billion/I [ilove[/i to say it...[/url

The DUP won't like those

Corbyn held all his rallies in very safe Labour seats - are you saying that wasn't stage managed? He went to Grenfell hugged a few people and then left what practical help did or his colleagues offer? Public "shows" of sorrow are just that unless they are backed up by action? He engaged young people by offering them a huge carrot - it was the carrot and not him that got them out to vote.

Agree on Boris I thought he was smarter than that - you cannot defend the indefensible the fact May put him in that position through her own stupidity suggest she is trying quash all opposition to her leadership.

The result showed one thing if you promise everything to everybody it will have a positive impact. What it did also show id the old adage "you can fool some of the people all the time, all the people some of the time but you cannot fool all the people all the time" Their manifesto couldn't be delivered and that became more evident the more stuff they promised.

Labour will lose face if they deliberately tamper with the natural order of Parliament like a bunch of school kids.

Don't forget if Labour were in power they would be reliant on the support of Queen Nicola which would be equally as bad if not worse - I surprised she didn't stand in for the Queen yesterday

Neither will Tim Farron

That first part of your quote highlights better than most how echo chambers work - and that probably includes me; personally, I fail to see how that size of rally in that many places could be stage managed - safe seat or not, everyone is not a Labour voter, so there would have been some dissenting voices. Contrasted with Mrs May's empty factories and remote village halls filled with party activists, councillors, or employees who were ordered to be there, he was a rock star; and at one point, he was an *actual* rock star - a stadium of 20k kids chanting his name for goodness sake!

You must remember that your conviction that the Labour manifesto was undeliverable is an opinion; there were plenty of independent analysts who said it was - and it least it was costed, so you had some actual numbers to rail against. The Tories couldn't even be d to include some basic sums - although with hindsight, that would have been wasted effort, since all their big ticket promises have been ditched anyway.

The quote above is a corker - that's called parliamentary democracy old chum; surely you wouldn't expect the opposition to roll over and vote with the government on things they've campaigned against for fear of being labelled immature? Especially not with JC in charge - he's nothing if not rebellious. I look forward to the utterly impotent Tories fail to get anything through parliament without first giving backhanders on a confidence and supply basis to the DUP - that'll go well.

The Tory MP in Shipley used parliamentary democracy to stifle a bill on equal rights i.e. he spoke for hours - that was exposed as a poor use of parliamentary democracy - what happened to him? Let's just say he will not be doing it again for a while. The public are not stupid - if the MPs could they would reverse the Brexit but they know the voting public would not stand for it. Messing around at our expense for the fun of it will do Labour no go going forwards. By all means vote against the bills but don't deliberately disrupt the process "old chum"

Yes, Philip Davies, the anti-feminist Tory MP for Shipley, tried to filibust a bill designed to protect women from domestic violence; whilst being a member of the equalities committee - that's a disgusting abuse of parliamentary process, and thank you for pointing it out.

I fail to see how that is in any way connected to the official opposition voting down bills that they oppose however; that's what they are there for.

Because if Labour try to abuse the parliamentary process - just for the sake of it - as did Mr Davies then their fate could quite easily be similar to that of Mr Davies.

I appreciate Corbyn and McDonald are having a real issue accepting the result of the GE - how they have the audacity to suggest they have more legitimacy to run the country than the Tories when 1m people less voted for them shows the arrogance of the top end of the Labour and how out of touch with reality they are.

The question of Corbyn accepting the result was even asked on QT last night

I'm sure that you realise that Corbyn & Co are just ramping up the pressure on Mrs May and the Tories.
As it stands, with the make up of parliament following the GE, Labour are in a worse position than the Tories (it's just basic arithmetic) but, by stating they are "ready to govern", it just increases pressure on the fragile Tory leadership.
If it wasnt for the Brexit sideshow, it would be really interesting to see how all this pans out and just how long the Tories put up with Mrs May.
However, with the Brexit negotiations having now begun and the outcome being so critical to all of our futures, Britain appears somewhat vulnerable and we ware certainly in a weaker negotiating position than we were a few months ago.

Ah I see - you're basing your empty threats on assumptions and guesses; and using a much derided Tory MP as an example of the fate that could befall anyone who dares defy the Tories?

Even for you, a poster not shy of making some fairly outrageous claims, this is a leap of logic.

Don't believe everything you see on QT; Peter Oborne claimed on the same programme that the Daily Mail was a paragon of truth and journalistic integrity...

A bit like all your posts based on assumptions and guesses - kettle and pot come to mind



I am capable of making my own mind up - but for a question to be asked on QT suggests it is a real issue. McDonald asking for 1m people to flood the streets of London demanding a Labour government as they really won the election - its delusional!!

Is that a fact or an assumption on your part?

I actually think Corbyn and McDonald think they actually won - its bonkers - devoid of any reality a bit like their manifesto



I don't think it increases any pressure on the Government it just makes Labour look silly as everyone knows they are not ready to govern or they would have won the election - pretty simple really.

As I said "you can fool some of the people" the only people Labour are fooling is themselves

Yep. just ramping up the pressure.
If they had won, it would have been Jeremy off to see the queen, which would have been interesting.
The Tories "won" by virtue of having most seats in parliament but, it seems like a hollow victory compared to Teresa's dream of a 100+ seat majority.
She may have won but, I dont think that too many bottles of champers were consumed at Tory HQ on election night.
There was a lot of knife sharpening going on in the back through, perhaps that was just the caterers getting supper ready

Know what I voted Tory. Couldn't see Corbyn as a strong enough leader. The tories made an almighty hash of its election campaign but still won. I'm seriously thinking of voting labour next time to see if he can walk I the walk as good as he is talking the talk.
It's always easier to promise when your not in power as it is to deliver when you are.