UK General Discussion: 2017 and onwards, Mayhem
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 04:13:50 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  UK General Discussion: 2017 and onwards, Mayhem
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 41 ... 79
Author Topic: UK General Discussion: 2017 and onwards, Mayhem  (Read 215961 times)
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #875 on: July 16, 2018, 08:54:36 AM »

The hard core would do it to anyone who showed even the slightest interest in negotiation. They have lost all touch with reality and live in a strange fantasy universe - in this respect they're like the more extreme elements of the Bennite faction in Labour by the mid 1980s.
Logged
EPG
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 992
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #876 on: July 16, 2018, 05:20:13 PM »

I know I'm one to talk, but it appears that this board must follow the moon or something, because you can guarantee that over the course of a month we will argue first about "are refugees all rapists?", followed by "Is Corbyn an anti-semite?" and finishing of with "but yeah, Corbyn will never win an election" before starting all over again.

So I'm personally very much looking forward to this time next week when tender posts a thread about something some refugee did in Cologne which gets a 100 replies all making exactly the same posts they did in the last argument.

Sorry you feel that way, you are respected by me as a constructive generator of positive externalities. But I do operate "no first strike": I always refrain from pointing out that Corbyn lost the last election to Theresa May, by a Gordon Brown-like margin of defeat, unless his "electoral" "success" is first raised by someone. What I don't get is saying he is morally unfit to serve as Labour leader, but supporting his election as Prime Minister of the UK. That seems to get the moral priorities utterly reversed to me as it seems to put a political party of moderate importance ahead of the governance of a world power.

Anyway, Kate Hoey and Labour pals are currently keeping Theresa May in office in the Commons. To reiterate: There is no market for a Remain party in Vauxhall and, by extension, the United Kingdom.
Logged
EPG
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 992
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #877 on: July 16, 2018, 05:23:54 PM »

The hard core would do it to anyone who showed even the slightest interest in negotiation. They have lost all touch with reality and live in a strange fantasy universe - in this respect they're like the more extreme elements of the Bennite faction in Labour by the mid 1980s.

Yes. Whatever the problems with May, I don't think one is that "people believe her pre-2016 Remain position was deeply heartfelt and sincere".
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #878 on: July 17, 2018, 03:25:01 AM »

The hard core would do it to anyone who showed even the slightest interest in negotiation. They have lost all touch with reality and live in a strange fantasy universe - in this respect they're like the more extreme elements of the Bennite faction in Labour by the mid 1980s.

Yes. Whatever the problems with May, I don't think one is that "people believe her pre-2016 Remain position was deeply heartfelt and sincere".

She was nicknamed the submarine by Cameron's people because she remained hidden for the whole campaign; she did the absolute minimum during the referendum

I know I'm one to talk, but it appears that this board must follow the moon or something, because you can guarantee that over the course of a month we will argue first about "are refugees all rapists?", followed by "Is Corbyn an anti-semite?" and finishing of with "but yeah, Corbyn will never win an election" before starting all over again.

So I'm personally very much looking forward to this time next week when tender posts a thread about something some refugee did in Cologne which gets a 100 replies all making exactly the same posts they did in the last argument.

Sorry you feel that way, you are respected by me as a constructive generator of positive externalities. But I do operate "no first strike": I always refrain from pointing out that Corbyn lost the last election to Theresa May, by a Gordon Brown-like margin of defeat, unless his "electoral" "success" is first raised by someone. What I don't get is saying he is morally unfit to serve as Labour leader, but supporting his election as Prime Minister of the UK. That seems to get the moral priorities utterly reversed to me as it seems to put a political party of moderate importance ahead of the governance of a world power.

Anyway, Kate Hoey and Labour pals are currently keeping Theresa May in office in the Commons. To reiterate: There is no market for a Remain party in Vauxhall and, by extension, the United Kingdom.
.

Eh to chase this line, it's a bit disingenuous to call it a Gordon Brown style defeat; they got the same number of seats, but as you know the vote share was remarkably different (Brown got what 28%, Corbyn got 40%) and Corbyn did so without the 30-40 odd Scottish Seats that Labour had back in 2010. Besides, considering that we lost nearly 100 MPs in 2010, the result is just not the same.
 
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #879 on: July 17, 2018, 03:50:32 AM »

On the whole though the Government is in a very similar situation to Labour during the 1970s; a serious of close parliamentary votes, general chaos at every division, a deal with a minor party, trying to deal with a major political, and economic crisis, whilst appeasing about 3 different factions.

The Tories can just thank the heavens that there MPs are a lot younger than the Labour benches were in the 1970s.
Logged
parochial boy
parochial_boy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,114


Political Matrix
E: -8.38, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #880 on: July 17, 2018, 05:25:51 AM »

I know I'm one to talk, but it appears that this board must follow the moon or something, because you can guarantee that over the course of a month we will argue first about "are refugees all rapists?", followed by "Is Corbyn an anti-semite?" and finishing of with "but yeah, Corbyn will never win an election" before starting all over again.

So I'm personally very much looking forward to this time next week when tender posts a thread about something some refugee did in Cologne which gets a 100 replies all making exactly the same posts they did in the last argument.

Sorry you feel that way, you are respected by me as a constructive generator of positive externalities. But I do operate "no first strike": I always refrain from pointing out that Corbyn lost the last election to Theresa May, by a Gordon Brown-like margin of defeat, unless his "electoral" "success" is first raised by someone. What I don't get is saying he is morally unfit to serve as Labour leader, but supporting his election as Prime Minister of the UK. That seems to get the moral priorities utterly reversed to me as it seems to put a political party of moderate importance ahead of the governance of a world power.

It's mostly that all we are doing at the moment is speculating, and given the last 12-18 months of stasis, we've been reduced to making the same points - maybe will change now we are coming to Brexit crunchtime though.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
I mean, presumably, most of her constituents don't actually know what her views actually are (although, on the one hand the Lib Dems got a pretty solid swing in 2017, but on the other, they got pretty solid swings across SW London).

And, without wanting to play the deranged momentum type, I genuinely don't understand why Vauxhall CLP hasn't you know, seriously thought about deselecting her. How exactly does a fox hunt supporting Brexiteer fit Vauxhall of all places? Presumably even the Progress types wouldn't be too devastated at her being replaced by a Corbyn fan.
Logged
MillennialModerate
MillennialMAModerate
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,009
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #881 on: July 17, 2018, 06:57:53 AM »

Can someone explain to me why the May conservative government is still a thing?

With all the cabinet chaos and all the seeming incompetence of the government in regards to BreXit, wouldn’t you think that a No confidence vote would be called and passed by the house (considering it is a minority government) .. or am I missing something?
Logged
LabourJersey
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,145
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #882 on: July 17, 2018, 07:34:04 AM »

Can someone explain to me why the May conservative government is still a thing?

With all the cabinet chaos and all the seeming incompetence of the government in regards to BreXit, wouldn’t you think that a No confidence vote would be called and passed by the house (considering it is a minority government) .. or am I missing something?

This is a simplification, but there is no obvious, serious challenger to May within the Conservative party, so a no confidence vote on her leadership doesn't make sense.

Also, the Tories are fully aware that is a no confidence vote happens, the new leadership is going to be fractured, as it will be either a Hard Brexit faction or Soft Brexit one. Without this kind of agreement Parliament may dissolve.

Basically the Tories won't take action because they think if they kick off May, they will have a snap election and lose to Corbyn. Otherwise they can keep May in for now, and not have to worry until the 2022 elections (which they also will probably lose).
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #883 on: July 17, 2018, 01:41:52 PM »

And, without wanting to play the deranged momentum type, I genuinely don't understand why Vauxhall CLP hasn't you know, seriously thought about deselecting her. How exactly does a fox hunt supporting Brexiteer fit Vauxhall of all places? Presumably even the Progress types wouldn't be too devastated at her being replaced by a Corbyn fan.

I mean the Progress types who probably be leading the effort to deselect her; Progress leadership tend to value Brexit much more than Momentum (who see it as a hurdle to be navigated), and Hoey has been relatively pro-Corbyn.

Although obviously card carrying progress members, and Momentum members typically only make up a very small % of CLP membership. I don't know the factional history/make up of her CLP though.

She's an awful fit. If I remember correctly she's quite a good, and active constituency MP; before 2015 MPs only got deselected if they were both an awful ideological fit, and chronically lazy. And Brexit wasn't an issue back in 2015.

Likewise, all candidates got adopted automatically in 2017. I reckon she'll stand down at the next election as Brexit will be largely sorted
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,612
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #884 on: July 17, 2018, 03:34:58 PM »

If there was a time to deselect these types it would be now. They just kept the government alive for another (needless) three months!
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,612
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #885 on: July 18, 2018, 01:38:13 AM »
« Edited: July 18, 2018, 01:42:14 AM by cp »

If their primary objective is to deliver Brexit, let them join UKIP or serve in a Leave-oriented NGO. Labour MPs should, above all else, want to oust the Tories from power when the (realistic) chance of doing so arises, which it did with the customs union amendment; the Tory whips said so themselves.

Having Eurosceptics in the Labour Party is fine. Having Labour MPs vote in lockstep for a Tory version of Brexit is taking the piss.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,612
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #886 on: July 18, 2018, 03:03:44 AM »

^^
being in a customs union, means UK cant sign it own Trade deals,
Frank field campaigned for leave along with Kate Hoey and Gisela Stuart, they were all prominent  voices in Labour Leave campaign.

Your point being? Leaving the EU and the UK signing its own trade deals are not synonymous. Plenty of Leave campaigners advocated for EEA/EFTA membership during and after the referendum, both of which would have involved the UK staying in the EU customs union.

The conflation of 'Leaving' the EU with the specific policies advocated (disingenuously and largely after the fact, but never mind) by the hard right for doing so is one of the great swindles perpetrated by the Europhobes over the past two years. That Hoey et al. have participated in it is evidence, to my mind, of them being either dupes or shills.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,612
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #887 on: July 18, 2018, 05:30:12 AM »

^^
being in a customs union, means UK cant sign it own Trade deals,
Frank field campaigned for leave along with Kate Hoey and Gisela Stuart, they were all prominent  voices in Labour Leave campaign.

Your point being? Leaving the EU and the UK signing its own trade deals are not synonymous. Plenty of Leave campaigners advocated for EEA/EFTA membership during and after the referendum, both of which would have involved the UK staying in the EU customs union.

The conflation of 'Leaving' the EU with the specific policies advocated (disingenuously and largely after the fact, but never mind) by the hard right for doing so is one of the great swindles perpetrated by the Europhobes over the past two years. That Hoey et al. have participated in it is evidence, to my mind, of them being either dupes or shills.

No Customs Union and EEA/EFTA are totally different.

Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland are all part of "EEA/EFTA" but not the "Customs Union".

Norway option is Basically EFTA but not 'the' or 'a' customs union, the Swiss notebly have done a lot of trade deals across the world.

Turkey is Part of a customs Union with the EU

"Turkey has little or no freedom to develop trade policy with other countries across the world and its relationship with the EU is therefore asymmetric and dependent.

Yes, Turkey has around 20 free-trade agreements, but they are ultimately a one-way street that can put Turkish firms at a competitive disadvantage. Turkey has to open its markets to any country the EU strikes an agreement with. But it doesn’t get any say over how that agreement is formed and doesn’t even get the same immediate duty-free access to that country’s market that EU members do."

Labour Leadership have been against EEA thus far.

EU withdrawal bill: which Labour MPs rebelled over the EEA amendment?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2018/jun/13/eu-withdrawal-bill-which-labour-mps-rebelled-over-the-eea-amendment

@Theo Usherwood
Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union - Labour manifesto 2017.

Both Labour and Conservatives haven't been totally honest about what arrangement they seek, you cant remain part of the EEA/EFTA and end free movement, You cant have an independent trade policy and be part of the customs union.
Labour made the pledge to end free movement, which i think was a wrong thing to do, because they feared they'd lose a lot of white working class votes to the Tories.


My mistake about the EEA/EFTA confusion, but my point still stands: leaving the EU does not necessarily entail leaving the customs union. Believing that it does is nothing more than Tory/Europhobic spin.

Labour's position has been, cannily, very vague, but they've said over and over that they want to stay in a/the EU customs union. The CU amendment was endorsed by the Labour leadership yesterday. If Hoey and other Labour Leavers want to opposite these objectives, fine, but when they have a chance to inflict a potentially fatal blow on the Tories and pass it up because it would contravene a Tory-concocted policy objective that their own party explicitly rejects, they really can't be defended on 'principle'.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,612
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #888 on: July 18, 2018, 07:22:53 AM »

Couldn't agree more. One of the more frustrating elements of the past few months - really, since the referendum itself - is how blithe and frivolous the debate over what leaving the EU really entails has been. For months it's been obvious to anyone who cared to educate themselves about it that the UK government's objectives for Brexit are unachievable (read: legally impossible). If Brexit were any other policy this would have prompted the powers that be to abandon it. Instead we've had to listen to an unending incantation of 'Brexit means Brexit' and 'will of the people' as May tries to conjure up an solution that doesn't destroy her party, the country's economy, or both.

IMHO, the end game won't be whether or not she pulls it off, but how bad of a disaster her failure to do so will be. Everything from Brexit being called off to a no deal/kamikaze Brexit scenario is possible, with the possibility of a middle-ground compromise ever less likely.
Logged
Hnv1
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,505


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #889 on: July 18, 2018, 10:36:03 AM »

Can someone explain to me why the May conservative government is still a thing?

With all the cabinet chaos and all the seeming incompetence of the government in regards to BreXit, wouldn’t you think that a No confidence vote would be called and passed by the house (considering it is a minority government) .. or am I missing something?
Whoever delivers Brexit is ed. No one wants the job before it’s done either way, not even Corbyn who would much rather run an election on living standards post any brexit than on how Brexit should look.
Logged
EPG
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 992
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #890 on: July 18, 2018, 02:22:42 PM »

Well, we're back to the Vauxhall question, aren't we. Back Corbyn like Hoey, and win new voters and insulate yourself from the weak centre faction. Who cares then about Remain or Leave? Corbyn himself could not care less about Brexit, I think, except as a threat to May.

As for May being comparable to Callaghan... Hmm... She has a much better economic outlook than Wilson/Callaghan had to deal with, in that their core voters are less immediately at risk than Labour voters in the 70s. And that is thanks to the ground work done by Cameron and Osborne to reward Conservative core voters and waverers - as an observer you don't have to like the policies, just recognise in a neutral way that they work and the Conservatives are reaping the rewards. Similarly, if you threaten to randomly take their houses, you will lose their votes. Pretty simple, nb May/Nick Timothy.

One question that didn't really arise in 78 was how many opposition MPs would support a Thatcher government. Clearly there are still a handful of John Woodcocks in the chicken coop who will quit before they do so. Another distinction is that it's not really a minority government as it can command confidence and supply from a majority of MPs; they don't all have to be in government, of course. Even if Ian Paisley is suspended, they can still rely on Sinn Féin not to vote. But this week, we learned that there is actually a tiny yet extant Commons majority for hard Brexit, plus whatever May can negotiate, at least until it comes time to choose to accept the final deal.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,612
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #891 on: July 18, 2018, 02:36:58 PM »

Well, we're back to the Vauxhall question, aren't we. Back Corbyn like Hoey, and win new voters and insulate yourself from the weak centre faction. Who cares then about Remain or Leave? Corbyn himself could not care less about Brexit, I think, except as a threat to May.

As for May being comparable to Callaghan... Hmm... She has a much better economic outlook than Wilson/Callaghan had to deal with, in that their core voters are less immediately at risk than Labour voters in the 70s. And that is thanks to the ground work done by Cameron and Osborne to reward Conservative core voters and waverers - as an observer you don't have to like the policies, just recognise in a neutral way that they work and the Conservatives are reaping the rewards. Similarly, if you threaten to randomly take their houses, you will lose their votes. Pretty simple, nb May/Nick Timothy.

One question that didn't really arise in 78 was how many opposition MPs would support a Thatcher government. Clearly there are still a handful of John Woodcocks in the chicken coop who will quit before they do so. Another distinction is that it's not really a minority government as it can command confidence and supply from a majority of MPs; they don't all have to be in government, of course. Even if Ian Paisley is suspended, they can still rely on Sinn Féin not to vote. But this week, we learned that there is actually a tiny yet extant Commons majority for hard Brexit, plus whatever May can negotiate, at least until it comes time to choose to accept the final deal.

The parallels between the Labour governments of the late 70s and the present situation are deeper, and more telling, than you're giving credit for. Both governments were riven by factional warfare to an exceptional degree in the context of their respective recent histories. Both governments were led by unelected PMs who were distrusted by the hardline/ascendant wings of their parties. Both periods saw a global realignment spurred more or less by a period of retrenchment in the United States. And maybe most significantly, both periods saw opposition parties (especially leaders) who were written off and underestimated at every turn.

I agree that the economic situation today is nowhere near the crisis (what crisis?) of the Winter of Discontent. But that could easily change in the wake of a no deal Brexit, or even a prolonged threat of one.
Logged
EPG
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 992
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #892 on: July 18, 2018, 05:05:09 PM »

What's really missing today to make the parallel convincing is the most fundamental centrifugal force in democratic politics, the "time for a change" emotion. It was dominant in say 2009 but not so much now?
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,612
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #893 on: July 19, 2018, 12:57:00 AM »

I can't remember any polling that's asked a 'time for a change' question recently (or ever, if I'm honest; do pollsters here usually ask that?), but there is very much a desire to change the government, albeit not from the place you'd expect: Tories. By staggering margins Tories, at least the rank and file members, want Theresa May gone. The fact that she's still in place is a function of the  factionalism and precariousness of the parliamentary situation.

Otherwise, you could also see the desire for a redo of the referendum, recent polling showing 50% of people want to stay in the EU (with the other 50% divided between leaving with a deal and leaving without a deal), the longstanding discontent with austerity, and the more recent scandals over Windrush and the 'hostile environment' as indicators of a desire for change - though I admit that take might be my own bias talking Tongue
Logged
Statilius the Epicurean
Thersites
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,596
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #894 on: July 19, 2018, 06:27:38 AM »
« Edited: July 19, 2018, 06:34:21 AM by Statilius the Epicurean »

What's really missing today to make the parallel convincing is the most fundamental centrifugal force in democratic politics, the "time for a change" emotion. It was dominant in say 2009 but not so much now?

"Time for a change" has powered successful insurgent movements in both main parties since 2015.

And the fundamental state of the economy is much (much) worse than most people think: real wage growth (the worst since the 1870s!) and productivity have flatlined since the 2008 crash and we have the lowest GDP growth in the OECD. People are obsessing over Brexit but the UK economy has been treading on water for structural reasons for a long time now.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,308
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #895 on: July 19, 2018, 02:16:21 PM »

On the whole though the Government is in a very similar situation to Labour during the 1970s; a serious of close parliamentary votes, general chaos at every division, a deal with a minor party, trying to deal with a major political, and economic crisis, whilst appeasing about 3 different factions.

The Tories can just thank the heavens that there MPs are a lot younger than the Labour benches were in the 1970s.

I'm sort of wishing the Tories did win a stomping victory in the election. Corbyn would have gone and we'd not have this Brexit mess.
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,192
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #896 on: July 19, 2018, 02:19:57 PM »

On the whole though the Government is in a very similar situation to Labour during the 1970s; a serious of close parliamentary votes, general chaos at every division, a deal with a minor party, trying to deal with a major political, and economic crisis, whilst appeasing about 3 different factions.

The Tories can just thank the heavens that there MPs are a lot younger than the Labour benches were in the 1970s.

I'm sort of wishing the Tories did win a stomping victory in the election. Corbyn would have gone and we'd not have this Brexit mess.

Would rather not; it's easier to forget now that the dominant narrative about May is that she is a giant loser surrounded insubordinate and ambitious ministers who revel in her humiliation, but all signs pointed to a woman who would use a powerful mandate for alarmingly authoritarian means.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,612
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #897 on: July 20, 2018, 02:52:29 AM »

On the whole though the Government is in a very similar situation to Labour during the 1970s; a serious of close parliamentary votes, general chaos at every division, a deal with a minor party, trying to deal with a major political, and economic crisis, whilst appeasing about 3 different factions.

The Tories can just thank the heavens that there MPs are a lot younger than the Labour benches were in the 1970s.

I'm sort of wishing the Tories did win a stomping victory in the election. Corbyn would have gone and we'd not have this Brexit mess.

Would rather not; it's easier to forget now that the dominant narrative about May is that she is a giant loser surrounded insubordinate and ambitious ministers who revel in her humiliation, but all signs pointed to a woman who would use a powerful mandate for alarmingly authoritarian means.

Agreed. Also, I don't think Corbyn would be so bad, but primarily I'm agreeing with the premise that an unrestrained May majority would be a an appalling outcome for civil rights, privacy, and the economy (if her willingness to contemplate a hard break with the EU is to be taken seriously)
Logged
EPG
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 992
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #898 on: July 20, 2018, 12:42:04 PM »

What's really missing today to make the parallel convincing is the most fundamental centrifugal force in democratic politics, the "time for a change" emotion. It was dominant in say 2009 but not so much now?

"Time for a change" has powered successful insurgent movements in both main parties since 2015.

Yes, a good point! - but even since 2016 a lot has changed. To take one example, see how the attitudes to immigrants have softened since 2016. If the dominant emotions in democracies are demand for change and fear of the consequences of change, #2 is definitely winning in the UK now.
Logged
EPG
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 992
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #899 on: July 21, 2018, 05:45:55 AM »

He is accurately rated by me as having done almost nothing with the capacity to do almost anything: a big majority and a healthy economy in the short term and what did he achieve? It's unfair that Major who actually delivered economic productivity and achieved lots of an ambitious agenda is instead associated with really minor sex scandals, whereas Macmillan's ministry has somehow managed not to be ... ?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 41 ... 79  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.079 seconds with 12 queries.