Gypsy Ram

Trump or Hilary. Trump WINS!

Trump or Hillary   107 members have voted

  1. 1. Who would you vote for? Same old crap with Hillary or the kinda guy who might tweet Putin at 1am after a drinking session and call him an a hole?

    • Trump
      46
    • Hillary
      51

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

697 posts in this topic

2 minutes ago, McRamFan said:

Exactly, they know very little and only remember the sound bites that get peddled around.

And we could say the same about a fair few other aspects that parties campaign on too. Shall we do away with general elections then?

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, StringerBell said:

But then you have to consider that hopefully those remain voters might grow up.

The Leave voters never did.

Sorry, couldn't resist that. It was like an open goal. I shut my eyes and saw a flailing Paul Robinson on the ground.:D

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, StringerBell said:

And we could say the same about a fair few other aspects that parties campaign on too. Shall we do away with general elections then?

 

Would be much tidier.

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, WhiteHorseRam said:

The Leave voters never did.

Sorry, couldn't resist that. It was like an open goal. I shut my eyes and saw a flailing Paul Robinson on the ground.:D

It was an open goal and you went and did a Chris Iwelumo.

 

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

It was an open goal and you went and did a Chris Iwelumo.

 

No, if I'd done a Chris Iwelumo I would have said:

washing powder

marmite

lettuce

margarine

 

Because who knows WHAT he was thinking when he took that shot.

StringerBell likes this

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, StringerBell said:

And we could say the same about a fair few other aspects that parties campaign on too. Shall we do away with general elections then?

Yes, until you have the option, None of the above, as well as a reform of how 'MP's' represent their area.  Sooner have a the leaders of industry in charge.

The remainers have grown up, we now want grown up answers to grown up questions.  The current leadership team have no clue what to do and if you think the UK will get a deal better out than in, that is just not going to happen.  All I hear Brexiters saying that the outcome doesn't matte, its the 'win' that counts.

ariotofmyown likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Now they're contemplating pay to trade. I hope we make them pay us a lot, as they need our business so badly.

ariotofmyown likes this

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, McRamFan said:

Yes, until you have the option, None of the above, as well as a reform of how 'MP's' represent their area.  Sooner have a the leaders of industry in charge.

The remainers have grown up, we now want grown up answers to grown up questions.  The current leadership team have no clue what to do and if you think the UK will get a deal better out than in, that is just not going to happen.  All I hear Brexiters saying that the outcome doesn't matte, its the 'win' that counts.

Ive always thought that (a) anarchists should have their voices heard in an election and that (b) if abstaining from voting was recognised as a positive vote for nothing rather than an apathetic 'I'll accept what I'm given' then the turnout at elections might increase. 

I still don't see why this nonsense about people not knowing what they're voting for is applied pretty much exclusively to leaving the EU and not any other aspect of politics though. You get the odd person saying that about general elections but it's generally frowned upon. But with Brexit it's a common thing to hear. Maybe there's something valid to knowing what Brexit means  precisely but that hasn't been hammered out yet. That hasn't stopped some people going on about it, in what seems to me is just a convenient extension of the idea that people were too uneducated to vote at all, a notion which has been about since before the referendum. It seems disingenuous on the part of those who say it.

For people like me who want to see the EU burn the win is the most important thing.

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

Ive always thought that (a) anarchists should have their voices heard in an election and that (b) if abstaining from voting was recognised as a positive vote for nothing rather than an apathetic 'I'll accept what I'm given' then the turnout at elections might increase. 

I still don't see why this nonsense about people not knowing what they're voting for is applied pretty much exclusively to leaving the EU and not any other aspect of politics though. You get the odd person saying that about general elections but it's generally frowned upon. But with Brexit it's a common thing to hear. Maybe there's something valid to knowing what Brexit means  precisely but that hasn't been hammered out yet. That hasn't stopped some people going on about it, in what seems to me is just a convenient extension of the idea that people were too uneducated to vote at all, a notion which has been about since before the referendum. It seems disingenuous on the part of those who say it.

For people like me who want to see the EU burn the win is the most important thing.

Interesting.

I agree with you in your paragraph one. I think there should be a 'I think you are all rubbish' box to tick, and if enough people put their cross in that, the election is suspended while politics sorts its self out. People who don't bother to vote and then moan about the result infuriate me. 16 yr olds should be able to vote, you should be able to do it online/over the phone (like renewing car tax) and there should be a fine for not voting (say £20, you choose a registered charity for it to go to).

I think many leave voters voted 'I think you are all rubbish' not expecting that a lot of others were doing the same. 

 

McRamFan and ariotofmyown like this

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

Ive always thought that (a) anarchists should have their voices heard in an election and that (b) if abstaining from voting was recognised as a positive vote for nothing rather than an apathetic 'I'll accept what I'm given' then the turnout at elections might increase. 

I still don't see why this nonsense about people not knowing what they're voting for is applied pretty much exclusively to leaving the EU and not any other aspect of politics though. You get the odd person saying that about general elections but it's generally frowned upon. But with Brexit it's a common thing to hear. Maybe there's something valid to knowing what Brexit means  precisely but that hasn't been hammered out yet. That hasn't stopped some people going on about it, in what seems to me is just a convenient extension of the idea that people were too uneducated to vote at all, a notion which has been about since before the referendum. It seems disingenuous on the part of those who say it.

For people like me who want to see the EU burn the win is the most important thing.

This is what I don't understand.

Fair enough you hate the E.U, you're getting out so surely it's happy days?

Why does it have to burn to suit you? Surely that's a decision for the countries that remain involved, if they want to rip it apart then fine, but it's not your call. 

The other issue is that if the E.U "burns", the fallout would take down the U.K too, in or out it wouldn't matter, from an economic or security stand point this country would suffer massively. 

Non of this makes any sense. 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community.


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now