-TSS-

It speaks volumes about the stupidity of the FPTP-system that in the last election two years ago the Tories managed to get an absolute majority in Parliament with 37% of the votes but this time with 42% they couldn't. As for the fixed-term law there is a way out of it if 2/3 of the MP's vote in favour of holding early elections, which in my opinion is wrong. I think an early election should only be held if there is some political deadlock or a vote of no-confidence against the government. This election was held because the polls looked good for the government and the opposition which keeps on saying how they are so much better than the government and would do things much better they would make fools of themselves by voting against holding early elections.

I guess that had this been the end of a normal 5-year electoral term the Tories would have won comfortably. I think people didnt like the nature of this election of seizing the moment to take advantage of the opponent's perceived state of weakness.

First round of French parliamentary-elections this weekend. Macron's party expecting to make a breakthrough.

He appears like a puppet but he is easily the internationally best known PM of Canada since his father.

Yes, I also read that part about the Tories threatening the core voters, the elderly, that they would have to pay for their own care. The ensuing damage-control didn't help them at all. They will last a full term but that silly woman can't be at the helm. They need someone competent.

I'm glad at the outcome of this election; the Tories remain on top, which is essential to get through Brexit but the election was a slap in the face for the stupid woman of a PM who will hopefully have to go. It was only some time ago when the British Parliament passed a law of fixed-term parliaments the purpose of which was exactly to get rid of these "snap elections". Even though the justification for this election was not contested by the opposition the very thing it was held was against the spirit of the law. Snap elections are not democratic. Elections should take place at regular intervals the exact date of which always known to all participants well beforehand and giving all of them time to prepare for the vote. This kind of gallup-democracy as May tried to pull off that the polls look good, let's go for a vote, is not fair. Btw, didn't the Canadian parliament also pass a similar act of fixed-term elections or am I confusing it with some other country?

I cant see the Tories sticking with May for the next five years. By calling this unnecessarily early election she was bound to end up either a shrewd tactician or a greedy fool. The outcome was the latter.

Manageable. The latest results give the Tories 318/650 which is 8 seats short of majority but as there were once again 7 Sinn Fein MPs elected and they always refuse to take the seats as that requires swearing the oath of allegiance to the Queen. Therefore and absolute majority is 322 seats.

Despite attempts to make the election a Brexit-vote 2.0 that failed as the Liberal Democrats, the most vehement anti-Brexiteers, did not perform too well. Had this been the end of a normal 5-year election term the result wouldnt be too bad for May. However, as she foolishly and greedily called this unnecessarily early election the outcome was a disaster. This election was winnerless. Why does the media portray the Labour-party as some sort of a winner? Yes, they performed better than expected but still finished second.

I guess that despite N-Ireland being part of the UK for the vast majority of "mainland" British people N-Ireland appears just as foreign as the Republic of Ireland does.

All this hassle only because May wanted a mandate of her own even though she had three years to do as she would have wanted. In the UK you dont need to win elections to become PM. You only need to be the leader of the largest party and the largest party can change its leader and therefore PM every week if it wishes to do so.

The result is totally inconclusive; no thinkable combination to form a majority. Therefore May caused a lot of harm by creating a situation of political instability when there was no need to even have an election for three years. I wouldn't be surprised if she drew the conclusions and quit. However, who is there to replace her?

The Tories will remain in power but weakened by losing their majority. If May had succeeded in her attempt to increase the majority she would be seen as a shrewd tactician but now she appears like a fool who has needlessly squandered a valuable majority. Despite theTories remaining in power the PM could be forced out. May may have to go. The newspapers will be having fun inventing headlines. May be, May be not.

According to the earliest exit-polls the Tories remain the largest party but lose their absolute majority. Therefore PM May's gamble has failed. She couldn't increase the majority and crush the Labour-party. A deserved setback for calling a totally unnecessarily early election.

About 60% of the population Qatar are foreign workers, basically slaves, from countries such as Nepal and Bangladesh for whom a large source of national income is remittances sent home from their citizens working abroad, in Qatar for example. If that money-flow is frozen those countries can have serious economic setbacks.

Where are all the world leaders now expressing shock, horror and condemnation? Where are all the facebook-profiles decorated with the flags of Iran?

Probably related to the crisis in the nearby Qatar.

If I'm not mistaken, please correct me if I'm wrong, this is not a serious issue in Canada. In Australia it is most definitely a serious issue and they even had a referendum on it and though the republic lost the referendum the issue has not died away. While in New Zealand there has never been any real republican-movement. Don't know really about some other Commonwealth-members as Jamaica or some of those other small Caribbean countries.

It appears that the perpetrators of the London attack were being watched by the security services and with the benefit of hindsight we could say that their attack should have been prevented. However, we must bear in mind that the number of people being watched is about 3,500 or thereabouts so it is difficult to prioritise which ones should be watched more. Let's remember that for any attack carried out several more are being regularly foiled by the authorities. There is really no other way to reduce the number of attacks than to intern all those people who are considered a threat and potential terrorists but that is not a realistic option unless a permanent martial-law is being declared , we must understand that.

The Mayor of London Sadiq Khan is the latest person to have a quarrel with Trump over Trump's tweets concerning the terrorist-attack in London.

In the wake of these recent terrorist-attacks and in the forthcoming election the most powerful weapon labour has against the Tories is to remind the voters how Theresa May when she was Home Secretary she sacked 20000 policemen. It has been said that as there are about 3500 radical jihadists under 24/7-surveillance it takes about 20-30 policemen to carry out that surveillance. Do the maths how many terrorists could be monitored with 20000 policemen. 20000 policemen is a considerable number of policemen even in a country the size of Britain.

It is ramadan-time and there is an election coming up in the UK. Both factors explain the current wave of terror-attacks.

If Corbyn were PM last night's terrorist-attack in London wouldn't have ended by the terrorists being shot as Corbyn has said he wouldn't allow it.

Islamophobia is a wrong term to begin with as phobia means fear. Islamonausea should the correct term; people are fed up with the nonsense of the medieval cult belonging to a desert just like another medieval cult we have just freed ourselves of in the western world.

See, even though the purpose of this thread was to be some "we are all the same, kumbaya dance around the bonfire together" yet even Canadians, which I suspect most posters of this thread are with the exception of myself, turn the thread into a vitriolic debate. If Canadians of all people, the most peace-loving people imaginable, can't have a civilised conversation about kumbaya dancing together around the bonfire how can you expect the same from anyone else..