in england we are at present in an election.england is moving more towards american presidental style of electioneering i.e more personalities than actual politics(i do not mean to get our friend over the water backs up with this statement)but when america votes for its president along comes his party to form the goverment and there he will normally stay . in england our primeminister can be voted out by his own party halfway through parliament(as with margret thather)thus getting rid of the peoples choice so should england take up the american idea and the peoples choice stays or stick with the english idea that the people at the top know better and YOU will have what we give you
I had long heard that the English language used in the United States is far different than the English language used in England; however, I never believed it.
Until now.
They may be inhabiting England physically, but I think they are cultural inhabitants of an entirely different locale. And in that kingdom, they don’t speak English, they speak Sophomorish. Translation is possible, but rarely worth it.
oh yes i see
look up yozzer and find out what a kirkby kiss is
"giz a job"boys from the blackstuff
It would be interesting if Britain adopted the “people’s-choice” style of the American voting system. However, they seem to be getting along just fine as it is, and here in America, we have a saying (as I’m sure they have everywhere else): “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
Now go take a friggin’ English Composition class, would ya?
“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
what did you think the people in the conservative party was doing then when they voted out mrs thatcher and replaced her as leader of their party and prime minister in the uk
with john mayor
what was broken and got fixed that the rest of great britain did not get to know about
You’re not electing the Prime Minister, you’re electing your local representative in the House of Commons. In practice, most people just vote for the party they prefer. It is up to those MPs, or, more particularly, those who are members of the majority party, to decide whether and when to remove the PM. They will have to account for that decision when they seek re-election at the following election. This may seem a privileged responsibility, but is surely no more so than getting to decide which proposals become new laws. That is what MPs are there for. (Note however that the rules of all three major parties have complicated the process by which leaders can be appointed and removed but the basic point remains valid.)
The personalities of the leaders have been a major feature of the press coverage of British parliamentary elections ever since the introduction of a mass franchise and the rise of modern-style political parties. Politics has always had its frivilous side.