Magilla Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Once upon a time there were three bears................... So in essence, you don't..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWOL Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Since no one can see the future, it seems trite to suggest he was lying then. Not at all, a coalition means compromise. Since they're not a majority player it's fairly obvious that the majority of pledges won't be met unless there is consensus on the issue at hand. You exclude the possibility of someone else pushing your hand holding the knife, without your consent & against your will. Given the circumstances this seems more likely in this instance. There seems to be no justification for saying he is definitely a lair. He is definitely a liar and a traitor to his party in my view. After many years they were actually making a little headway, now he has gone and thrown away many years of hard work. Whether you like it or not most people will never trust him( and hence the party) again. He is a traitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 He is definitely a liar and a traitor to his party in my view. You are entitled to your view, but it doesn't mean you're correct. After many years they were actually making a little headway, now he has gone and thrown away many years of hard work. So what would you have chosen he do? Since he didn't win, any option you choose will involve compromise. With that in mind, what would you suggest he could have done that wouldn't have made him a liar in your view at some point? Whether you like it or not most people will never trust him( and hence the party) again. He is a traitor. Personally I'm indifferent, but I still think you're wrong to state he's an outright liar without, seemingly, any logical reason to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWOL Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 You are entitled to your view, but it doesn't mean you're correct. So what would you have chosen he do? Since he didn't win, any option you choose will involve compromise. With that in mind, what would you suggest he could have done that wouldn't have made him a liar in your view at some point? Personally I'm indifferent, but I still think you're wrong to state he's an outright liar without, seemingly, any logical reason to do so. He is either a traitor and a liar or a traitor and a man without conscience......you choose which is the lesser of the two evils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 He is either a traitor and a liar or a traitor and a man without conscience......you choose which is the lesser of the two evils. So what would you have had him do under the circumstances, that wouldn't have made him a traitor in your view? It's not a trick question, I'm genuinely interested in what you think the options were at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossyrooney Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 If you consider liar to be harsh would you accept,ill fated spouter of untruths that's responsible for the demise of a political party? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWOL Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 So what would you have had him do under the circumstances, that wouldn't have made him a traitor in your view? I really have no connection with uni tuition fees. To say however that he would scrap them, then agreeing to them being tripled is a sign of a man without scruples, morals, conscience or balls. As I stated, I have nothing to gain or lose here, but to do what he did in this regard was unforgivable. He is not to be trusted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 If you consider liar to be harsh would you accept,ill fated spouter of untruths that's responsible for the demise of a political party? I'm just interested in what, realistically, you think he could have done differently that wouldn't have pretty much ended up the same way. I suppose he could have said "sod it" we won't even try, but I'm not sure what that would have achieved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossyrooney Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 By the same margin i am curious to know what it's like to constantly have to defend acts of deceit and buffoonery carried out against the party you have struggled to support and move forward in past years. Truly,it must be heartbreaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KARATE DAVE Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 I really have no connection with uni tuition fees. To say however that he would scrap them, then agreeing to them being tripled is a sign of a man without scruples, morals, conscience or balls. As I stated, I have nothing to gain or lose here, but to do what he did in this regard was unforgivable. He is not to be trusted. the words ..he is not to be trusted.... is the best way to describe clegg. the man is abhorant and has little chance of ever being in government again. he truly is the face of twisted and untruthful politicians Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.