Originally Posted by
the other bob wilson
I can think of one, the party that was already in Government could have carried on with it's working majority until 2020, just like our strong and stable leader said they were going to - seven times apparently.
Instead, she called an election purely on the grounds that she saw an opportunity for her party and so, after plenty of talk about how there was so much to do in the Brexit negotiations in such a short time, promptly put them back another couple of months!
Let's not forget that Trimmer Cameron got himself in a right mess by winning an election he didn't think he would and so was forced to hold the referendum on EU membership that he had offered as a sop to the anti EU faction of his party.
So, twice now we've been left dropped in it because Conservative Prime Ministers think more of what's in it for their party, rather than what's in it for the UK.
For the first few weeks of the election campaign, it seemed that the Government were trying to win their "landslide" by relentlessly parroting two three letter phrases - "strong and stable" and "coalition of chaos".
To concentrate on one of those words, I always think that, in political terms at least, "stable" and "stability" is meant to signal competence, solidity, a safe pair of hands. So, can I ask what on earth have the Tories done in the last seven years to justify such descriptions being applied to them? To carry on as they have done, while telling us about the "mess" Labour left for them in 2010 takes arrogance to unbelievable levels.
I hated Thatcher and her Government, but I had to admit that many within it had the authority and gravitas you should expect from the party running the country, but this lot are incredible - they are just so inept.
Reply With Quote