-
Re: General Election 2015
QUESTION: “Why did you opt out using two devices at the time, obviously if this didn’t come out, probably wouldn’t become an issue. …”
HILLARY CLINTON: “… As I said, I saw it as a matter of convenience and it was allowed, others had done it according to the State Department which recently said Secretary Kerry was the first Secretary of State to rely primarily on State.gov email account. And when I got there, I wanted to just use one device for both personal and work emails instead of two. It was allowed, and as I said, it was for convenience and it was my practice to communicate with State Department and other government officials on their .gov accounts so those emails would be automatically saved in the State Department system to meet record keeping requirements and that indeed is what happened.” (Hillary Clinton, Press Conference At The United Nations, 3/10/15)
vs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXjB-HAhmUY
Sure it's trivial, but let's tug on this string and see what unfolds shall we?
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
You must not remember all the members of the Bush administration running their own private email servers. Dick Cheney and his man size safes in his office and his own system off classified documents. The White House having a shredding lorry turen up and shred tons of documents every few months and a local firm wiping hard drives on a regular basis. It only upset a few Democrats. Nobody else gave a shit.
All these "scandals" are things that only exercise Republicans and people who hate her and aren't going to vote for her. The rest of the country hears them and rolls their eyes. If the GOP want to win an election in 2015 by digging up non-scandals from the 1990s all it will do is make people contemplate what a ridiculous bunch of shit they were fed back then -- House investigations into whether Hillary murdered people or whether the Clintons were running a drug ring etc.
It's difficult for you to understand because your little shelf doesn't have the capacity for critical thought when it comes to politics. All it can do is store roughly forty eight hours worth of Fox News propaganda. That puts you in the same boat as a large number of other American voters, a lot of whom also interact with the internet, but just because there are a lot of you doesn't mean that everybody thinks like you do. The vast majority of people are just rolling their eyes when something like this comes up.
#1 Condi Rice said she never used a private email account so there's your trouble using that word again...."All" :rolleyes:
#2 New regulations were passed in 2009 which of course do not and did not effect the W administration, but DO effect the Obama Administration.
Also there's the pesky little issue about foreign money pouring into the Clinton Global Initiative and the legality of that.....but you were insulting me, I shouldn't have interrupted your posting of such important slanders pray continue
Like I said, what you need to think about is whether any of these "scandals" are of any interest to anybody who doesn't hate Hillary. There's a big old world outside of the Fox news bubble Woti.
-
Yep who cares if the former Secretary of State committed several felonies?
I mean why even have an election? Why not a coronation????
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
Still feeling confident about Hillary for President?
Hillary is an absolutely shit candidate.
Incredible isn't it?! And still is the front runner.
Totally bought and paid for by banks and corporations,
Call me conspiratorial, but Andrew Jackson was the last POTUS - Lincoln & Kennedy tried, but they got off'd. Since the meeting at Jeckyl Island 1913-1914...the POTUS is a position of pupeteering. No way could I have conceived that Obama would be elected & be able to make a difference. So Hillary is being pushed by the banks on the Dem's side & IMO Jeb on the repub's side. 2008,2012 IMO is just like the election of 1912, when the Warburgs financed all 3 candidates: Taft, Wilson & Roosevelt. If one candidate one- the privatizing of the banks would occur called The Aldridge Act. If another one it would be called the Federal Reserve Act. Didn't matter who won, the banks & affiliates had control over them and the media that pushed them or pulled them down.
prone to verbal gaffes, completely out of touch with average Americans, unlikely to have any serious challengers in the primaries so won't get the opportunity to get sharpened up by debates and competition with anybody before she faces the election campaign. Endless negatives.
Political abyss.
The only thing saving her is the fact that the GOP candidates all make her look good by comparison.
Aint that some shit? The almighty righteous right, has produced Bush,Dole, Bush, McCain and FlopRomney, damn that shit is pathetic. Dumb and Dumber;D
I'm guessing you're looking at this email thing and thinking ha!, here we go!. But every time you think that over the next few months what you need to think is, does anybody apart from people who hate her/weren't going to vote for her anyway really give a shit about this.
.
You must not remember all the members of the Bush administration running their own private email servers.
I remember them. From Plamegate the outing of our own CIA agent to Republican Darryll Issa trying to explain away possibly 22 million emails lost. Too easy to google it, yahoo it. But I prefer to say fuck it.
Dick Cheney and his man size safes in his office and his own system off classified documents. The White House having a shredding lorry turen up and shred tons of documents every few months and a local firm wiping hard drives on a regular basis. It only upset a few Democrats. Nobody else gave a shit.
All these "scandals" are things that only exercise Republicans and people who hate her and aren't going to vote for her.
Conservatives love to hate. Its what they do.
The rest of the country hears them and rolls their eyes. If the GOP want to win an election in 2015 by digging up non-scandals from the 1990s all it will do is make people contemplate what a ridiculous bunch of shit they were fed back then -- House investigations into whether Hillary murdered people or whether the Clintons were running a drug ring etc.
Sad, but true.
It's difficult for you to understand because your little shelf doesn't have the capacity for critical thought when it comes to politics. All it can do is store roughly forty eight hours worth of Fox News propaganda. That puts you in the same boat as a large number of other American voters, a lot of whom also interact with the internet, but just because there are a lot of you doesn't mean that everybody thinks like you do. The vast majority of people are just rolling their eyes when something like this comes up.
2016 Clinton vs Bush again....:-\
-
both parties are simply two heads of 1 monster and that monster is pulling the wool over the eyes of all the American citizens
-
Re: General Election 2015
What does any of this have to do with the British election?:confused:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Greenbeanz
What does any of this have to do with the British election?:confused:
as I was reading down through this thread it did somehow morph into US politics. I was confused during the last reading of the thread and thought that perhaps the British election was on a different OP Somehow this thread morphed.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Greenbeanz
What does any of this have to do with the British election?:confused:
;D
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Greenbeanz
What does any of this have to do with the British election?:confused:
Woti.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Greenbeanz
What does any of this have to do with the British election?:confused:
Woti.
If you're implying that I caused this thread to veer off course then you had best re-read the comments starting from the beginning.
I'll be waiting on the apology you SHOULD provide
-
Re: General Election 2015
Nigel Farage would axe 'much of' race discrimination laws.
UKIP would scrap much of the legislation designed to prevent racial discrimination in work, party leader Nigel Farage has said.
He was speaking in a Channel 4 documentary to be shown next week.
Downing Street said his comments were "deeply concerning", while Labour branded them "shocking".
Mr Farage told the BBC his remarks, recorded last autumn, had been "wilfully misinterpreted", saying he was talking about nationality not race.
BBC News - Nigel Farage would axe 'much of' race discrimination laws
-
Re: General Election 2015
.....so no apology then? How adult of you Kirkland
-
Re: General Election 2015
Somebody asked a question about the British political system in relation to America which I answered. That would have been the end of it were it not for your habit of turning every fucking thread into a chance for you to rant about your favourite subjects. It's you who should apologise to everybody else for continually inflicting your ignorance on us every chance you get. Now fuck off.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
Somebody asked a question about the British political system in relation to America which I answered. That would have been the end of it were it not for your habit of turning every fucking thread into a chance for you to rant about your favourite subjects. It's you who should apologise to everybody else for continually inflicting your ignorance on us every chance you get. Now fuck off.
Ah, ever so humble of you to yet again dodge responsibility. "I was just answering a question"...fine, I didn't respond to any part of your post with anything about American politics. I pressed you for an answer (which you have yet to provide me) on evolution and commented on Climate Change...that is all.
I did correct master when he called the United States a "Democracy" which we are not, we're a Republic, but you again took some sort of offense to that and stuck your nose in again.
Like a good little lefty you wanted to bring up race in regards to The Constitution, now you COULD have started a new thread, you COULD have let my comments slide, you COULD have stayed on topic after I corrected Master, but you didn't.
I am waiting for an answer about evolution, you've had precious time to study up on phyletic gradualism vs punctuated equilibrium. Along with that answer I will await the apology owed to me. Good day
-
Re: General Election 2015
What is the difference between a democracy and a republic?
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
What is the difference between a democracy and a republic?
Democracy quite simply put by Benjamin Franklin is "2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner"
Basically a Constitutional Republic is a government run (hopefully) within a set of rules outlined in a document such as the Constitution of the United States of America and a Democracy is pure majority rule which seems fine and dandy until you're on the short end of a 51-49% split and realize you're at the mercy of the 51%.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
What is the difference between a democracy and a republic?
Democracy quite simply put by Benjamin Franklin is "2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner"
Basically a Constitutional Republic is a government run (hopefully) within a set of rules outlined in a document such as the Constitution of the United States of America and a Democracy is pure majority rule which seems fine and dandy until you're on the short end of a 51-49% split and realize you're at the mercy of the 51%.
They appear the same thing. Majority rule even at 51% or 2 wolves over 1 sheep.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
What is the difference between a democracy and a republic?
Democracy quite simply put by Benjamin Franklin is "2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner"
Basically a Constitutional Republic is a government run (hopefully) within a set of rules outlined in a document such as the Constitution of the United States of America and a Democracy is pure majority rule which seems fine and dandy until you're on the short end of a 51-49% split and realize you're at the mercy of the 51%.
They appear the same thing. Majority rule even at 51% or 2 wolves over 1 sheep.
In a Constitutional Republic the sheep has inalienable rights: life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, ability to own land. The sheep also has the right to bear arms. So 51% have the say, but the sheep is protected under the rule of law.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
What is the difference between a democracy and a republic?
Democracy quite simply put by Benjamin Franklin is "2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner"
Basically a Constitutional Republic is a government run (hopefully) within a set of rules outlined in a document such as the Constitution of the United States of America and a Democracy is pure majority rule which seems fine and dandy until you're on the short end of a 51-49% split and realize you're at the mercy of the 51%.
They appear the same thing. Majority rule even at 51% or 2 wolves over 1 sheep.
In a Constitutional Republic the sheep has inalienable rights: life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, ability to own land. The sheep also has the right to bear arms. So 51% have the say, but the sheep is protected under the rule of law.
In a democracy a person should have all those rights anyway.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
In a democracy a person should have all those rights anyway.
Everyone SHOULD ALWAYS have those rights, but I digress
-
Re: General Election 2015
Budget 2015 at a glance: 14 key points
Growth
In 2015 revised up to 2.5% from 2.4% in the autumn statement.
The economy is forecast to grow 2.3% next year before reaching 2.4% in 2019.
Rowena Mason, political correspondent: This is good news for the chancellor but he is treading carefully when it comes to boasting about growth to make sure voters do not think his work is done when it comes to the economy. He therefore argues the sun has only just begun to shine.
Inflation
Forecast at 0.2% this year and the next three years. Bank of England’s monetary policy committee mandate remains at 2%.
RM: This is helping Osborne as it means he will have lower interest on the public debt but he is still way below the 2% inflation target.
Banks
A total of £5.3bn of extra taxes to come from the banking sector over five years as banks are stopped claiming relief on compensation claims and the bank levy - intended to bring in £2.9bn of revenue a year - to be increased to 0.21% to bring in extra £900m.
£13bn of mortgage loans still owned by the government from Northern Rock and Bradford & Bingley to be sold.
Another £9bn of Lloyds Banking Group shares to be sold this year - to be used to sell down the national debt.
RM: He says the money raised from the bank sale will be used to pay off national debt and not fund pre-election giveaways in a move that may disappoint Tories fighting marginal seats.
Debt
As a proportion of GDP, 80.4% in 2014/5, 80.2% in 2015/6 to reach 71.6% in 2019/20.
RM: Osborne is now able to say his original target has been met of getting the national debt share falling by the end of the parliament – although it is still a year later than predicted in emergency budget in June 2010.
Borrowing
£150bn at the start of this parliament. To be £90.2bn this year, £1bn lower than in the autumn statement.
Surplus to reach £5bn. At the autumn statement the surplus was projected to be £23bn in 2019/20.
RM: The massive fall in the surplus Osborne was predicting for 2018-19 means less opportunity for promised future hand-outs. It is an easing of his plans for austerity that may be designed to kill Labour’s argument that he was shrinking the state to size of 1930s.
Pensions
Lifetime allowance cut from £1.25m to £1m and index-linked from 2018.
RM: This decision is a political trap for Ed Balls. Osborne poached the plan from Labour, which said it would be used to pay partly for the tuition fees cut.
Tax avoidance
To raise £3.1bn over five years.
Diverted profits tax to be introduced into legislation.
RM: Labour has made tackling tax avoidance a major campaign issue. This appears to be an attempt to put the Conservatives on the same page when it comes to stopping multinationals shifting profits offshore. However, yet more claims of raising money through cracking down on tax avoidance may be met with scepticism as they rarely seem to raise as much as expected.
North Sea
To receive an extra £1.3bn through a number of measures, including cutting the petroleum revenue tax to 35% from 50% and cutting the supplementary charge to 20% from 30%, back-dated to January
RM: This appears to undo a big tax rise on the industry in 2011 when the oil price was higher. He makes a political argument that this is only possible because the UK is still together - and could not have been afforded in an independent Scotland.
Businesses
Abolish annual tax return.
Abolish national insurance contribution for the self employed.
RM: There are big cheers from the Tory backbench for this one. It is a tangible cut to red tape that will make a difference to some of their core voters. The abolition of employer NICs for under 21s and self-employed is a bid to boost employment further.
Alcohol
1p off a pint of beer.
2% cut in cider duty and whiskey duty.
Wine duty frozen.
RM: A beer duty cut had been widely expected but it is also cheer for wine, whisky and cider lovers - for voters across the drinking spectrum.
Petrol
Fuel duty frozen.
RM: Osborne has frozen or cut petrol duty for so many budgets in a row it would have been impossible for him to put it up this time.
Personal tax
Allowance raised to £10,800 (from £10,600) and to £11,000 the following year.
Higher rate threshold raised above inflation rate to £43,300
RM: This had been widely trailed - originally a Liberal Democrat policythat the Conservatives have tried to adopt and take credit for since going into coalition. Repeatedly raising the threshold from £6,475 to £11,000 in successive budgets has also been criticised for failing to do anything for the very lowest earners who are already exempt from income tax.
Savings
A personal allowance of £1,000, or £500 for higher rate tax payers (over £42,701), on interest received on savings.
ISA freedom: £15,240 tax free allowance remains even if cash withdrawn.
First time buyer ISA: £200 saved, government puts in £50.
RM: This is the rabbit out of the hat. It is a small-c conservative policy to reward saving will please the Tory faithful and give activists something new to talk about the doorstep but it’s not a eye-catching as some may have been hoping for.
-
Re: General Election 2015
What a crock of shit all that talk of growth is. The debt has doubled in 5 years and in the meantime wages have fallen and prpoerty is as unaffordable as ever. If there is any growth it hasnt gone to ordinary people. And the employment and inflation numbers are as cooked as everything else. If it is all so healthy then why are interest rates still at 'we fucked up and dont know what to do' levels. It's a fish tank that potentially blows the fish to the moon.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
What a crock of shit all that talk of growth is. The debt has doubled in 5 years and in the meantime wages have fallen and prpoerty is as unaffordable as ever. If there is any growth it hasnt gone to ordinary people. And the employment and inflation numbers are as cooked as everything else. If it is all so healthy then why are interest rates still at 'we fucked up and dont know what to do' levels. It's a fish tank that potentially blows the fish to the moon.
oh god how refreshing. :happy0931sb4::happy0931sb4::happy0931sb4:
-
Re: General Election 2015
I genuinely hope this poll isn't reflective of the nation as a whole, as UKIP currently are the biggest party. Fahr-ahhhge is an incorrect pronunciation of his name, when said correctly it should rhyme with disparage, savage and miscarriage, which are all appropriate to such a farce of a party.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Democracy a political system of government by, of, and for the people but has actually metamorphosed into a system where the politicians fool the people into believing that what is good for these crooks and their rich lobbyists friends are good for the them as well. And what do the people answer? Amen... I think we've grown mature enough to do away with these middlemen who are called politicians...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
superheavyrhun
I genuinely hope this poll isn't reflective of the nation as a whole, as UKIP currently are the biggest party. Fahr-ahhhge is an incorrect pronunciation of his name, when said correctly it should rhyme with disparage, savage and miscarriage, which are all appropriate to such a farce of a party.
I think its more reflective of the forum, and you have to factor in at least a couple Non-UK residents voting UKIP and distorting the results. UKIP will get votes because they appeal to many people who feel disenfranchised or unrepresented. The labour party no longer represents the working class, and then there are those for whom unbelievably Tories are no longer right wing enough. The crazy thing is both groups will probably vote for Farrage.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Greenbeanz
Quote:
Originally Posted by
superheavyrhun
I genuinely hope this poll isn't reflective of the nation as a whole, as UKIP currently are the biggest party. Fahr-ahhhge is an incorrect pronunciation of his name, when said correctly it should rhyme with disparage, savage and miscarriage, which are all appropriate to such a farce of a party.
I think its more reflective of the forum, and you have to factor in at least a couple Non-UK residents voting UKIP and distorting the results. UKIP will get votes because they appeal to many people who feel disenfranchised or unrepresented. The labour party no longer represents the working class, and then there are those for whom unbelievably Tories are no longer right wing enough. The crazy thing is both groups will probably vote for Farrage.
Yup, all because he likes a pint and a smoke. And blaming foreigners is the easiest political line to spin since the bloody Anglo-Saxons arrived and took over this wonderful Celtic country. Send em all back to Anglesey I say!
-
Re: General Election 2015
Miliband And Cameron Prepare For Live Showdown
David Cameron and Ed Miliband are preparing themselves for the first big media setpiece of the election campaign, as Sky and Channel 4 jointly present Cameron & Miliband Live: The Battle For Number 10.
The programme, which starts at 9pm tonight, is part traditional interview and part questioning by a studio audience.
After winning a coin toss, Mr Miliband has elected to appear after the Prime Minister.
Miliband And Cameron Prepare For Live Showdown
-
Re: General Election 2015
How was it? I've only just checked in now, and frankly I was still under the impression that the TV debate was off the table. Then again, as it was Sky and Channel 4, no surprise I missed it, as I generally follow the Beeb for news coverage, and I doubt they'd be promoting something on these channels.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Comfortable win for Miliband. This demonstrated exactly what Cameron won't face him head-to-head.
Anyone that has watched PMQs for the last 5 years knew that anyway.
-
Re: General Election 2015
PMQ's in the notorious playground of war criminals, perverts, petty criminals, and general acts of treason against the populace. Why is anybody voting exactly? :)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
PMQ's in the notorious playground of war criminals, perverts, petty criminals, and general acts of treason against the populace. Why is anybody voting exactly? :)
exactly.
it is a lose lose lose situation just like in the United States. Those are just three or four parties which are all ugly privileged pompous heads of a 4 headed beast. It is the same beast.any head of the beast which you vote for will still empower the beast to continue to fleece the people like the f****** scallywags and filthy thieves and perverts that they all are.
the beast gets the Sheep to argue to and fro about which one of its four heads is the best.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
superheavyrhun
How was it? I've only just checked in now, and frankly I was still under the impression that the TV debate was off the table. Then again, as it was Sky and Channel 4, no surprise I missed it, as I generally follow the Beeb for news coverage, and I doubt they'd be promoting something on these channels.
It was on BBC news, as well as sky and channel 4, which was better viewing because it had no adverts.
Paxmon asked some really personal and difficult questions which was great viewing.
Both politicians were asked questions from the audience.
Cameron looked nervous and sweaty. Milliband was bumbling at times.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Like 'Why have you privatised the NHS?' or 'Why has the national debt doubled despite you killing vulnerable members of society?' or 'How can you criticize Russia when you voted to invade Iraq and won't publish the Chilcott enquiry?' I don't believe tough questions were asked at all. It is pantomime on a dusty stage in the theater of financiers.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Like 'Why have you privatised the NHS?' or 'Why has the national debt doubled despite you killing vulnerable members of society?' or 'How can you criticize Russia when you voted to invade Iraq and won't publish the Chilcott enquiry?' I don't believe tough questions were asked at all. It is pantomime on a dusty stage in the theater of financiers.
Did you watch it?
Cameron was asked about nhs, borrowing more and breaking his promise, and Milliband said invading Iraq was wrong.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Like 'Why have you privatised the NHS?' or 'Why has the national debt doubled despite you killing vulnerable members of society?' or 'How can you criticize Russia when you voted to invade Iraq and won't publish the Chilcott enquiry?' I don't believe tough questions were asked at all. It is pantomime on a dusty stage in the theater of financiers.
Did you watch it?
Cameron was asked about nhs, borrowing more and breaking his promise, and Milliband said invading Iraq was wrong.
well I am glad to see that atleast these points were mentioned at all! How did they respond to Milliband's assertion on Iraq? i didnt see it.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Like 'Why have you privatised the NHS?' or 'Why has the national debt doubled despite you killing vulnerable members of society?' or 'How can you criticize Russia when you voted to invade Iraq and won't publish the Chilcott enquiry?' I don't believe tough questions were asked at all. It is pantomime on a dusty stage in the theater of financiers.
Did you watch it?
Cameron was asked about nhs, borrowing more and breaking his promise, and Milliband said invading Iraq was wrong.
Only 'highlights' but I thought it was just pantomime and soundbites. Where were the tough questions about child abuse? About HSBC? About war criminals? Also, they let Cameron lie repeatedly without following up on it. I also thought they were much harder on Milliband too who just came across as a dork. It's almost as though he doesn't want to win and the super coalition that is planned becomes inevitable. They are both awful, though Ed is obviously the nicer of the two. If Labour was serious the first thing they would do is kick Blair out of the party. Cameron is just a nasty piece of work looking to loot the place and get his place on the corporate ticket ASAP.
-
Re: General Election 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Like 'Why have you privatised the NHS?' or 'Why has the national debt doubled despite you killing vulnerable members of society?' or 'How can you criticize Russia when you voted to invade Iraq and won't publish the Chilcott enquiry?' I don't believe tough questions were asked at all. It is pantomime on a dusty stage in the theater of financiers.
Did you watch it?
Cameron was asked about nhs, borrowing more and breaking his promise, and Milliband said invading Iraq was wrong.
Only 'highlights' but I thought it was just pantomime and soundbites. Where were the tough questions about child abuse? About HSBC? About war criminals? Also, they let Cameron lie repeatedly without following up on it. I also thought
they were much harder on Milliband too who just came across as a dork. It's almost as though he doesn't want to win and the super coalition that is planned becomes inevitable. They are both awful, though Ed is obviously the nicer of the two. If Labour was serious the first thing they would do is kick Blair out of the party. Cameron is just a nasty piece of work looking to loot the place and get his place on the corporate ticket ASAP.
yep its all fucking staged, its demonization of Milliband, of course he didnt "want" to win, he doesnt want a bullet in the head so to speak.
-
Re: General Election 2015
They did get personal with Milliband saying hurtful things like Labour party chose the wrong brother, that he is a wimp and Putin would wipe the floor with him at the international stage also that Labour should be way ahead in the polls but it was him that was the reason why Labour are behind in the polls.
He blamed media, Murdoch propaganda and that he was more interested in real issues not interested in perpetuating myths.
-
Re: General Election 2015
The funny thing about Putin is that everything the British condemn him for they have done infinitely worse. Putin has actually improved life for his middle classes and built his economy on sound principles whilst the British have added another 75,000 pounds of debt on to each family in order to continue the ponzi scheme and prop up criminal banks. Putin took a region after a poll in which they chose to stay with Russia whilst Britain full on invaded several nations and left the Middle East a ruin. They full on threatened Scotland who now knows the score! Russia is no paradise, but the British are laughable in their hypocrisy. Carry on speculating.....
