News1 min ago
Maybot Malfunction On Newsnight
This Daily Mail report on the car crash interview Theresa May did on Newsnight is scathing.
I don't think I have ever seen the Mail so vicious toward a Conservative Prime Minister.
After reading that, there is little doubt that May is toxic, a lame duck and a dead woman walking.
http://
Do you agree that she will now be removed sooner, rather than later?
I don't think I have ever seen the Mail so vicious toward a Conservative Prime Minister.
After reading that, there is little doubt that May is toxic, a lame duck and a dead woman walking.
http://
Do you agree that she will now be removed sooner, rather than later?
Answers
every day she stays in office she makes Corbyn look more attractive. Which doesn't bother me, of course, but it ought to bother her party and its diehard voters that she's doing Labour's work for it..
11:29 Sat 17th Jun 2017
Of course at this point it's a witch hunt because she fails so badly at every test of office she is given that even her own kind now want her gone before she can damage them further. She was floundering. Yes the interviewer was somewhat hard line, but then she should be, that is how politicians should be interviewed, not asked what they are happy to talk about, and everyone has a cosy little chat. I actually feel sorry for Theresa May on a human level, not on a political one I hasten to add, because she is out of her depth and stubbornly clinging onto to something which is hurting her badly. She should just let go and go and retire to a cottage by the sea and recuperate because she is unsuited to the role, she has no empathy for anyone or anything, and as a woman and type one diabetic it pains me to say that, but it's true, she has done no-one including herself any favours.
// it's also interesting that it *isn't* titled "Leftie Liberal biased BBC hounds PM unfairly pushing some agenda or other".//
Jim I love the // *isn't* //
Half the ABers will read it as +is+ and give you prolonged hell for getting it wrong ( having minutely checked the real thing)
your point was discussed on Newswatch this morning
and the Beeb not surprisingly replied that they report the news as is
[not even as they perceive it]
Jim I love the // *isn't* //
Half the ABers will read it as +is+ and give you prolonged hell for getting it wrong ( having minutely checked the real thing)
your point was discussed on Newswatch this morning
and the Beeb not surprisingly replied that they report the news as is
[not even as they perceive it]
If she misjudges anything, Mikey, it’s the common sense of the public. She spoke to firefighters to ensure that they have everything they need to carry out the appalling task before them. Why did you want her to give a public display? So that you could gloat at her being spitefully heckled and booed, as though she, personally, was responsible for the disaster? Wouldn’t you have loved that!!
Old_Geezer
With respect, the reason she's bring heavily criticised isn't just because of of not meeting folk, it's because that weakness has left an opportunity for folk with ulterior motives to have a vicious go.
I think the scumbag element of the left turned up at the Town Hall yesterday ... the crowd there appeared to contain some professional agitators.
I don't think we will have to wait to long for the 'smashing up of London'
With respect, the reason she's bring heavily criticised isn't just because of of not meeting folk, it's because that weakness has left an opportunity for folk with ulterior motives to have a vicious go.
I think the scumbag element of the left turned up at the Town Hall yesterday ... the crowd there appeared to contain some professional agitators.
I don't think we will have to wait to long for the 'smashing up of London'
The whole point ( even the whole perception which has been missed wholesale by the average ABer) is that rich ( sorry v rich) West Ken Council thought to themselves
'how can we hive off expense dogs like Grenfell? and save us lots and lots of munnay ! '
and answered themselves " o I know ! - create an arms length body "west ken housing or whatever" and make them run it cost-neutrally. This means when anyone comes ( or storms into) the Town Hall we can say 'nothing to do wiv us' go and see someone else'.'
so the whole thing worked like it was intended to work.....
[ ie cost cutting, corner cutting, prolonged complaints, fires and dead babies]
and as we know on AB - saying you have got something badly badly wrong is very difficult and hardly ever happens
'how can we hive off expense dogs like Grenfell? and save us lots and lots of munnay ! '
and answered themselves " o I know ! - create an arms length body "west ken housing or whatever" and make them run it cost-neutrally. This means when anyone comes ( or storms into) the Town Hall we can say 'nothing to do wiv us' go and see someone else'.'
so the whole thing worked like it was intended to work.....
[ ie cost cutting, corner cutting, prolonged complaints, fires and dead babies]
and as we know on AB - saying you have got something badly badly wrong is very difficult and hardly ever happens
The Prime Minister is ultimately responsible, seeing as how she's nominally in charge of running the country. I don't see that she bears any personal responsibility but part of the job of any politician is to stand up and be accountable for what's gone wrong.
Sadiq Khan stood there and let himself be heckled, let the public vent their anger at him. Theresa May did not. Which approach is better? I wouldn't care to say, but it does seem like May is bad at engaging with people who disagree with her. Even when accepting accountability for the election shambles, she only did so when confronted by her own party -- ie, surrounded by friends, colleagues and allies. Not on election night itself, not on the doorstep of Number 10, and not since then either.
Also the interviewer was hounding her mostly over the question: "Have you misjudged the public's anger?" To which May's reply was "What the government has done is blablabla". That doesn't answer any aspect of the question at all, as it's neither about Theresa May personally nor about the public anger. Why shouldn't the interviewer interject, point out that she isn't addressing the question, and do so several times?
Sadiq Khan stood there and let himself be heckled, let the public vent their anger at him. Theresa May did not. Which approach is better? I wouldn't care to say, but it does seem like May is bad at engaging with people who disagree with her. Even when accepting accountability for the election shambles, she only did so when confronted by her own party -- ie, surrounded by friends, colleagues and allies. Not on election night itself, not on the doorstep of Number 10, and not since then either.
Also the interviewer was hounding her mostly over the question: "Have you misjudged the public's anger?" To which May's reply was "What the government has done is blablabla". That doesn't answer any aspect of the question at all, as it's neither about Theresa May personally nor about the public anger. Why shouldn't the interviewer interject, point out that she isn't addressing the question, and do so several times?
Well said Zacs. If I were a Tory supporter, I would be urging May to go, and go quickly. She is a liability, not just to Britain, but to her own Party.
To paraphrase Oliver Cromwell ::
" You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately... Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go! "
To paraphrase Oliver Cromwell ::
" You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately... Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go! "
'part of the job of any politician is to stand up and be accountable for what's gone wrong'
Do you really think that Jim? You actually want someone / some government representative, who might have absolutely nothing to do with the situation to say 'yep sorry, the Grenfell tradgedy was our making'?
What a strange opinion.
Do you really think that Jim? You actually want someone / some government representative, who might have absolutely nothing to do with the situation to say 'yep sorry, the Grenfell tradgedy was our making'?
What a strange opinion.
Mikey, odd that you should choose that quote. I went to Cromwell’s house recently and during my time there learnt a lot I didn’t know about him. At the end of it all visitors were asked to decide if Cromwell was a hero or a traitor – and guess what the majority vote was. Yes, indeedy. A self-serving traitor. Ring any bells?
Part of it at least is the deal between politicians and the Civil Service, for example -- politicians take the fall for mistakes made by the CS, and the credit for their successes.
But what I am talking about is professional, not personal, responsibility. I don't think it's strange at all to suggest that holders of public office, who are after all truly accountable to the public since that's who appointed them, should therefore see that accountability as part of their role.
But what I am talking about is professional, not personal, responsibility. I don't think it's strange at all to suggest that holders of public office, who are after all truly accountable to the public since that's who appointed them, should therefore see that accountability as part of their role.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.