If they aren't an MP they can't even vote on the matter, should the government offer one. Which they've said they won't.

Optimistic as ever

A lot of debate here about Scotland but why?

If they want the EU, independence - a socially just society of their own and they vote for it then surely we should let them go?

Its down to them whether they win or fail but they are away from Westminster rule - that's got be welcome.

[Tweet Link]

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

It's a shame that Sanders ended up endorsing Clinton, considering she got a lot of her funding from Wall Street, who he claimed he was going stand up to. The democratic 'anti-establishment' candidate ended up backing the democratic candidate who epitomised the establishment.

This short video is worth watching for a bit of background on him:

[Link]

There's also the stealing of the candidacy by the DNC, yet he still carried on backing her. [Link]

I'm for Corbyn, in the sense that I think he's true to his beliefs. The one thing that disappointed me about him, is him backing down over his anti-EU stance, which he'd held his whole political career up until he became the Labour leader.

On a side note, I also don't trust May at all, purely due to her appointing Woolf and Sloss to run the child sex abuse enquiry, seeing as they both had links to those who were going to be investigated. It means to me that she is either incompetent or complicit in an attempted cover-up, the latter being the most likely.

Surely Trump initially represents another anti-establishment vote with the electorate simply fed up of the same old, not helped by Clinton's evident murky past that would make HER an electoral liability in any case.

The biggest, most screamingly obvious complaint from the rest of the world is that a country that has at least 250m population can be at best whittled down to these two plebeians to run for President - talk about the ultimate dumbing down?