Poll: Potential General Election: who are you voting for?

Potential October GE: Who will you vote for?

  • Conservative

    Votes: 84 19.1%
  • Labour

    Votes: 129 29.4%
  • SNP

    Votes: 29 6.6%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 4 0.9%
  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 130 29.6%
  • TIG

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • DUP

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 2 0.5%
  • UUP

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • SDLP

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Green Party (or any local Green affiliate)

    Votes: 14 3.2%
  • Other independent or minor party (please state!)

    Votes: 3 0.7%
  • Spoiled ballot

    Votes: 7 1.6%
  • Not voting

    Votes: 13 3.0%
  • Brexit Party

    Votes: 24 5.5%

  • Total voters
    439
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
4,678
Nope, I simply haven't got round to listing her great many trespasses. It may actually be easier to list any actual truths.
The please, either list some lies that Jo Swinson has told, or retract your claim that she is a liar.

If you do neither of these things then everyone who reads these last few posts will see that you are making a statement (and quite a slanderous one at that) for which you are unable, when challenged, to provide any evidence. The only plausible inference from that is that you are knowingly stating something that is untrue.

So which option are you going to take?

Do you remember ANYTHING about the coalition government? How about the tuition fees she promised to vote against to name one? :lol:
I remember the coalition Government well. I remember Jo Swinson supporting a number of policies that I fundamentally disagree with. I even remember that the LibDem support for those policies was one reason why I swapped my allegiance to Labour, after having voted LibDem in 2010. However, supporting policies that you disagree with does not make someone a liar. What makes someone a liar is - ummm - telling lies. If you are unable to give examples of actual *lies* that Jo Swinson has told, then it is wrong of you to say that she is a liar.

Have you been watching the grilling she's been getting from Neil and Marr?
No, I didn't see them, but I read about them? Why? Did she tell any lies in them? If so, can you tell me what they were?
 

43066

Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
1,022
Location
London
At least Conservatives and Labour are sticking to representing the core of people who generally vote for them. The Liberal Democrats are neither liberal nor democrats any more.
I’m not so sure that’s true of Labour any more. Certainly based on many “traditional” Labour supporters I know, all of whom despise Corbyn with a passion.

Labour is more concerned about “WOKE” identity politics, liberal hand wringing and the appeasement of wealthy, Guardian reading, chattering Islington luvvies than it is about representing true working class folk these days.

Agreed re. the Lib Dems!
 
Last edited:

GrimShady

On Moderation
Joined
13 Dec 2016
Messages
1,740
The please, either list some lies that Jo Swinson has told, or retract your claim that she is a liar.

If you do neither of these things then everyone who reads these last few posts will see that you are making a statement (and quite a slanderous one at that) for which you are unable, when challenged, to provide any evidence. The only plausible inference from that is that you are knowingly stating something that is untrue.

So which option are you going to take?



I remember the coalition Government well. I remember Jo Swinson supporting a number of policies that I fundamentally disagree with. I even remember that the LibDem support for those policies was one reason why I swapped my allegiance to Labour, after having voted LibDem in 2010. However, supporting policies that you disagree with does not make someone a liar. What makes someone a liar is - ummm - telling lies. If you are unable to give examples of actual *lies* that Jo Swinson has told, then it is wrong of you to say that she is a liar.



No, I didn't see them, but I read about them? Why? Did she tell any lies in them? If so, can you tell me what they were?
Hmmm I'll take option one please

https://en-gb.facebook.com/Channel4...ted-to-increase-tuition-fees/733567253727665/

"We shouldn't have voted to increase tuition fees... because we'd said we wouldn't do it." Pretty sure there's a picture of her somewhere proudly displaying such a pledge.



There's many more like it........Slanderous, good one!


Didn't she also say she'd respect the vote on brexit? Another good one!
 

43066

Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
1,022
Location
London
Hmmm I'll take option one please

https://en-gb.facebook.com/Channel4...ted-to-increase-tuition-fees/733567253727665/

"We shouldn't have voted to increase tuition fees... because we'd said we wouldn't do it." Pretty sure there's a picture of her somewhere proudly displaying such a pledge.



There's many more like it........Slanderous, good one!


Didn't she also say she'd respect the vote on brexit? Another good one!
Aren’t those examples of hypocrisy, rather than outright lies? I believe she has explained that she was “wrong” before and now thinks differently.

Pathetic, nonetheless.
 

MoleStation

Member
Joined
1 Aug 2018
Messages
29
Location
Gateshead
Did someone say 'Woke'? It's all BS really. I'd love to be so anarchistic to tick the fabled None Of The Above option on the ballot as really, you cannot vote for the Whitehall civil servants that really dictates policy. All those Sir Huffington-Blowers(!) that we never hear of in the papers that are unelected, y'know?
I better shuttup....
 

43066

Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
1,022
Location
London
Did someone say 'Woke'? It's all BS really. I'd love to be so anarchistic to tick the fabled None Of The Above option on the ballot as really, you cannot vote for the Whitehall civil servants that really dictates policy. All those Sir Huffington-Blowers(!) that we never hear of in the papers that are unelected, y'know?
I better shuttup....
Good night in the pub, was it? :D
 

GrimShady

On Moderation
Joined
13 Dec 2016
Messages
1,740
Aren’t those examples of hypocrisy, rather than outright lies? I believe she has explained that she was “wrong” before and now thinks differently.

Pathetic, nonetheless.
She pledged not to increase the fees and as soon as she got a bit of power.....up came the two fingers. I fully appreciate she now admits that was wrong but I suspect only because it serves her purpose...to be PM, well we all know that's never going to happen.

No different from the rest and IMO totally untrustworthy.
 

43066

Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
1,022
Location
London
She pledged not to increase the fees and as soon as she got a bit of power.....up came the two fingers. I fully appreciate she now admits that was wrong but I suspect only because it serves her purpose...to be PM, well we all know that's never going to happen.

No different from the rest and IMO totally untrustworthy.
But has she actually lied, or has she merely changed her position, in order to garner the maximum possible number of votes now that it suits her?

For the record, I despise the Lib Dems with a passion.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
4,678
Hmmm I'll take option one please
:smile:

https://en-gb.facebook.com/Channel4...ted-to-increase-tuition-fees/733567253727665/

"We shouldn't have voted to increase tuition fees... because we'd said we wouldn't do it." Pretty sure there's a picture of her somewhere proudly displaying such a pledge.
A good attempt. But that's not a lie. A lie is, saying something that you know at the time you say it is not true. You have just quoted Jo Swinson expressing regret at a past decision of the LibDems, when they promised to do something but subsequently changed their minds (in somewhat understandable circumstances, since they were in the position of having to make compromises as part of a coalition Government). Promising to do something and then later on changing your mind is a broken promise, not a lie (unless you were actually intending to break the promise at the time you made it). And expressing regret at a past decision that was made when someone else was the leader of your party is certainly not lying.

Didn't she also say she'd respect the vote on brexit? Another good one!
Well she wasn't an MP at the time of the EU referendum. In 2017 she stood on a manifesto that clearly stated:

LibDemManifesto2017 said:
That’s why, when the terms of our future relationship with the EU have been negotiated (over the next two years on the Government’s timetable), we will put that deal to a vote of the British people in a referendum, with the alternative option of staying in the EU on the ballot paper.
As far as I'm aware, her stance in Parliament since then was consistent with that manifesto. And of course the LibDems are going into this election with a different manifesto policy on Europe. Again, I don't see any sign of any lies there.

Do you have any examples of Jo Swinson saying anything that actually IS a lie?
 

GrimShady

On Moderation
Joined
13 Dec 2016
Messages
1,740
But has she actually lied or has she merely changed her position in order to garner the maximum number of votes when it suited her?

For the record, I despise the Lib Dems with a passion.
Very eloquently put lol but yeah it's the same thing is it not? Let's not forget it wasn't years down the line she changed her mind, It was literally the first few weeks after gaining power. Maybe a betrayal if it makes it sound better? Which is worse?
 

GrimShady

On Moderation
Joined
13 Dec 2016
Messages
1,740
:smile:



A good attempt. But that's not a lie. A lie is, saying something that you know at the time you say it is not true. You have just quoted Jo Swinson expressing regret at a past decision of the LibDems, when they promised to do something but subsequently changed their minds (in somewhat understandable circumstances, since they were in the position of having to make compromises as part of a coalition Government). Promising to do something and then later on changing your mind is a broken promise, not a lie (unless you were actually intending to break the promise at the time you made it). And expressing regret at a past decision that was made when someone else was the leader of your party is certainly not lying.



Well she wasn't an MP at the time of the EU referendum. In 2017 she stood on a manifesto that clearly stated:



As far as I'm aware, her stance in Parliament since then was consistent with that manifesto. And of course the LibDems are going into this election with a different manifesto policy on Europe. Again, I don't see any sign of any lies there.

Do you have any examples of Jo Swinson saying anything that actually IS a lie?
Good God! Any experience of being a Spin Doctor? :lol:

She signed her name on the pledge! She said she would vote to cap the fees and then done a complete 180.....AND voted to raise them.

That's what you call a LIE, the truth is there for all to see. Try and convince those students caught up in her LIES it was only a broken promise, lets see what kind of backlash you'll get.
 
Last edited:

43066

Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
1,022
Location
London
Very eloquently put lol but yeah it's the same thing is it not? Let's not forget it wasn't years down the line she changed her mind, It was literally the first few weeks after gaining power. Maybe a betrayal if it makes it sound better? Which is worse?
I just like arguing about semantics.

I’ll come clean and say I basically agree with you - a betrayal is far worse than a lie. The Lib Dems betrayed their core vote for a sniff of power in 2010, and will do so again at the drop of a hat.

I can respect a liar more than a betrayer, so long as his lies are delivered with some eloquence and panache, I guess that explains why I’ll be voting Tory at this election :D.

Although I’m disappointed with BoJo’s oration - for such an intelligent, eloquent man he has fallen well short of my expectations.

He’d best avoid that Andrew Neil grilling at all costs.
 

GrimShady

On Moderation
Joined
13 Dec 2016
Messages
1,740
I just like arguing about semantics.

I’ll come clean and say I basically agree with you - a betrayal is far worse than a lie. The Lib Dems betrayed their core vote for a sniff of power in 2010, and will do so again at the drop of a hat.

I can respect a liar more than a betrayer, so long as his lies are delivered with some eloquence and panache, I guess that explains why I’ll be voting Tory at this election :D.

Although I’m disappointed with BoJo’s oration - for such an intelligent, eloquent man he has fallen well short of my expectations.

He’d best avoid that Andrew Neil grilling at all costs.
I just baffles me why anyone would want to defend someone like that.

I fully believe they and Swinson will say anything to get a seat at the table again.

You know I get the distinct impression Boris doesn't actually want to be PM for some reason.
 
Last edited:

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
5,594
Location
North Wales
I’m sure she is, but she’s running the worst campaign of the whole shebang.
I try and keep up from here in the USA but sounds like I am hopelessly out of touch.
I get the feeling that some of that is she's had more media exposure recently and thus more opportunity to alienate people (or have mud slung at her), whereas the leaders of the Conservative and Labour parties had already alienated significant portions of the electorate before the election was called.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
7,235
She will literally say or do anything for power. Her track record has been deplorable. Totally untrustworthy, much more so than the other clowns standing for election.
Has she been sacked from any job for lying?

Has she had to do several interviews and faced a lot of grilling before apologising for something which many people think maybe a problem with their party (anti-Semitic/anti-muslim/tution fees)?

The Lib Dems made an error with tution fees, they could have said we'll abstain rather than support. However many MP's, when faced with a the line whip, will hold their nose and vote differently to what they believe.

For instance Boris Johnson has said a lot of negative stuff about HS2, as it goes down well with his constituents. Yet he has NEVER voted on it. The reason being is that his party wants him to vote in favour.

As such, so he's done is avoided voting so that he doesn't show that actually he'd rather view for it than face the consequences of voting against his party.

Is she doing what most politicians do? Yes.

Is she the worst? I'd suggest not, not even from the leaders she's up against.

On the fact that the Lib Dems are no longer democratic, I'll ask you this, it's got quite a long lead up; in 2017 the people voted for a new government and spoke. Leaving us with a hung parliament, as the vote share was fairly evenly split.

To resolve this the Conservatives have called for a new general election.

In 2016 the vote share was fairly evenly split leaving us with the Brexit debate. How many of you have had your vote listened to on Brexit? Those who voted to remain would say no because Brexit is currently going ahead, those who voted to leave would say no because it's not happened yet.

There would likely be many who voted to leave who would say no even after we have left depending on what our future agreement looks like (as the withdraw agreement is only our interim agreement and has nothing on what the future agreement looks like). For instance there's a good chance that the only way that we'll get a trade deal done quickly is if there's free movement of people (which many don't want) and the UK to keep to the same standards as the EU (so almost as much red tape for businesses, which many don't want).

A fairly good analogy is that we've voted to have takeaway rather than cook a roast dinner at home (as it was fairly fixed at to what we have/will have in the future), now the politicians are deciding which takeaway we're going to have. Those who support the people's vote are saying let's have a vote on which takeaway we get.

Does Brexit involve free movement, a trade deal, WTO terms, no deal, Canada plus, Norway plus, etc. Have we been asked what we think it should look like, or have we been asked leave our remain?

Looking at it in those terms, which is the more democratic thing to do?
 

SteveP29

Member
Joined
23 Apr 2011
Messages
847
Location
Chester le Street/ Edinburgh
There has been alot of goodwill towards the Lib Dems with their strong Remain stance in recent months but the public have seen Swinson up close over the past few weeks and don't like what they see.
An LD rep on BBC Breakfast this morning said that the LD's are now for a People's Vote 'if' they were to win a majority.
So much for the cancelling Brexit policy.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
4,678
Good God! Any experience of being a Spin Doctor? :lol:
Haha! No, but I can be quite a stickler for accuracy and people not saying untrue things.

She signed her name on the pledge! She said she would vote to cap the fees and then done a complete 180.....AND voted to raise them.
That's what you call a LIE, the truth is there for all to see. Try and convince those students caught up in her LIES it was only a broken promise, lets see what kind of backlash you'll get.
So you're still calling her a liar, even though it's becoming increasingly obvious that you cannot find a single time when she has apparently told a direct lie. Can you really not see how wrong that is? Can you not see how that makes YOU the person who is telling a lie (about Jo Swinson)?

Bottom line is: 9 years ago, the LibDems made a pledge on what they would do on tuition fees. They did so at a time when Jo Swinson was not leader of the party - she was one a large number of MPs - and as far as I can make out, a fairly junior one at that - so you're already on pretty shaky ground when you try to blame Jo Swinson for what the LibDems did at that time. If anyone is to blame, it's surely Nick Clegg, who no longer represents the LibDems. The LibDems changed their minds very quickly after the election when faced with the unexpected situation of having to negotiate a coalition Government. To some extent, that's the nature of politics: You have to respond to changing circumstances, and that means, you have to sometimes change your mind about things in order to achieve those changes that are achievable in the circumstances. I think it's very arguable (although a bit subjective) that the LibDems were too ready to compromise on this issue given how big a deal they'd made of it before the election. But that's not at all the same thing as lying. My own sense is the LibDems were very naive not to realise how their tuition fee reversal would be seen, but they were probably genuinely trying to achieve the best they could from being the minor partner in a a coalition situation rather than being deliberately deceptive.

You may well feel justifiably angry at that ONE decision that the LibDems made 9 years ago (and which it seems unlikely that Jo Swinson herself had much to do with, other than going along with what more senior figures at the time decided on). But I think you're making a much bigger deal out of it than it is in 2019 - and it certainly doesn't justify your saying things that appear to be not true.
 
Last edited:

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
4,678
I just baffles me why anyone would want to defend someone like that.
Yet on a different thread, you appear to be defending Donald Trump, whose record - not only on repeatedly telling verifiable lies, but also on making dangerous policy decisions that massively damage millions of people's lives and it seems also on direct corruption - makes Jo Swinson look like a shining angel. I imagine it would baffle quite a lot of people why anyone would want to defend Donald Trump.

I don't particularly support Swinson - like I said, I support Labour and I'm voting Labour in this election. But I think you're making her out to be far worse than she really is.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
18,502
Location
Nottingham
For instance Boris Johnson has said a lot of negative stuff about HS2, as it goes down well with his constituents. Yet he has NEVER voted on it. The reason being is that his party wants him to vote in favour.
Worse than that is his record on Heathrow. Having promised to lie down in front of the bulldozers, when the crucial vote came up he engineered himself a trip to Afghanistan in order to avoid it. This would have required considerable extra security in such a high-risk location. So he's actually putting our forces in harm's way to avoid personal and political embarrassment.
 

43066

Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
1,022
Location
London
I support Labour and I'm voting Labour in this election.
Out of interest would that be because of, or in spite of, Corbyn?

What has struck me is how many traditional Labour voters seem to strongly dislike him, even to the point of abandoning their longstanding tribal loyalty to the party.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
4,678
Out of interest would that be because of, or in spite of, Corbyn?
More, in spite of, as I would have preferred a more social-democrat type leader. I don't actually think Corbyn is half as bad as many on the right make out. I'd say he's fundamentally a decent - and extremely honest - person who cares deeply about injustices and has a long record of standing up for the oppressed even when it's not popular to do so. But he is also fundamentally a protester who has no experience and little appreciation for the compromises and judgement calls that you need to make if you are a Government. As a result, he's lead Labour into policy directions that are well meaning but would be ineffective or counter-productive if actually implemented. And he also seems to have somewhat poor judgement when it comes to who you should associate with on the international scene. If he ever did lead a majority Government, he'd have a very sharp learning curve.

But on the other hand he and the Labour Party do have a good understanding of the need for the Government to step in and resolve social problems like homelessness, and of the need for some kind of reform of how the market economy is functioning - which, to my mind, the Conservatives do not understand, and the LibDems only partially understand. The Green New Deal is brilliant - and answers what is by far the most important issue facing the Government (even if Brexit is more urgent), whereas the Conservatives seem to pay lip-service to the environment while never actually doing much about the issue.

And Corbyn is, essentially honest and dedicated to improving people's lives. And I do not believe Boris Johnson is either of those things.

As it happens, there's clearly basically no chance of Labour securing a majority at this election. The only plausible outcomes are a Boris majority Government (which I think would be absolutely disastrous), or a minority Labour Government, heavily dependent on the LibDems and the SNP not to vote down everything they do - which would probably work quite well because a lot the stuff in Labour's manifesto is quite sensible and badly needed - and the LibDems and the SNP will almost certainly veto all the sillier stuff :)
 

GrimShady

On Moderation
Joined
13 Dec 2016
Messages
1,740
Haha! No, but I can be quite a stickler for accuracy and people not saying untrue things.





So you're still calling her a liar, even though it's becoming increasingly obvious that you cannot find a single time when she has apparently told a direct lie. Can you really not see how wrong that is? Can you not see how that makes YOU the person who is telling a lie (about Jo Swinson)?

Bottom line is: 9 years ago, the LibDems made a pledge on what they would do on tuition fees. They did so at a time when Jo Swinson was not leader of the party - she was one a large number of MPs - and as far as I can make out, a fairly junior one at that - so you're already on pretty shaky ground when you try to blame Jo Swinson for what the LibDems did at that time. If anyone is to blame, it's surely Nick Clegg, who no longer represents the LibDems. The LibDems changed their minds very quickly after the election when faced with the unexpected situation of having to negotiate a coalition Government. To some extent, that's the nature of politics: You have to respond to changing circumstances, and that means, you have to sometimes change your mind about things in order to achieve those changes that are achievable in the circumstances. I think it's very arguable (although a bit subjective) that the LibDems were too ready to compromise on this issue given how big a deal they'd made of it before the election. But that's not at all the same thing as lying. My own sense is the LibDems were very naive not to realise how their tuition fee reversal would be seen, but they were probably genuinely trying to achieve the best they could from being the minor partner in a a coalition situation rather than being deliberately deceptive.

You may well feel justifiably angry at that ONE decision that the LibDems made 9 years ago (and which it seems unlikely that Jo Swinson herself had much to do with, other than going along with what more senior figures at the time decided on). But I think you're making a much bigger deal out of it than it is in 2019 - and it certainly doesn't justify your saying things that appear to be not true.
You're not being slick, you're defending a proven liar, the truth is right in front of you.

I'm not blaming the Lib Dems at the time, I'm blaming her for the choices she made regardless of her party. It's not just the ONE decision she made years ago, have a look at the ways she's voted. She's the one standing for election, not Clegg.

She's a bare faced liar.....i've shown you the proof, pretty much end of discussion.

Yet on a different thread, you appear to be defending Donald Trump, whose record - not only on repeatedly telling verifiable lies, but also on making dangerous policy decisions that massively damage millions of people's lives and it seems also on direct corruption - makes Jo Swinson look like a shining angel. I imagine it would baffle quite a lot of people why anyone would want to defend Donald Trump.

I don't particularly support Swinson - like I said, I support Labour and I'm voting Labour in this election. But I think you're making her out to be far worse than she really is.
Who's defending Trump? I simply do not see him a the devil incarnate that others do. As I pointed there's been many more dangerous leaders in the world for the last century than an old business man who sometimes fudges his lines. Also not being on the Anti Trump bandwagon that most people are I'm not aware of every little thing said.

Sorry but you're wrong, Swinson is not to be trusted and is unelectable, this is coming from a member of her constituency where she's not very popular at the moment.
 
Last edited:

Busaholic

Established Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
9,364
I’m sure she is, but she’s running the worst campaign of the whole shebang.
It's a crowded field though! Nicola Sturgeon is the only grown-up in the room, on top of her subject and clamps down straightaway on any nonsense discovered about SN candidates, no matter how far in the past. I'm voting for Andrew George in St Ives almost despite him standing as a Lib Dem, and display his poster which, yes, is in LD colours but makes no mention of the party, and his leaflets are equally sparing of the party name, despite his winning four times at General Elections for them! Swinson's been to the adjoining constituency, but not come here, with a Con majority over LD of 320. Now I hear Norman Lamb's old seat in Norfolk, LD for donkeys', is thought to be going to either Con or Lab. Lady Bracknell would have some sage advice for her!
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
7,235
I simply do not see him a the devil incarnate that others do.
He is certainly not the devil incarnat however he doesn't help himself, as he positions himself as a patriotic person, however when he was called up to serve in Vietnam he avoided service.

Not just once, but 5 times.

Feel free to criticise him for not being someone who want to give people healthcare (which given that he's a Republican is unsurprising), however given that most Trump supporters voted him as the President because they saw him a Patriotic.

Would you consider someone who appears to have deliberately avoided serving in the military when many others did as Patriotic?
 

GrimShady

On Moderation
Joined
13 Dec 2016
Messages
1,740
He is certainly not the devil incarnat however he doesn't help himself, as he positions himself as a patriotic person, however when he was called up to serve in Vietnam he avoided service.

Not just once, but 5 times.

Feel free to criticise him for not being someone who want to give people healthcare (which given that he's a Republican is unsurprising), however given that most Trump supporters voted him as the President because they saw him a Patriotic.

Would you consider someone who appears to have deliberately avoided serving in the military when many others did as Patriotic?
Probably not Ham but there are other forms of patriotism without slaughtering Vietnamese under the guise of control the evil that is communism (at least that's the way the yanks consider it). By that defination can a woman not be patriotic given women aren't required by the draft?

Also didn't Bush pull a similar stunt with the National Guard?

I suspect the reason he's so popular is he puts the US first above all other considerations. Like it or not that wins votes.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
18,502
Location
Nottingham
Who's defending Trump? I simply do not see him a the devil incarnate that others do. As I pointed there's been many more dangerous leaders in the world for the last century than an old business man who sometimes fudges his lines. Also not being on the Anti Trump bandwagon that most people are I'm not aware of every little thing said.

Sorry but you're wrong, Swinson is not to be trusted and is unelectable, this is coming from a member of her constituency where she's not very popular at the moment.
Trump is now accused, on very strong evidence, of withholding military aid agreed by Congress for Ukraine, where war with Russia could break out any time. His motive is simply to do down a political opponent.

I can't help thinking that your judgment is questionable if you are so relaxed about Trump and Johnson and so het up about Swinson.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top