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.

The Tories won by virtue of 1m more votes and a larger share of the vote than Blair ever managed. They conducted the worst campaign ever and still labour couldn't get across the line.

Mrs May will be gone by the Autumn - I think Liam Fox will be the next PM. Tim Farron wont like that!!

Your seem obsessed with what Tim Farron will or won't like; you are aware he resigned, yes?

JC on glasto stage tonight. Unconfirmed reports he will reprise snoop dogs raps on California Girls with Katy Perry complete with shades and a large nhs approved spliff.

What you say is of course true but, what is the actual cost of May's disastrous leadership and worse GE campaign.
She has turned the Tories from a strong political party, with a sizeable lead in the polls into a party running scared, siding with the political wing of a terrorist sympathising party and utterly incapable of negotiating with the EU27.
Even her opening gambit, on immigration and the rights of UK citizens abroad and EU citizens in the UK, which should have been solid and unambiguous, has been pulled apart by her counterparts in the EU.
She needs to go quickly and give us a chance of regaining some credibility.

There is an intrigue there I guess with that, similar to slowing down on the motorway to get a good look at a car crash. His ego in charge of running the country, good god.

Not quite - but he did pull pints for the punters afterwards.

Interestingly, the MSM have used this as their latest attempt to smear him; he should have been at the Armed Forces event instead, they were bribed by the promise of uni fees being abolished, bet he wouldn't get the same reception at Ascot (?!) etc etc blah blah.

Perhaps the winner of the ridiculously desperate right wing response to this, was from washed up has-been Edwina Currie, who objected that he was preaching about fairness and a more equal society, to a crowd who had the audacity to spend £240 for a Glastonbury ticket; clearly, the unwashed need to spend more time wallowing in poverty - and can't have political legitimacy if they're able to save up for a big event?

Whichever side of the political divide you come from, this man deserves credit for energising young people and getting them interested in politics; might be a bit scary for Tories to think that young people will take part in our democracy - but it's absolutely and unequivocally a good thing if the people who will inherit the future, take a bit of control of it back from old people.

Yes, bribing them with unaffordable and uncosted scrapping of fees, what a masterstroke.

Point proved - and as long as the establishment keep ignoring or patronising young people like that, support for Corbyn will continue to grow; I'm all for it.

By the way - the average age of Glastonbury attendees is 36.

If it was uncosted how do you know it was unaffordable?

Meanwhile the delightful Andrea Leadsom has stated news reporters should be more patriotic. A step towards fascism.

Snap. We're already living in a country that is obsesses with what they can get for free or cheap and he's starting off a whole generation in politics thinking it's all about who can offer the best freebies. Incredibly short sighted to think this is the way to go and what attitude it'll create when Corbyn is long gone and other politicians have to pick up his mess. If you can only get people interested in politics by offering free stuff then I think we're better off without them having an interest.

Was that the same Edwina Currie who said that that there wasn't a problem with child poverty in the UK and cited increased numbers of child obesity to "back up" her comment.
I think it's best that we realise that many Tory MP's (and some Labour MP's) just dont live in the real world, which is particularly dangerous when they are asked to solve issues, without the slightest bit of understanding of those problems.
It's probably why they were happy to cut disability benefits, because it wont affect them !

To be a competent MP you therefore need to have kids, experienced poverty, be disabled............ What utter nonsense.

Maybe you could talk us through Jezzas non political experiences which make him so competent. (Leave the private schooling, never worked outside of Parliament, brought up in a wealthy home, earns £100+k etc)

What an inane comment. If you distill your argument to the extreme, you would be happy with a few warlords or whatever they might be taking all the wealth 99.9999999% living at subsistence level - in other words like a very bad case of Communism. Any robust, successful, democratic society / nation can only survive by co-operation and the question becomes how the government tweaks the fiscal system and law to arrive at a working, reasonable and 'fair' distribution of wealth and resources. The current situation is unsustainable and so thinking needs to change. As a writer (in I think the right-wing press) wrote after (!) Corbyn had lost the recent election - he could not see what all the panic and fuss was about Corbyn's very modest, democratic socialist manifesto had been.

So, you're ok with predominantly white, male, privately educated MP, many of whom haven't experienced life outside the Education system and the Westminster "bubble".

6 of the 23 cabinet are women, call that a quarter and 15 are white middle aged privately educated men, that's really diverse isn't it.
Labour, at least, have a 50/50 male/female split and they certainly have a far more diverse range of people.

When politics is becoming further and further detached from society in general and with many people disillusioned by the whole political process, it would certainly help if some of our representatives were a little more "representative" or, do you think that we should all be told what to do by the "ruling class".