pc gone mad. What happened to freedom to kill off old people when you are PM? People offended by the smallest things these days and cancelled him. World has gone mad.
It has been reported to some extent, but I don't think it has fully sunk in to the national consciousness how catastrophically the government managed the pandemic, and how many thousands of people unnecessarily lost their lives as a result. From Johnson's laziness in interacting with the looming crisis to his glib "let the bodies pile high" responses to the libertarian "prioritise the economy" instincts to the PPW contracts handed out to unqualified chums. But what I find particularly unforgivable was failing to learn from mistakes. At the outset, we didn't know how the virus would behave, and while I would have preferred a caution-first / prevent the spread approach once we saw what happened in northern Italy, I could understand the logic of "spread is inevitable, let's minimise the economic damage by delaying the lockdown". By the summer we knew that had backfired tragically. Our mortality rates were among the worst in the world, and we ended up locking down longer and hurting the economy more severely than most of our counterparts. So what did we do? Eat out to help out - subsidised super-spreader events (but not including takeaways which would support businesses without creating crowds) and then once again resistance to locking down as infection rates soared, and once again a bigger wave of death and longer lockdown than necessary. And then once again at the end of the year. It's the most scandalous, murderous negligence this country has perpetrated on its own people, certainly in my lifetime.
to repeating the initial tragic mistakes twice more when we
By the way, one of the reasons this hasn't yet been recognised as a historic scandal is that much of the media has actively propagandised the government throughout its tenure, and were cheerleading the anti-lockdown argument at the time.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
It has been reported to some extent, but I don't think it has fully sunk in to the national consciousness how catastrophically the government managed the pandemic, and how many thousands of people unnecessarily lost their lives as a result. From Johnson's laziness in interacting with the looming crisis to his glib "let the bodies pile high" responses to the libertarian "prioritise the economy" instincts to the PPW contracts handed out to unqualified chums. But what I find particularly unforgivable was failing to learn from mistakes. At the outset, we didn't know how the virus would behave, and while I would have preferred a caution-first / prevent the spread approach once we saw what happened in northern Italy, I could understand the logic of "spread is inevitable, let's minimise the economic damage by delaying the lockdown". By the summer we knew that had backfired tragically. Our mortality rates were among the worst in the world, and we ended up locking down longer and hurting the economy more severely than most of our counterparts. So what did we do? Eat out to help out - subsidised super-spreader events (but not including takeaways which would support businesses without creating crowds) and then once again resistance to locking down as infection rates soared, and once again a bigger wave of death and longer lockdown than necessary. And then once again at the end of the year. It's the most scandalous, murderous negligence this country has perpetrated on its own people, certainly in my lifetime.
to repeating the initial tragic mistakes twice more when we
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just listening to some of this inquiry - the govt at the time agreed a lock down was neccessary on the 14 March 2020, but initiated it 10 days later. The dithering cost lives
From what I see on social media, Johnson's view was (and still is) a very common one.
"Why should I be inconvenienced for the sake of other people?" is the underlying argument of pretty much every Covidiot.
comment by Jalisco Red - Losing My Reguilón (U4195)
posted 2 minutes ago
From what I see on social media, Johnson's view was (and still is) a very common one.
"Why should I be inconvenienced for the sake of other people?" is the underlying argument of pretty much every Covidiot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yup
comment by We Support the Glazers Money Making Scheme (U17162)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
It has been reported to some extent, but I don't think it has fully sunk in to the national consciousness how catastrophically the government managed the pandemic, and how many thousands of people unnecessarily lost their lives as a result. From Johnson's laziness in interacting with the looming crisis to his glib "let the bodies pile high" responses to the libertarian "prioritise the economy" instincts to the PPW contracts handed out to unqualified chums. But what I find particularly unforgivable was failing to learn from mistakes. At the outset, we didn't know how the virus would behave, and while I would have preferred a caution-first / prevent the spread approach once we saw what happened in northern Italy, I could understand the logic of "spread is inevitable, let's minimise the economic damage by delaying the lockdown". By the summer we knew that had backfired tragically. Our mortality rates were among the worst in the world, and we ended up locking down longer and hurting the economy more severely than most of our counterparts. So what did we do? Eat out to help out - subsidised super-spreader events (but not including takeaways which would support businesses without creating crowds) and then once again resistance to locking down as infection rates soared, and once again a bigger wave of death and longer lockdown than necessary. And then once again at the end of the year. It's the most scandalous, murderous negligence this country has perpetrated on its own people, certainly in my lifetime.
to repeating the initial tragic mistakes twice more when we
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just listening to some of this inquiry - the govt at the time agreed a lock down was neccessary on the 14 March 2020, but initiated it 10 days later. The dithering cost lives
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, but they had to get Cheltenham Festival done first, (Hancock and Dido Harding are/were bigwigs in the Jockey Club).
An absolute scandal. They cancelled the Saturday football matches within minutes of the last race finishing at Cheltenham.
Pandering to voter base aside (mixed signals, as a huge part of their crowd was anti vax, anti covid rules), the more obvious reason to 'let the bodies pile high' was the very convenient but hidden result of doing that: avoiding (future) pension payments which just got triple locked before COVID + saving on future NHS costs/workload.
Knowing this generation of Tories and especially the ones in power & higher up, I wouldn't be surprised if propping up the economy was leading (+ mentioned side benefits) in every decision making, absolutely vile
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 9 minutes ago
It has been reported to some extent, but I don't think it has fully sunk in to the national consciousness how catastrophically the government managed the pandemic, and how many thousands of people unnecessarily lost their lives as a result. From Johnson's laziness in interacting with the looming crisis to his glib "let the bodies pile high" responses to the libertarian "prioritise the economy" instincts to the PPW contracts handed out to unqualified chums. But what I find particularly unforgivable was failing to learn from mistakes. At the outset, we didn't know how the virus would behave, and while I would have preferred a caution-first / prevent the spread approach once we saw what happened in northern Italy, I could understand the logic of "spread is inevitable, let's minimise the economic damage by delaying the lockdown". By the summer we knew that had backfired tragically. Our mortality rates were among the worst in the world, and we ended up locking down longer and hurting the economy more severely than most of our counterparts. So what did we do? Eat out to help out - subsidised super-spreader events (but not including takeaways which would support businesses without creating crowds) and then once again resistance to locking down as infection rates soared, and once again a bigger wave of death and longer lockdown than necessary. And then once again at the end of the year. It's the most scandalous, murderous negligence this country has perpetrated on its own people, certainly in my lifetime.
to repeating the initial tragic mistakes twice more when we
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with a lot of what you say here but it is much easier to look back and judge.
Boris and his team certainly handled it badly and made a lot of bad decisions based on skewed priorities BUT you also have to factor in the public mood in this country. Things had to be eased. A continual lock down over the summer would have been very difficult to impose, and actually the second wave can be (there is no clear evidence either way) concluded as an outcome of kids returning to School / Uni. The moment the schools were reopened, the spread grew and by half term we were locking down again in tiers (and tears!!).
I also do not think the there is evidence that we locked down that much longer than most. Countries like France had very strict rules, curfews etc where persisted for a long while, Oz closed its boarder for 12 months. You cite Italy but our lockdowns and easing of largely matched theirs after the initial delay first time around..
As someone who works in private practice, whose company relied on furlough to keep staff, whose very existence was threatened by continued lock down, I have a slightly different view to the balancing exercise between saving lives and saving the economy.
Its not as simple as "more people could have been saved so we should have done that [lock down longer]" because that would have other catastrophic consequences.
I have less of an issue with how this balance was made, but the underlying tone of these decisions, which is now coming out once again through this inquiry, displayed a complete lack of humanity and morality which is unforgivable. It just reinforces what we all came to learn about Boris over his tenure.
Every single turkey who voted for xmas in the last election should be proud of themselves for putting in a man who ran away from Piers Morgan in a fridge.
The moral compass of this country has been lost over the last decade This enquiry is a reward for the majority voter. Enjoy it and drink it in.
Boris Johnson in incompetent piece of shiiiiit shocker. Who could have predicted it?
Let the 18 to 25's be the only age group elligibile to vote next election. The rest of us don't deserve to vote
I literally only care about this inquiry if we get a comprehensive guide to what we should have done and what we should do next time.
Lockdown was always a total farce.
comment by We Support the Glazers Money Making Scheme (U17162)
posted 4 minutes ago
Let the 18 to 25's be the only age group elligibile to vote next election. The rest of us don't deserve to vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Speak for yourself. I’ve never voted for these cuuuunts.
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by We Support the Glazers Money Making Scheme (U17162)
posted 4 minutes ago
Let the 18 to 25's be the only age group elligibile to vote next election. The rest of us don't deserve to vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Speak for yourself. I’ve never voted for these cuuuunts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Any from that age group I talk to over here don’t even vote but they love complaining
comment by We Support the Glazers Money Making Scheme (U17162)
posted 8 minutes ago
Let the 18 to 25's be the only age group elligibile to vote next election. The rest of us don't deserve to vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What, and end up in a Socialist Dystopian Nightmare? Where pronouns are currency and if you get the wrong ones you end up cancelled and in prison for life. Nobody does any work, just make stupid woke nutter video's on line whilst sponging off those of us that do work?
Nah, not for me. You should have to take a sanity test to be able to vote these days. I hate to say it, but most 18-25's wouldn't pass it. Plus when they don't, they will cry about it and blame everyone else for their inability to be normal.
God please tell me we’re not debating lockdowns again.
ðŸ˜
comment by Irishred (U2539)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by We Support the Glazers Money Making Scheme (U17162)
posted 4 minutes ago
Let the 18 to 25's be the only age group elligibile to vote next election. The rest of us don't deserve to vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Speak for yourself. I’ve never voted for these cuuuunts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Any from that age group I talk to over here don’t even vote but they love complaining
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As is their right.
Although it would never happen, I’ve always thought it would be a good idea to weight your vote based on age, so let’s say an 18 year olds vote is worth 1 whereas a 80 year olds is worth 0.5.
Another waste of Tax payers money, doubt very much anyone else could of done any better!
Makes you laugh when the guy says to Cummings “so in your opinion” ffs this is the bloke who broke COVID rules and then lied, was eventually kicked out of his role and they want his “opinion” what good is this inquiry when it’s based in people’s opinion?
comment by RED666👺 The Influencer (U6562)
posted 4 minutes ago
Another waste of Tax payers money, doubt very much anyone else could of done any better!
Makes you laugh when the guy says to Cummings “so in your opinion” ffs this is the bloke who broke COVID rules and then lied, was eventually kicked out of his role and they want his “opinion” what good is this inquiry when it’s based in people’s opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Big fan of the "could of" in there.
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by We Support the Glazers Money Making Scheme (U17162)
posted 4 minutes ago
Let the 18 to 25's be the only age group elligibile to vote next election. The rest of us don't deserve to vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Speak for yourself. I’ve never voted for these cuuuunts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would be interested if tomorrow there was an election and only 16-25 year olds could vote, who would move into government.
Undoubtedly it would not be the Tories, but I feel even Labour might not get a sniff. Maybe the greens would win?
Labour would win a landslide.
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 3 minutes ago
Tory Lite Labour would win a landslide.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed
comment by LukaBrasi Ange-r management (U22178)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 3 minutes ago
Tory Lite Labour would win a landslide in England. Scotland completely different and really should be a separate country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly
Sign in if you want to comment
Boris Johnson - Covid inquiry
Page 1 of 2
posted on 31/10/23
pc gone mad. What happened to freedom to kill off old people when you are PM? People offended by the smallest things these days and cancelled him. World has gone mad.
posted on 31/10/23
It has been reported to some extent, but I don't think it has fully sunk in to the national consciousness how catastrophically the government managed the pandemic, and how many thousands of people unnecessarily lost their lives as a result. From Johnson's laziness in interacting with the looming crisis to his glib "let the bodies pile high" responses to the libertarian "prioritise the economy" instincts to the PPW contracts handed out to unqualified chums. But what I find particularly unforgivable was failing to learn from mistakes. At the outset, we didn't know how the virus would behave, and while I would have preferred a caution-first / prevent the spread approach once we saw what happened in northern Italy, I could understand the logic of "spread is inevitable, let's minimise the economic damage by delaying the lockdown". By the summer we knew that had backfired tragically. Our mortality rates were among the worst in the world, and we ended up locking down longer and hurting the economy more severely than most of our counterparts. So what did we do? Eat out to help out - subsidised super-spreader events (but not including takeaways which would support businesses without creating crowds) and then once again resistance to locking down as infection rates soared, and once again a bigger wave of death and longer lockdown than necessary. And then once again at the end of the year. It's the most scandalous, murderous negligence this country has perpetrated on its own people, certainly in my lifetime.
to repeating the initial tragic mistakes twice more when we
posted on 31/10/23
By the way, one of the reasons this hasn't yet been recognised as a historic scandal is that much of the media has actively propagandised the government throughout its tenure, and were cheerleading the anti-lockdown argument at the time.
posted on 31/10/23
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
It has been reported to some extent, but I don't think it has fully sunk in to the national consciousness how catastrophically the government managed the pandemic, and how many thousands of people unnecessarily lost their lives as a result. From Johnson's laziness in interacting with the looming crisis to his glib "let the bodies pile high" responses to the libertarian "prioritise the economy" instincts to the PPW contracts handed out to unqualified chums. But what I find particularly unforgivable was failing to learn from mistakes. At the outset, we didn't know how the virus would behave, and while I would have preferred a caution-first / prevent the spread approach once we saw what happened in northern Italy, I could understand the logic of "spread is inevitable, let's minimise the economic damage by delaying the lockdown". By the summer we knew that had backfired tragically. Our mortality rates were among the worst in the world, and we ended up locking down longer and hurting the economy more severely than most of our counterparts. So what did we do? Eat out to help out - subsidised super-spreader events (but not including takeaways which would support businesses without creating crowds) and then once again resistance to locking down as infection rates soared, and once again a bigger wave of death and longer lockdown than necessary. And then once again at the end of the year. It's the most scandalous, murderous negligence this country has perpetrated on its own people, certainly in my lifetime.
to repeating the initial tragic mistakes twice more when we
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just listening to some of this inquiry - the govt at the time agreed a lock down was neccessary on the 14 March 2020, but initiated it 10 days later. The dithering cost lives
posted on 31/10/23
From what I see on social media, Johnson's view was (and still is) a very common one.
"Why should I be inconvenienced for the sake of other people?" is the underlying argument of pretty much every Covidiot.
posted on 31/10/23
comment by Jalisco Red - Losing My Reguilón (U4195)
posted 2 minutes ago
From what I see on social media, Johnson's view was (and still is) a very common one.
"Why should I be inconvenienced for the sake of other people?" is the underlying argument of pretty much every Covidiot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yup
posted on 31/10/23
comment by We Support the Glazers Money Making Scheme (U17162)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
It has been reported to some extent, but I don't think it has fully sunk in to the national consciousness how catastrophically the government managed the pandemic, and how many thousands of people unnecessarily lost their lives as a result. From Johnson's laziness in interacting with the looming crisis to his glib "let the bodies pile high" responses to the libertarian "prioritise the economy" instincts to the PPW contracts handed out to unqualified chums. But what I find particularly unforgivable was failing to learn from mistakes. At the outset, we didn't know how the virus would behave, and while I would have preferred a caution-first / prevent the spread approach once we saw what happened in northern Italy, I could understand the logic of "spread is inevitable, let's minimise the economic damage by delaying the lockdown". By the summer we knew that had backfired tragically. Our mortality rates were among the worst in the world, and we ended up locking down longer and hurting the economy more severely than most of our counterparts. So what did we do? Eat out to help out - subsidised super-spreader events (but not including takeaways which would support businesses without creating crowds) and then once again resistance to locking down as infection rates soared, and once again a bigger wave of death and longer lockdown than necessary. And then once again at the end of the year. It's the most scandalous, murderous negligence this country has perpetrated on its own people, certainly in my lifetime.
to repeating the initial tragic mistakes twice more when we
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just listening to some of this inquiry - the govt at the time agreed a lock down was neccessary on the 14 March 2020, but initiated it 10 days later. The dithering cost lives
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, but they had to get Cheltenham Festival done first, (Hancock and Dido Harding are/were bigwigs in the Jockey Club).
An absolute scandal. They cancelled the Saturday football matches within minutes of the last race finishing at Cheltenham.
posted on 31/10/23
Pandering to voter base aside (mixed signals, as a huge part of their crowd was anti vax, anti covid rules), the more obvious reason to 'let the bodies pile high' was the very convenient but hidden result of doing that: avoiding (future) pension payments which just got triple locked before COVID + saving on future NHS costs/workload.
Knowing this generation of Tories and especially the ones in power & higher up, I wouldn't be surprised if propping up the economy was leading (+ mentioned side benefits) in every decision making, absolutely vile
posted on 31/10/23
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 9 minutes ago
It has been reported to some extent, but I don't think it has fully sunk in to the national consciousness how catastrophically the government managed the pandemic, and how many thousands of people unnecessarily lost their lives as a result. From Johnson's laziness in interacting with the looming crisis to his glib "let the bodies pile high" responses to the libertarian "prioritise the economy" instincts to the PPW contracts handed out to unqualified chums. But what I find particularly unforgivable was failing to learn from mistakes. At the outset, we didn't know how the virus would behave, and while I would have preferred a caution-first / prevent the spread approach once we saw what happened in northern Italy, I could understand the logic of "spread is inevitable, let's minimise the economic damage by delaying the lockdown". By the summer we knew that had backfired tragically. Our mortality rates were among the worst in the world, and we ended up locking down longer and hurting the economy more severely than most of our counterparts. So what did we do? Eat out to help out - subsidised super-spreader events (but not including takeaways which would support businesses without creating crowds) and then once again resistance to locking down as infection rates soared, and once again a bigger wave of death and longer lockdown than necessary. And then once again at the end of the year. It's the most scandalous, murderous negligence this country has perpetrated on its own people, certainly in my lifetime.
to repeating the initial tragic mistakes twice more when we
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with a lot of what you say here but it is much easier to look back and judge.
Boris and his team certainly handled it badly and made a lot of bad decisions based on skewed priorities BUT you also have to factor in the public mood in this country. Things had to be eased. A continual lock down over the summer would have been very difficult to impose, and actually the second wave can be (there is no clear evidence either way) concluded as an outcome of kids returning to School / Uni. The moment the schools were reopened, the spread grew and by half term we were locking down again in tiers (and tears!!).
I also do not think the there is evidence that we locked down that much longer than most. Countries like France had very strict rules, curfews etc where persisted for a long while, Oz closed its boarder for 12 months. You cite Italy but our lockdowns and easing of largely matched theirs after the initial delay first time around..
As someone who works in private practice, whose company relied on furlough to keep staff, whose very existence was threatened by continued lock down, I have a slightly different view to the balancing exercise between saving lives and saving the economy.
Its not as simple as "more people could have been saved so we should have done that [lock down longer]" because that would have other catastrophic consequences.
I have less of an issue with how this balance was made, but the underlying tone of these decisions, which is now coming out once again through this inquiry, displayed a complete lack of humanity and morality which is unforgivable. It just reinforces what we all came to learn about Boris over his tenure.
posted on 31/10/23
Every single turkey who voted for xmas in the last election should be proud of themselves for putting in a man who ran away from Piers Morgan in a fridge.
The moral compass of this country has been lost over the last decade This enquiry is a reward for the majority voter. Enjoy it and drink it in.
posted on 31/10/23
Boris Johnson in incompetent piece of shiiiiit shocker. Who could have predicted it?
posted on 31/10/23
Let the 18 to 25's be the only age group elligibile to vote next election. The rest of us don't deserve to vote
posted on 31/10/23
I literally only care about this inquiry if we get a comprehensive guide to what we should have done and what we should do next time.
Lockdown was always a total farce.
posted on 31/10/23
comment by We Support the Glazers Money Making Scheme (U17162)
posted 4 minutes ago
Let the 18 to 25's be the only age group elligibile to vote next election. The rest of us don't deserve to vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Speak for yourself. I’ve never voted for these cuuuunts.
posted on 31/10/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by We Support the Glazers Money Making Scheme (U17162)
posted 4 minutes ago
Let the 18 to 25's be the only age group elligibile to vote next election. The rest of us don't deserve to vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Speak for yourself. I’ve never voted for these cuuuunts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Any from that age group I talk to over here don’t even vote but they love complaining
posted on 31/10/23
comment by We Support the Glazers Money Making Scheme (U17162)
posted 8 minutes ago
Let the 18 to 25's be the only age group elligibile to vote next election. The rest of us don't deserve to vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What, and end up in a Socialist Dystopian Nightmare? Where pronouns are currency and if you get the wrong ones you end up cancelled and in prison for life. Nobody does any work, just make stupid woke nutter video's on line whilst sponging off those of us that do work?
Nah, not for me. You should have to take a sanity test to be able to vote these days. I hate to say it, but most 18-25's wouldn't pass it. Plus when they don't, they will cry about it and blame everyone else for their inability to be normal.
posted on 31/10/23
God please tell me we’re not debating lockdowns again.
ðŸ˜
posted on 31/10/23
comment by Irishred (U2539)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by We Support the Glazers Money Making Scheme (U17162)
posted 4 minutes ago
Let the 18 to 25's be the only age group elligibile to vote next election. The rest of us don't deserve to vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Speak for yourself. I’ve never voted for these cuuuunts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Any from that age group I talk to over here don’t even vote but they love complaining
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As is their right.
posted on 31/10/23
Although it would never happen, I’ve always thought it would be a good idea to weight your vote based on age, so let’s say an 18 year olds vote is worth 1 whereas a 80 year olds is worth 0.5.
posted on 31/10/23
Another waste of Tax payers money, doubt very much anyone else could of done any better!
Makes you laugh when the guy says to Cummings “so in your opinion” ffs this is the bloke who broke COVID rules and then lied, was eventually kicked out of his role and they want his “opinion” what good is this inquiry when it’s based in people’s opinion?
posted on 31/10/23
comment by RED666👺 The Influencer (U6562)
posted 4 minutes ago
Another waste of Tax payers money, doubt very much anyone else could of done any better!
Makes you laugh when the guy says to Cummings “so in your opinion” ffs this is the bloke who broke COVID rules and then lied, was eventually kicked out of his role and they want his “opinion” what good is this inquiry when it’s based in people’s opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Big fan of the "could of" in there.
posted on 31/10/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by We Support the Glazers Money Making Scheme (U17162)
posted 4 minutes ago
Let the 18 to 25's be the only age group elligibile to vote next election. The rest of us don't deserve to vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Speak for yourself. I’ve never voted for these cuuuunts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would be interested if tomorrow there was an election and only 16-25 year olds could vote, who would move into government.
Undoubtedly it would not be the Tories, but I feel even Labour might not get a sniff. Maybe the greens would win?
posted on 31/10/23
Labour would win a landslide.
posted on 31/10/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 3 minutes ago
Tory Lite Labour would win a landslide.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed
posted on 31/10/23
comment by LukaBrasi Ange-r management (U22178)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 3 minutes ago
Tory Lite Labour would win a landslide in England. Scotland completely different and really should be a separate country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly
Page 1 of 2