The usual suspects signalling their virtue hard on facebook :hehe:

[Sir C]

Apparently May is behaving like a dictator... by asking parliament to vote. On whether we should have an election.

Can't think of anything less democratic, really.

[Billy Goat Sverige]

Apparently May is behaving like a dictator... by asking parliament to vote. On whether we should have an election.

Can't think of anything less democratic, really.

I like the talk that Labour have now sunk so low under Corbyn that they're considered something of a protest vote in this election

[Burney]

Apparently May is behaving like a dictator... by asking parliament to vote. On whether we should have an election.

Can't think of anything less democratic, really.

I do struggle with the idea that a politician seeking maximum advantage for her party by calling an election with the permission of Parliament is somehow considered to be cheating. It smacks of 'You can't call an election because we'll lose horribly and that's not fair!'

[Peter]

Apparently May is behaving like a dictator... by asking parliament to vote. On whether we should have an election.

Can't think of anything less democratic, really.

The EU? Surely that is less democratic, having an unelected executive and all that. We would never permit such a thing here

[SWv2]

I do struggle with the idea that a politician seeking maximum advantage for her party by calling an election with the permission of Parliament is somehow considered to be cheating. It smacks of 'You can't call an election because we'll lose horribly and that's not fair!'

Is the general annoyance not stemming from TM going back on an earlier claim that she would not do exactly what she has done in respect of calling an early election?

Mind you if one follows politics, which to be annoyed by it all would surely be the case, then to be annoyed by a politician making a complete U turn on an earlier claim or promise is surely not ground breaking.

It is times like this where Jorge is missed as he fumes and rages at the social injustices of a Conservative led Britain.

[Peter]

I do struggle with the idea that a politician seeking maximum advantage for her party by calling an election with the permission of Parliament is somehow considered to be cheating. It smacks of 'You can't call an election because we'll lose horribly and that's not fair!'

Well, it is just *******s isn't it. There is constitutional legislation that permits her to do precisely what she is doing.

[World's End Stella]

Apparently May is behaving like a dictator... by asking parliament to vote. On whether we should have an election.

Can't think of anything less democratic, really.

And - according to that virtue signaler extraordinaire Ian Harvey - she's a liar. And she doesn't want the NHS. And she will tax the rich less. I was shocked he didn't go down the 'she hates the poor' path.

Good ole Ian

[Burney]

Is the general annoyance not stemming from TM going back on an earlier claim that she would not do exactly what she has done in respect of calling an early election?

Mind you if one follows politics, which to be annoyed by it all would surely be the case, then to be annoyed by a politician making a complete U turn on an earlier claim or promise is surely not ground breaking.

It is times like this where Jorge is missed as he fumes and rages at the social injustices of a Conservative led Britain.

The Prime Minister's job is to do what she believes to be best for the country first and her party second. She can make a good case that both are best served by her calling an election, so she is entitled - even obliged - to do so. It's not like it was some sort of manifesto pledge or as if the PM has any obligation not to pīss off the opposition. The only people objecting are her opposition, who themselves are doing so for purely party political reasons themselves. Besides, they have the option of voting against this election if they're that bothered - but they're not going to do it.

In short, the objections to her calling an election are böllocks.

[Burney]

Well, it is just *******s isn't it. There is constitutional legislation that permits her to do precisely what she is doing.

Quite. If that is the best they have to throw at her, they are truly fùcked.

[Luis Anaconda]

The Prime Minister's job is to do what she believes to be best for the country first and her party second. She can make a good case that both are best served by her calling an election, so she is entitled - even obliged - to do so. It's not like it was some sort of manifesto pledge or as if the PM has any obligation not to pīss off the opposition. The only people objecting are her opposition, who themselves are doing so for purely party political reasons themselves. Besides, they have the option of voting against this election if they're that bothered - but they're not going to do it.

In short, the objections to her calling an election are böllocks.

Typical bird really - changing her mind all the time. Quite why she vehemently denied she was going to do it so many times is the mystery.