[TimW]

Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

[TimW]

On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!

[alan_m]

On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up with
Boris as Prime Minister

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

[bm[_2_]]

"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up with
Boris as Prime Minister

I've been looking for my black armband.

[Bob Eager[_5_]]

On Fri, 09 Jun 2017 03:18:19 +0300, TimW wrote:

Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

So am I.




--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

[T i m]

On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 02:15:08 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up with
Boris as Prime Minister

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?

Cheers, T i m

[Adam Aglionby]

On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 1:18:21 AM UTC+1, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

on to Turd Recount at mo

[alan_m]

On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 02:15:08 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up with
Boris as Prime Minister

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?



Worse than that. Con will have most seats but no majority. Brexit
postponed as there will be no-one to lead the negotiations and another
general election due soon. The UK currency has crashed as a result of
people voting Labour.


--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

[T i m]

On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 04:09:58 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

snip

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?



Worse than that.

Great, just what we need after already kicking the hornets nest in the
world arena.

Con will have most seats but no majority.

That always sounds crazy to me. Is FPTP better?

Brexit
postponed

So there is some good to come out of this then. That should give us
chance so see what the deal might be before deciding on it.

as there will be no-one to lead the negotiations

I'm not sure 1 V 26 was ever going to be a real 'negotiation' was it?

and another
general election due soon.

yawn

The UK currency has crashed as a result of
people voting Labour.

Great again / not

Cheers, T i m.

[Clive George]

On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?

Labour always get more seats earlier on since they tend to have urban
constituencies whereas the tories have the rural ones.

(massive generalisation of course - look how early the Caithness etc one
declared...)

[Rod Speed]

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 02:15:08 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!

The result of too many people voting Labour is
that we will end up with Boris as Prime Minister

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election g)

We know you ****ed the bed, again...

I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178)
so does that mean they are on their way to winning

Nope, just that Labour seats tend to get the counting completed earlier.

and the whole time and effort wasting debacle changes again?

Nope. Even you lot aint quite THAT stupid.

[Rod Speed]

"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 02:15:08 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up with
Boris as Prime Minister

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?

Worse than that.

We'll see...

Con will have most seats but no majority.

Yes.

Brexit postponed as there will be no-one to lead the negotiations

Even sillier than you usually manage. The majority
will want to leave and thats all that matters.

and another general election due soon.

Not a chance, you watch.

The UK currency has crashed as a result of people voting Labour.

Doesnt matter a damn, thats good for the economy, stupid.

[Andy Burns[_13_]]

Bob Eager wrote:

TimW wrote:

Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.

So am I.

She clung on by skin of her teeth ... Amber vs Boris for leader?

The DUP webmaster should have ordered up some more web capacity ...

[T i m]

On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 05:11:35 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?

Labour always get more seats earlier on since they tend to have urban
constituencies whereas the tories have the rural ones.

Makes sense.

(massive generalisation of course - look how early the Caithness etc one
declared...)

Sure, but looking at the map that does seem to be the case:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2017/results

I wonder what the stats are on the recounts ... if they are more
prevalent in the rural areas (where counting may not be their strong
point). weg

Watching it play out as a non gambling man (so I didn't place my bet
on any of them) it all seems to be a farce.

So, someone became the Prime Minister even though we didn't vote her
in and then she voluntary decided to hold a snap election to prove how
much support her party had, only to find out that she / they were
wrong.

So, we are still a very spit country suggesting to me at least that
not enough of us are happy with what is on offer and so just as with
the Brexit vote, maybe we need to think outside the box.

Question. If you look at all the things promised by all the parties
.... and got a shrewd business person to tick all the things that would
be considered as both positive and viable (eg. no point promising
stuff we can't be guaranteed to get (like a positive Brexit deal) or
can afford (giving the NHS money we don't have), and testing the
electorate on their ability to understand what is going on before they
are allowed to vote [1] ... we might stop wasting all this time and
energy and actually get somewhere?

Are there any examples of this sort of system working well anywhere
round the world? (Absolute monarchy, dictatorship, oligarchy or some
other authoritarian political system etc).

Cheers, T i m

[1] Like I wouldn't ask my Mum if an AMD or Intel processor would be
better for my new PC or my Aunty Mary what sand type and cement ratio
would be best for the pointing on my house.

[Rod Speed]

T i m wrote

Watching it play out as a non gambling man (so I didn't
place my bet on any of them) it all seems to be a farce.

So, someone became the Prime Minister even though we didn't vote her
in and then she voluntary decided to hold a snap election to prove how
much support her party had, only to find out that she / they were wrong.

Yep, you lot couldn't organise a ****up in a brewery.

So, we are still a very spit country suggesting to me at least that
not enough of us are happy with what is on offer and so just as
with the Brexit vote, maybe we need to think outside the box.

Not even possible.

Question. If you look at all the things promised by all the parties
... and got a shrewd business person to tick all the things that would
be considered as both positive and viable (eg. no point promising
stuff we can't be guaranteed to get (like a positive Brexit deal)

No one 'promised' anything of the sort. May said more than
once that no deal is better than a steaming turd of a deal.

or can afford (giving the NHS money we don't have),

Tax rates in Britain aint that high. But its far from clear if many
of the voters want higher taxes to give more to the NHS.

and testing the electorate on their ability to understand
what is going on before they are allowed to vote [1] ...

Even sillier than you usually manage, and that's saying something.

we might stop wasting all this time and
energy and actually get somewhere?

Britain is getting somewhere, out of the EU, you watch.

Are there any examples of this sort of system working well
anywhere round the world? (Absolute monarchy, dictatorship,
oligarchy or some other authoritarian political system etc).

Nope, not once decent democracys showed up.

Yes, its got massive downsides as this result shows, but
all the rest are even worse and usually MUCH worse.

[1] Like I wouldn't ask my Mum if an AMD or Intel processor would
be better for my new PC or my Aunty Mary what sand type and
cement ratio would be best for the pointing on my house.

Just who would you ask about how Britain is run ?

[tim...]

"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up with
Boris as Prime Minister

and given the alternatives,

just why is that a bad thing?

tim

[tim...]

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 02:15:08 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up with
Boris as Prime Minister

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?

It's always like that

Their urban seats always declare before the Tory shires

tim

[tim...]

"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 02:15:08 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up with
Boris as Prime Minister

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?



Worse than that. Con will have most seats but no majority. Brexit
postponed

oh if that were possible

but it isn't

tim

[tim...]

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 04:09:58 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

snip

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?



Worse than that.

Great, just what we need after already kicking the hornets nest in the
world arena.

Con will have most seats but no majority.

That always sounds crazy to me. Is FPTP better?

Brexit
postponed

So there is some good to come out of this then. That should give us
chance so see what the deal might be before deciding on it.

and what do you think will be the result of voting not-liking it?

The EU don't play nicey, nicey.

The Greeks voted not to accept the deal that the EU offered them and on
return for an alternative the EU said "tough, take it or get out (of the
Euro)", their parliament decided that they would overrule the electorate and
take it.

Do you really think that the EU will do anything different over Brexit?

tim

[tim...]

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 05:11:35 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?

Labour always get more seats earlier on since they tend to have urban
constituencies whereas the tories have the rural ones.

Makes sense.

(massive generalisation of course - look how early the Caithness etc one
declared...)

Sure, but looking at the map that does seem to be the case:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2017/results

I wonder what the stats are on the recounts ... if they are more
prevalent in the rural areas (where counting may not be their strong
point). weg

pure chance who needs a recount.

Watching it play out as a non gambling man (so I didn't place my bet
on any of them) it all seems to be a farce.

So, someone became the Prime Minister even though we didn't vote her
in and then she voluntary decided to hold a snap election to prove how
much support her party had, only to find out that she / they were
wrong.

So, we are still a very spit country suggesting to me at least that
not enough of us are happy with what is on offer and so just as with
the Brexit vote, maybe we need to think outside the box.

Nope, there we a couple of million gullibles who fell for Corbyn's offer of
free sweeties for life

tim

[tim...]

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
Bob Eager wrote:

TimW wrote:

Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.

So am I.

She clung on by skin of her teeth ... Amber vs Boris for leader?

However bad Boris might be, I can't see Rudd being even 10% as good

tim

[tim...]

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 05:11:35 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?

Labour always get more seats earlier on since they tend to have urban
constituencies whereas the tories have the rural ones.

Makes sense.

(massive generalisation of course - look how early the Caithness etc one
declared...)

Sure, but looking at the map that does seem to be the case:

What's not clear is, with only 5 seats to go, why Kensington hasn't
declared. It's a safe Tory seat so unlikely to have multiple recounts and
there are no logistical issues with getting the ballot boxes to the count.
Perhaps they have a lie in and don't bother to count overnight :-)

the other undeclared seats are all in Cornwall, and I guess that's because,
being a unitary council, they count all Cornwall seats at the same place,
one seat after the other.

[tim...]

"tim..." wrote in message
news


"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 05:11:35 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?

Labour always get more seats earlier on since they tend to have urban
constituencies whereas the tories have the rural ones.

Makes sense.

(massive generalisation of course - look how early the Caithness etc one
declared...)

Sure, but looking at the map that does seem to be the case:

What's not clear is, with only 5 seats to go, why Kensington hasn't
declared. It's a safe Tory seat so unlikely to have multiple recounts and
there are no logistical issues with getting the ballot boxes to the count.
Perhaps they have a lie in and don't bother to count overnight :-)

seems I was wrong

5th recount

[The Natural Philosopher[_2_]]

On 09/06/17 07:10, tim... wrote:


"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 02:15:08 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up with
Boris as Prime Minister

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?



Worse than that. Con will have most seats but no majority. Brexit
postponed

oh if that were possible

but it isn't


Watch and see.

Now the tide will turn as the media and the politicians - now all firmly
remoaners, try and sell a watered down version.


tim





--
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
foolish, and by the rulers as useful.

(Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , tim...
escribió:

[Boris as PM]

just why is that a bad thing?

*rolls eyes*

http://www.shaunriordan.com/wp-conte...07/image6.jpeg

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) "Between two evils, I always pick
(")_(") the one I never tried before." - Mae West

[alan_m]

On 09/06/2017 07:06, tim... wrote:


"alan_m" wrote in message
...


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up
with Boris as Prime Minister

and given the alternatives,

just why is that a bad thing?


Boris and Trump in power at the same time - shudder.

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

[Martin Brown[_2_]]

On 09/06/2017 08:08, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/06/17 07:10, tim... wrote:


"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 02:15:08 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up
with
Boris as Prime Minister

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?


Worse than that. Con will have most seats but no majority. Brexit
postponed

oh if that were possible

but it isn't

Watch and see.

Now the tide will turn as the media and the politicians - now all firmly
remoaners, try and sell a watered down version.

Watered down? We may well stop it in its tracks.

Hard Brexit has no mandate any more. Time for the Europhiles to use
exactly the same tactics as the *******s did against John Major.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Martin Brown[_2_]]

On 09/06/2017 07:18, tim... wrote:

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
Bob Eager wrote:

TimW wrote:

Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.

So am I.

She clung on by skin of her teeth ... Amber vs Boris for leader?

However bad Boris might be, I can't see Rudd being even 10% as good

I dunno. At least she had the balls to turn up for a TV debate.

Boris will be a bad hair day for everyone!

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Rod Speed]

"tim..." wrote in message
news


"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up with
Boris as Prime Minister

and given the alternatives,

just why is that a bad thing?

It would certainly be interesting to watch with the Article 50
'negotiations'

Unlikely that May will have the balls to fall on her darning scissors tho.

[Rod Speed]

"tim..." wrote in message
news


"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 04:09:58 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

snip

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?



Worse than that.

Great, just what we need after already kicking the hornets nest in the
world arena.

Con will have most seats but no majority.

That always sounds crazy to me. Is FPTP better?

Brexit
postponed

So there is some good to come out of this then. That should give us
chance so see what the deal might be before deciding on it.

and what do you think will be the result of voting not-liking it?

The EU don't play nicey, nicey.

Sure, but Britain is free to tell them to go and **** themselves.

The Greeks voted not to accept the deal that the EU offered them and on
return for an alternative the EU said "tough, take it or get out (of the
Euro)", their parliament decided that they would overrule the electorate
and take it.

But they had their balls in the vice.

Britain doesn't.

Do you really think that the EU will do anything different over Brexit?

Corse not, but it doesn't matter what they demand,
Britain can just tell them to go **** themselves.

Boris is quite capable of saying that very explicitly.

[alan_m]

On 09/06/2017 05:23, Rod Speed wrote:


"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 02:15:08 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up with
Boris as Prime Minister

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?

Worse than that.

We'll see...

Con will have most seats but no majority.

Yes.

Brexit postponed as there will be no-one to lead the negotiations

Even sillier than you usually manage. The majority
will want to leave and thats all that matters.

and another general election due soon.

Not a chance, you watch.

The UK currency has crashed as a result of people voting Labour.

Doesnt matter a damn, thats good for the economy, stupid.

Whoosh
I was only paraphrasing what the media election and financial experts on
TV were bull****ting as a handful of results were declared.

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

[tim...]

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


"tim..." wrote in message
news


"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 04:09:58 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

snip

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?



Worse than that.

Great, just what we need after already kicking the hornets nest in the
world arena.

Con will have most seats but no majority.

That always sounds crazy to me. Is FPTP better?

Brexit
postponed

So there is some good to come out of this then. That should give us
chance so see what the deal might be before deciding on it.

and what do you think will be the result of voting not-liking it?

The EU don't play nicey, nicey.

Sure, but Britain is free to tell them to go and **** themselves.

but we need a leader prepared to do that

and I don't think we have that at the moment

[tim...]

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
news
On 09/06/17 07:10, tim... wrote:


"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 02:15:08 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up
with
Boris as Prime Minister

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?



Worse than that. Con will have most seats but no majority. Brexit
postponed

oh if that were possible

but it isn't


Watch and see.

Now the tide will turn as the media and the politicians - now all firmly
remoaners, try and sell a watered down version.

but that's not a postponement

once that deal's accepted that will be it for the next century.

The politicians have got burned once, they will say away next time

tim

[alan_m]

On 09/06/2017 08:45, Martin Brown wrote:


Hard Brexit has no mandate any more. Time for the Europhiles to use
exactly the same tactics as the *******s did against John Major.


A hard Brexit is just telling the rest of the EU to **** off when after
2 years of negotiation the deal is unacceptable? For once some
politicians are considering a plan B when plan A doesn't work.

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

[tim...]

"Martin Brown" wrote in message
news
On 09/06/2017 08:08, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/06/17 07:10, tim... wrote:


"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 02:15:08 +0100, alan_m
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up
with
Boris as Prime Minister

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?


Worse than that. Con will have most seats but no majority. Brexit
postponed

oh if that were possible

but it isn't

Watch and see.

Now the tide will turn as the media and the politicians - now all firmly
remoaners, try and sell a watered down version.

Watered down? We may well stop it in its tracks.

Hard Brexit has no mandate any more.

define hard brexit

tim

[tim...]

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


"tim..." wrote in message
news


"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 09/06/2017 01:41, TimW wrote:
On 09/06/17 03:18, TimW wrote:
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

Stoney silence. Ha ha ha!


The result of too many people voting Labour is that we will end up with
Boris as Prime Minister

and given the alternatives,

just why is that a bad thing?

It would certainly be interesting to watch with the Article 50
'negotiations'

Unlikely that May will have the balls to fall on her darning scissors tho.

if 15% ask her to go, she goes

tim

[Rod Speed]

"tim..." wrote in message
news


"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
Bob Eager wrote:

TimW wrote:

Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.

So am I.

She clung on by skin of her teeth ... Amber vs Boris for leader?

However bad Boris might be, I can't see Rudd being even 10% as good

And I can't see even the stupid Torys going for
someone in that marginal a seat as the leader.

Corse they can just find her a better seat and parachute her into that.

[Rod Speed]

"tim..." wrote in message
news


"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 05:11:35 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?

Labour always get more seats earlier on since they tend to have urban
constituencies whereas the tories have the rural ones.

Makes sense.

(massive generalisation of course - look how early the Caithness etc one
declared...)

Sure, but looking at the map that does seem to be the case:

What's not clear is, with only 5 seats to go, why Kensington hasn't
declared. It's a safe Tory seat so unlikely to have multiple recounts and
there are no logistical issues with getting the ballot boxes to the count.
Perhaps they have a lie in and don't bother to count overnight :-)

Yep, why bother when the result is inevitable.

And they don't **** the bed like you do either.

the other undeclared seats are all in Cornwall,

They're too busy smuggling, stupid.

and I guess that's because, being a unitary council, they count all
Cornwall seats at the same place, one seat after the other.

And still count them on their fingers and toes.

[Brian Gaff]

Not quite but close.
I see the architect of the Conservative manifesto lost his.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"TimW" wrote in message
news
Staying up hoping to see Amber Rudd lose her seat.
TW

[Rod Speed]

"tim..." wrote in message
news


"tim..." wrote in message
news


"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 05:11:35 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 09/06/2017 03:40, T i m wrote:

Getting up again (stuff on my mind, 0% of it to do with any election
g) I see that Lab look like they are in the lead (189 V 178) so does
that mean they are on their way to winning and the whole time and
effort wasting debacle changes again?

Labour always get more seats earlier on since they tend to have urban
constituencies whereas the tories have the rural ones.

Makes sense.

(massive generalisation of course - look how early the Caithness etc one
declared...)

Sure, but looking at the map that does seem to be the case:

What's not clear is, with only 5 seats to go, why Kensington hasn't
declared. It's a safe Tory seat so unlikely to have multiple recounts
and there are no logistical issues with getting the ballot boxes to the
count. Perhaps they have a lie in and don't bother to count overnight :-)

seems I was wrong

5th recount

Because they are completely blotto because of the result they got.

Bet the plow**** is off the trolley too.