Should we have a General Election?

The Tory party are just being arrogant and treating the general public with contempt.It's their arrogant belief that they can trample on the democratic will of the people.It's like they've gone mad and just want to commit a gigantic fraud....people voted for May and now they will (probably) get Johnson, how is that democratic ? It's a scandal but we are putting up with what is essentially a stitch up ! It means he will take over number 10 without a mandate from the people for the next 3 years.

No one will have elected Johnson as Prime Minister so surely he should do the right thing to get the mandate that he needs by putting it to the public and hold a General Election as soon as he takes office !

 

I'd like a specific one, I don't think general is going to cut it. It's too namby pamby, we need to be more focused.

 

Vast majority didn't vote for May actually. She bought her way in with her magic money tree..

 

No problem with that. (If a pm died during office would you suggest another election, people vote for a parties policies not the leader.) I do admit personalities influence people to a degree. What I do have a problem with is an MP being allowed to cross over/join a new party or go independent. That should definitely go back to the electorate.

 

It’s s fekin shitfest orchestrated by the worst Prime minister since Thatcher to appease an avaricious self centred bunch of non talented party .
A referendum that solved absolutely nothing and only informed us that the country was split and gave the most disgusting of parasites a stage to open the wound and let the maggots feast .

I don’t know what the answer is but I really believe that for the majority in this country we will be poorer for leaving if it comes to that and there’s riches for a few who are shouting loudest and in a lot of cases not resident .

The fact that no one is concentrating on the biggest Brexiteer has feathered his nest and made sure whatever happens he’s covered by cementing his allegiance to the EU with his pension and his families membership is gobsmacking tbh.

The division this referendum has foist upon us is a crime imo and Cameroon should be in the dock.
We appoint MPs to debate and make decisions thus avoiding events that is unfolding atm and this was done solely to appease a political party.
I hope they implode and are exposed to the greedy avaricious self centred selfish cnuts they are and lose everything they have made and back to the slums they truly deserve.

 

The word seems to be that the Tories fear losing to Corbyn. Also, Boris would fear that his tenure as PM would be very short-lived. But if he had real balls (bedroom prowess aside) he would do it. That would expose the fact that Corbyn is not allied with the majority of his membership, who are pro-EU or pro second referendum. The split would potentially sink Labour. Also, if he struck straight away he might pre-empt Nasty Nige from being organised enough to fight a GE successfully. The other thing is that he could tout that he was asking for support for his version of Brexit, whatever that really is. He'd probably get his mandate. Do I want Boris to succeed? No. Not in a million years. But nor do I have any enthusiasm for a Corbyn-led Labour government. Now the Lib Dems...…………….

 

Same with all political parties only in it for themselves with no care about the public who voted them in

 

That says it all really, Lib Dem’s FFs

 

They were superb at propping up the Tories and their austerity last time in office. Good old Nick Clegg and co. I remember Chuka telling us about how awful they were back then, how nobody could ever vote for such a party who change their minds more than their underwear.

He’s a Lib Dem now. In a seat that he won on Labour policy.

Odious turd. Odious party.

 

No. There will be one this year in my opinion but not because the Tories have elected a new leader. Personally I don't think a change of leader should trigger one; we vote for an MP to represent our consistency within a party and they either form the government or sit in opposition. Changing a leader doesn't change anything in terms of the numbers in parliament.

Changing the leader of the government has happened before, its happening now and will happen again.

 

Circumstances such as these should trigger a by election in my humble opinion.

 

But the most pro-EU.

 

As staunch a remainer as I am I cannot vote for s single policy .
You have called Corbyn as a communist , IRA sympathiser etc etc but his policies are the policies of a Democratic Party conference and popular amongst the public .
Corbyn is not a dictator as most are making out . The policies are not Communist, left Socialist or for that matter any extreme you care to mention .
They are popular costed and achievable .
The Capitalist system is still there just the proceeds are not going into a few pockets and benefits us all ,
The policies are there for anyone to read and it’s intersting that the media doesn’t concentrate on these but just the lies and bile .
Yet you’ll vote for a party on a single issue a party remember that have form on a single issue (student fees ) and sold those policies and some others for Limousines and personal bodyguards and front bench seats .
In fact I’m sure some of them handed over their Grandmothers in exchange.
The Lib Dem’s only have popular policies because they know they’ll never have to try and implement them andvif ever they get into positions where they can sell them to the highest bidder

 

If you had a “none of the above” option, I genuinely believe that you would have the largest ever turnout followed by the largest ever landslide victory.
Other than that, get your giant pin ready, blindfold on and look for that donkeys arse.

 

If Boris has any morality or integrity he'll call an election pretty much immediately he becomes PM.
So no election then.

 

Well that’s what Labour did when Blair quit so it’s only fair......oh wait a minute....

 

And who heaped scorn on that process?? Let’s see.....

“ IT'S the arrogance. It’s the contempt. That’s what gets me. It’s Gordon Brown’s apparent belief that he can just trample on the democratic will of the British people.

"It’s at moments like this that I think the political world has gone mad, and I am alone in detecting the gigantic fraud.
They voted for Tony, and yet they now get Gordon, and a transition about as democratically proper as the transition from Claudius to Nero. It is a scandal.

Why are we all conniving in this stitch-up? This is nothing less than a palace coup “

Yes, another example of that conniving c.u.nt Boris Johnson’s barefaced hypocrisy.

 

Funny you should mention that as what i put was a very concise version of this article from 2007 by the one and (thank God) only Boris Johnson.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment...4DvABOf7D55WeoGaSm-Mo2zD_wtYwJojh9guyDZJeHMgE

Brown's looking for a Scottish ally

By Boris Johnson

12:01AM BST 21 Jun 2007


It's the arrogance. It's the contempt. That's what gets me. It's Gordon Brown's apparent belief that he can just trample on the democratic will of the British people. It's at moments like this that I think the political world has gone mad, and I am alone in detecting the gigantic fraud.

Everybody seems to have forgotten that the last general election was only two years ago, in 2005. A man called Tony Blair presented himself for re-election, and his face was to be seen - even if less prominently than in the past - on manifestos, leaflets, television screens and billboards. We rather gathered from the Labour prospectus that said Blair was going to be Prime Minister. Indeed, Tony sought a new mandate from the British electorate with the explicit promise that he would serve a full term.

The British public sucked its teeth, squinted at him closely, sighed and, with extreme reluctance, decided to elect him Prime Minister for another five years. Let me repeat that. They voted for Anthony Charles Lynton Blair to serve as their leader. They were at no stage invited to vote on whether Gordon Brown should be PM.


–– ADVERTISEMENT ––





I must have knocked on hundreds of doors during that campaign, and heard all sorts of opinions of Mr Blair, not all of them favourable. But I do not recall a single member of the public saying that he or she was yearning for Gordon Brown to take over. Perhaps I missed it, but I don't remember any Labour spokesman revealing that they planned to do a big switcheroo after only two years.

It is a sad but undeniable truth that there are huge numbers of voters (including many Tory types) who have rather liked the cut of Tony's jib. They have tended to admire his easy manner, and his air of sincerity, and his glistering-toothed rhetoric. They may have had a sneaking feeling - in spite of Iraq - that he has not wholly disgraced Britain on the international stage; and though you or I may think they were wrong, they unquestionably existed.

In 2005, there was a large number who voted Labour on the strength of a dwindling but still significant respect for the Prime Minister. They voted for Tony, and yet they now get Gordon, and a transition about as democratically proper as the transition from Claudius to Nero. It is a scandal.

Why are we all conniving in this stitch-up? This is nothing less than a palace coup, effected by the Brownites, and it is possible only because Tony had run out of road. He knew that the Brownites would eventually assassinate him, and so he decided to go "at a time of his own choosing" and, with North Korean servility, the Labour Party has handed power over to the brooding Scottish power-maniac.

The extraordinary thing is that it looks as though he will now be in 10 Downing Street for three years, and without a mandate from the British people. No one elected Gordon Brown as Prime Minister, which is bad enough; but what makes things worse is that he now proposes to share power with a group of people even less elected than himself - the Liberal Democrats.

Yes, that's right: in revelations that yesterday rocked Westminster, it emerged that Sir Menzies Campbell has been engaged in talks with Gordon, about a "government of all the talents", which must be faintly mystifying to all those Labour candidates, activists and voters who have been engaged in fighting the Liberal Democrats. They thought they were campaigning for Tony Blair - and it now turns out there was a secret plan to bring in Gordon Brown and assorted Liberal Democrats, including good old Paddy Pantsdown.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't remember the electorate being asked their views of a Gord-Ming Lib-Lab coalition. It is fraud and double-fraud.

Why is Gordon Brown doing it? Because he is worried, of course, about his own democratic credentials to lead the United Kingdom. Last week, the exuberant Scottish executive, led by the Nationalists, decided that they would scrap any kind of co-financing for Scottish universities. Scottish students would go Scot-free, and so would Finns, Latvians, Germans, French, Portuguese, Luxembourgers and everyone except, of course, the English, who will continue to pay.

One of the consequences of this decision to return to taxpayer-funded universality (except for the English) is that the financial and competitive position of Scottish universities will continue to deteriorate. English universities, on the other hand, have received a cash injection of £1.35 billion in fees, and are thereby able to lure away Scottish lecturers; and many English university vice-chancellors hope to get more cash if it ever proves possible to lift the cap on fees.

In those circumstances - with a potential conflict of interest between English and Scottish universities - it is unthinkable that Gordon Brown and the other 58 Scottish MPs should be able to sit and vote on higher education finance in England, when English MPs have no say over the matter in Scotland.

How can Gordon Brown decide on the rights and wrongs of English top-up fees when they could put Scottish universities at a further financial disadvantage? Of course, he might decide he wants English students to pay more for tuition in England, whatever the consequences for Scotland. But how can he really assess the impact of fees that will never be paid by his own constituents?

He must know in his heart that the position is increasingly morally repugnant, and I would guess that is one reason why he would like to bring in Ming Campbell, his neighbour in Fife. He can see trouble brewing, and would like to forge an alliance with another Scottish party leader against the logical and obvious Tory solution - English votes for English laws.

We cannot allow this Belgian-style coalition to be foisted on us. We know that there is not a cat's chance in hell of a referendum on the new EU treaty, in spite of the further transfers of sovereignty involved. Gordon Brown could appease public indignation over that, and secure the democratic mandate he needs, by asking the public to vote at once on him, on the new EU treaty, and on the implications of the devolutionary settlement. Let's have an election without delay.

• Boris Johnson is MP for Henley

 

Absolutely.

 

I voted remain, but I’m not voting for a party in a GE based on one policy. I’d vote Green again even if that was the case.

Absolutely no time for the Lib Dems. They are the yellow party, in more ways than one.