The tv debate - in short.

Corbyn came across as calm, sincere and statesmanlike.
Rudd should never have been there, what WAS May thinking throwing her to the wolves 72 hours after her father died. Proved May is as callous and uncaring as people think she is.
Farron looked like a lost schoolboy.
Nuttall, nasty bit of work, a one policy pony.
Greens did ok, but will never become mainstream.
Had to chuckle about the Mail columnists rants, they went into Dacre overdrive with the Corbyn smears.
Proof that Labour are looking promising for a good election.

Too many lefties as usual, shouting over people trying to explain things,

Why does the BBC always pick the yobs who don't want to listen to others who have a different opinion to themselves?

Angry Andy wrote:Corbyn came across as calm, sincere and statesmanlike.
Rudd should never have been there, what WAS May thinking throwing her to the wolves 72 hours after her father died. Proved May is as callous and uncaring as people think she is.
Farron looked like a lost schoolboy.
Nuttall, nasty bit of work, a one policy pony.
Greens did ok, but will never become mainstream.
Had to chuckle about the Mail columnists rants, they went into Dacre overdrive with the Corbyn smears.
Proof that Labour are looking promising for a good election.

So know for certain that May forced a grieving Amber Rudd to do that programme, do you?

How do you know that Rudd didn't actually wish to do it? Many people who believe that life must go on after a bereavement prefer to carry on as near normally as possible, not only out of a sense of duty to their colleagues but also as an important part of the grieving process.

The scenario of May deliberately throwing a close colleague "to the wolves" is risible...and the product of a filthy, disgusting mind anxious to exploit any smear possible to score a cheap point.

I'd bet my bottom dollar that Rudd was given plenty of offers and opportunities to withdraw and that most senior Tory ministers would have taken on the job without hesitation out of a sense of sympathy, loyalty and friendship.

And I'm pretty certain that the same could have been said for senior, indeed most, members of the Labour, LibDem, UKIP and other parties under similar circumstances.

But that's because, unlike you, they are at heart sympathetic and thoughtful human beings with feelings who would be at the front of the queue to "be there" for a friend or colleague at a time of need.

You, on the other hand, have proved in this forum that you are eager and willing to spread your bile, filth, lies and smears if you think it will be to your advantage.

And you have the sheer gall and breathtaking hypocrisy to whine about journalists "smearing" someone.

Angry Andy wrote:Corbyn came across as calm, sincere and statesmanlike.
Rudd should never have been there, what WAS May thinking throwing her to the wolves 72 hours after her father died. Proved May is as callous and uncaring as people think she is.
Farron looked like a lost schoolboy.
Nuttall, nasty bit of work, a one policy pony.
Greens did ok, but will never become mainstream.
Had to chuckle about the Mail columnists rants, they went into Dacre overdrive with the Corbyn smears.
Proof that Labour are looking promising for a good election.

you must have watched a different program to the rest of us. What was patently clear during 15 to 1 was a clear view into what a cabinet meeting of the coalition of chaos would look like.

the only winner was Mrs May who chose not to get involved in that farce.,

As to Amber rudd, I don't think she was thrown to the wolves by May at all. she stood her ground and wiped the floor with them and went home with a wolf skin coat, or bearing in mind the calibre of those there more like a sheep skin coat.

corbyn is so indecisive that he wasn't going to appear if she didn't but then his vanity got the better of him and he couldn't resist, or was it because the alternative was Abbot.