So country might not be taken over by fascists then Tom? Well I never. Can you believe that..Two things happened on the political front yesterday:
The first notable point is that the electorate in Copeland voted in an understandably protectionist manner by rejecting the Labour Party candidate on account of Labour's lack of support for the nuclear industry.
The second significant event occurred when voters in Stoke on Trent thoroughly rejected the opportunity to elect the leader of UKIP, choosing a Labour candidate instead.
While neither of these events has much bearing on the current political make-up of the UK, the Stoke result is interesting in as much as this was a very carefully selected constituency by UKIP's research people and was seen as a great opportunity to boost the party's flagging fortunes while putting their lying leader into the HofC.
That went badly wrong and it probably marks the beginning of the end for this now redundant group of right-wing extremists.
In summary, the tories must be delighted while Labour need to find a left-of-centre candidate to replace JC as party leader. Lovely chap though he is, another leader with a more definitive position on the importance of the nuclear industry, would see Labour regain the Copeland seat at the next election. By that, I mean that there needs to be a clear distinction between our ongoing need to rely on nuclear power production but we most certainly do not require nuclear weapons.
Tom
Fair point re nuclear...said it all along about Corbyn and his stance on it. Crazy.
But, its still an endorsement for May.
Last edited: