Forum Message

Topic: Re:Votes for 16 year olds?
Posted by: Sue Hammond
Date/Time: 06/09/26 16:23:00

@JC 6/9/26 10.05

I didn’t use your link (you post too many🥱) but I read Runciman’s rubbish from his article published in 2021 in the Guardian:👇

https://share.google/E1mmggXwN4bELtAWE

In my opinion he wasn’t being provocative, he was deadly serious!   This is quite worrying from someone described as a ‘political scientist’🙄 (what is the science behind politics (?) > perhaps Mr Ixer could explain) and is presumably why Runciman drones on and on in his very long article.  

Jonathan as you are so concerned about paragraphs - I think his article could have benefited from a few, what do you think?

PS less links would be welcome


Entire Thread
TopicDate PostedPosted By
Votes for 16 year olds?05/09/26 15:11:00 Janis Christine Humberstone
   Reply05/09/26 16:04:00 Martine Guy
      Re:Reply05/09/26 18:45:00 Steven Rose
         Re:Re:Reply05/09/26 20:29:00 Ivonne Holliday
      Re:Reply05/09/26 19:31:00 Lucille Grant
         Re:Re:Reply05/09/26 20:11:00 Jonathan Callaway
            Reply05/09/26 20:56:00 Sue Hammond
   Re:Votes for 16 year olds?05/09/26 20:59:00 Adam Tripp
      Re:Re:Votes for 16 year olds?05/09/26 22:13:00 Jonathan Callaway
         Re:Re:Re:Votes for 16 year olds?06/09/26 18:43:00 Lucille Grant
   Re:Votes for 16 year olds?05/09/26 22:39:00 Michael Brigo
      Re:Re:Votes for 16 year olds?06/09/26 01:32:00 Steven Rose
         Re:Re:Re:Votes for 16 year olds?06/09/26 10:05:00 Jonathan Callaway
            Re:Votes for 16 year olds?06/09/26 16:23:00 Sue Hammond
               Reply06/09/26 17:10:00 Michael Ixer
               Re:Re:Votes for 16 year olds?06/09/26 17:23:00 Jonathan Callaway
      Re:Re:Votes for 16 year olds?06/09/26 08:49:00 Barbara Stevens
         Re:Re:Re:Votes for 16 year olds?06/09/26 09:46:00 Adam Tripp
            Re:Re:Re:Re:Votes for 16 year olds?06/09/26 11:03:00 Steven Rose

Forum Home