Hello from a very wet Glasgow - the good news being that the more rain gets dumped here tonight the less there is to dump on me tomorrow as I head for Skye.
In an also grey and soggy Labour world, there are now counter letters being circulated. One gives councillors the opportunity to pledge fealty to Jezbollah. The other condemns the absurd mock expulsion of Hilary Anderson.
I know that there are all kinds of rumors circulating round about planned Tory defections and plots. The same is very much true in the Labour Party. Fun times - at least we've both chosen a quiet time in British politics where there is no urgency to decide to smash the post war settlement...
A bad idea. Firstly I think many voters will rebel against the idea that they have to vote on a single issue in a General Election, when they may have significant issues with nominated parties on other issues. And secondly, when the Election results are in and a Government needs to be formed, any such government formed largely on the backs of these single issue candidates would have little serious democratic mandate to do anything.
Leave it to the voters to decide how they want to cast their votes, and decide for themselves if they want to coalesce tactically on single issues.
All very well, but FPTP means that a Remain backing constituency could still elect a member of the ERG with many fewer votes than the combined Remain parties.
I think you will find that the BBC will not be mentioning that Panorama programme so often now that the wheels are coming off. I gather that most of the "cast" were not as "innocent" as they tried to make out. I look forward to this week's Private Eye to see if they have caught on to the story.
The last thing I learnt Panorama wise was just how much bbc journos could put away...
I read in Paxo's book that the culture at Panorama is not a good one. It is ultra competitive between the teams as they compete to get stories aired and it leads to a lot of bitterness.
"You take that wrong, as Cyclefree has made clear on many an occasion.
A reasonable reading of the argument would make it pretty clear that in a democracy power doesn’t lie any particular where; it is distributed. Or do you have a problem with pluralism, too ?"
Yes well I notice she can't be bothered to defend herself.
Obviously power lies in many places. It's a complicated matter.
I'm just curious as to Cyclefree's particular stance given her pro-BBC, anti-weed stance.
Another great soundbite-
"An understanding that state and government are not the same."
Thanks for that, I'll make sure to write to my MP the next time the cops put me in cuffs.
I expect @Cyclefree takes the same view that I do, that a thread header should stand for itself and below thread you should let other people have their say.
Well, that too. But mainly that my beloved garden takes priority, even over PB.
Candidly, you do well to cultivate your garden. Remember it's in the best of all possible worlds.
A bad idea. Firstly I think many voters will rebel against the idea that they have to vote on a single issue in a General Election, when they may have significant issues with nominated parties on other issues. And secondly, when the Election results are in and a Government needs to be formed, any such government formed largely on the backs of these single issue candidates would have little serious democratic mandate to do anything.
Leave it to the voters to decide how they want to cast their votes, and decide for themselves if they want to coalesce tactically on single issues.
All very well, but FPTP means that a Remain backing constituency could still elect a member of the ERG with many fewer votes than the combined Remain parties.
And vice versa. If voters in the constituency don’t want to elect an ERG MP, and don’t care who they elect instead, then in the vast majority of cases they will be able to work out how to do that without the parties trying to force it on them.
And where you have voters that don’t see Brexit as the main determinant of their vote, such alliances could actually end up having the opposite effect to that intended, by artificially restricting voter choice they could actually be driven towards the “wrong” candidate.
Also whilst you could do this sort of thing in a single election, I would imagine that parties standing down would want some input into the candidates being put forward, and the manifestos they are standing on.
Clearly the hot take will be Harris surging to 16%.
Rather that she possibly has more to win, and more to lose than any other candidate in the debates at the end of this month. The three in front of her are more established in voters’ minds, Biden and Sanders far more so. She could have a further surge, justifying her current betting odds, or be back in the chasing pack with Buttigieg.
An important dynamic with this race is that, for the September debates, the "entrance requirements" have doubled.
The consequence of which is that only five candidates have definitely qualified for them (Biden, Harris, Warren, Sanders and Buttigieg), and then there are two or three with a chance (O'Rourke, Kloubacher, Castro).
We could go from two debates with twenty candidates, to one debate with five or six.
I also suspect that those who do not qualify for the September debate, are effectively out the race.
If O’Rourke goes out, who inherits all those Texas votes ? Buttigieg, I think, polled as his followers’ second preference, but he might well not be in the race at that point, either.
Warren has some hard thinking to do on policy. Thus far, she’s more or less managed ambiguity on several issues, but I think will get targeted on this come the next debate.
The problem with Cyclefree's thesis is that, whilst it is correct, it assumes that some of the systems that support our democracy have not already been subverted to the extent that they are no longer fit fir purpose and can no longer be considered impartial and working for the good of the country.
There is nothing written in stone that says these institutions will always remain impartial nor that they will not be subverted by politicians and civil servants who think they can get away with it. Blair horribly politicised the civil service to the extent that many of us simply no longer trust it to be impartial in any way.
Similarly the police have been politicised - or have politicised themselves - to the extent that there are large swathes of otherwise law abiding citizens who wouldn't trust them as far as we could throw them. The Andrew Mitchell affair was a classic example of this and simply reinforced what many of us have long thought of the police.
The idea that it is Brexit that has caused this or even brought it to the fore is rubbish. Many of these institutions have, through their actions over many years, shown they do not deserve our trust or our faith that they are acting in the best interests of the country and the public.
As for Parliament. There are far too many people on here (and in Parliament) suggesting it is okay for MPs to sweep aside legal and constitutional arrangements and laws with little or no debate simply because they get in the way of their aims. It is they who are doing damage to our democracy just as much as the idiots talking about prorogation.
I'm back! Ms Brisk has buggered off to bed, besides I was checking on my ipad (I know, right; but in case I get hospitalised again it's kind of de riguer nowadays; although mine doesn't play out gangsta rap in various languages) the whole time, very naughty.
I think me and Cyclefree can just let this one lie.
Clearly the hot take will be Harris surging to 16%.
Rather that she possibly has more to win, and more to lose than any other candidate in the debates at the end of this month. The three in front of her are more established in voters’ minds, Biden and Sanders far more so. She could have a further surge, justifying her current betting odds, or be back in the chasing pack with Buttigieg.
An important dynamic with this race is that, for the September debates, the "entrance requirements" have doubled.
The consequence of which is that only five candidates have definitely qualified for them (Biden, Harris, Warren, Sanders and Buttigieg), and then there are two or three with a chance (O'Rourke, Kloubacher, Castro).
We could go from two debates with twenty candidates, to one debate with five or six.
I also suspect that those who do not qualify for the September debate, are effectively out the race.
If O’Rourke goes out, who inherits all those Texas votes ? Buttigieg, I think, polled as his followers’ second preference, but he might well not be in the race at that point, either.
Warren has some hard thinking to do on policy. Thus far, she’s more or less managed ambiguity on several issues, but I think will get targeted on this come the next debate.
Buttigieg has already qualified for the September debates, O'Rourke has not.
Also, Buttigieg topped the fundraising charts in Q2, raising $25m (2.5x what Harris pulled in and 5x O'Rourke), so I don't think he's dropping out any time soon.
The problem with Cyclefree's thesis is that, whilst it is correct, it assumes that some of the systems that support our democracy have not already been subverted to the extent that they are no longer fit fir purpose and can no longer be considered impartial and working for the good of the country.
There is nothing written in stone that says these institutions will always remain impartial nor that they will not be subverted by politicians and civil servants who think they can get away with it. Blair horribly politicised the civil service to the extent that many of us simply no longer trust it to be impartial in any way.
Similarly the police have been politicised - or have politicised themselves - to the extent that there are large swathes of otherwise law abiding citizens who wouldn't trust them as far as we could throw them. The Andrew Mitchell affair was a classic example of this and simply reinforced what many of us have long thought of the police.
The idea that it is Brexit that has caused this or even brought it to the fore is rubbish. Many of these institutions have, through their actions over many years, shown they do not deserve our trust or our faith that they are acting in the best interests of the country and the public.
As for Parliament. There are far too many people on here (and in Parliament) suggesting it is okay for MPs to sweep aside legal and constitutional arrangements and laws with little or no debate simply because they get in the way of their aims. It is they who are doing damage to our democracy just as much as the idiots talking about prorogation.
Indeed. That's why I wrote - "Perhaps the Brexit referendum caused this. Maybe these tendencies were always there and were exacerbated by it." I appreciate that I may be being idealistic and/or naive in thinking about how things ought to be.
Whatever the multiple reasons, politicians should be thinking about the long-term future of our democracy. They are not, it seems to me. And that worries me.
The problem with Cyclefree's thesis is that, whilst it is correct, it assumes that some of the systems that support our democracy have not already been subverted to the extent that they are no longer fit fir purpose and can no longer be considered impartial and working for the good of the country.
There is nothing written in stone that says these institutions will always remain impartial nor that they will not be subverted by politicians and civil servants who think they can get away with it. Blair horribly politicised the civil service to the extent that many of us simply no longer trust it to be impartial in any way.
Similarly the police have been politicised - or have politicised themselves - to the extent that there are large swathes of otherwise law abiding citizens who wouldn't trust them as far as we could throw them. The Andrew Mitchell affair was a classic example of this and simply reinforced what many of us have long thought of the police.
The idea that it is Brexit that has caused this or even brought it to the fore is rubbish. Many of these institutions have, through their actions over many years, shown they do not deserve our trust or our faith that they are acting in the best interests of the country and the public.
As for Parliament. There are far too many people on here (and in Parliament) suggesting it is okay for MPs to sweep aside legal and constitutional arrangements and laws with little or no debate simply because they get in the way of their aims. It is they who are doing damage to our democracy just as much as the idiots talking about prorogation.
Indeed. That's why I wrote - "Perhaps the Brexit referendum caused this. Maybe these tendencies were always there and were exacerbated by it." I appreciate that I may be being idealistic and/or naive in thinking about how things ought to be.
Whatever the multiple reasons, politicians should be thinking about the long-term future of our democracy. They are not, it seems to me. And that worries me.
Apologies if you thought I was attacking you or your piece by the way. I do agree with your thesis. I just fear that at least some of these institutions have brought this upon themselves to some extent by allowing themselves to be manipulated by politicians because they agreed with their aims.
Edit. I would add that one of the worst examples of this is The Speaker who has been thoroughly inconsistent and partisan in the way he has chosen to change long standing conventions when it suited him.
Clearly the hot take will be Harris surging to 16%.
Rather that she possibly has more to win, and more to lose than any other candidate in the debates at the end of this month. The three in front of her are more established in voters’ minds, Biden and Sanders far more so. She could have a further surge, justifying her current betting odds, or be back in the chasing pack with Buttigieg.
An important dynamic with this race is that, for the September debates, the "entrance requirements" have doubled.
The consequence of which is that only five candidates have definitely qualified for them (Biden, Harris, Warren, Sanders and Buttigieg), and then there are two or three with a chance (O'Rourke, Kloubacher, Castro).
We could go from two debates with twenty candidates, to one debate with five or six.
I also suspect that those who do not qualify for the September debate, are effectively out the race.
If O’Rourke goes out, who inherits all those Texas votes ? Buttigieg, I think, polled as his followers’ second preference, but he might well not be in the race at that point, either.
Warren has some hard thinking to do on policy. Thus far, she’s more or less managed ambiguity on several issues, but I think will get targeted on this come the next debate.
Buttigieg has already qualified for the September debates, O'Rourke has not.
Also, Buttigieg topped the fundraising charts in Q2, raising $25m (2.5x what Harris pulled in and 5x O'Rourke), so I don't think he's dropping out any time soon.
Clearly the hot take will be Harris surging to 16%.
Rather that she possibly has more to win, and more to lose than any other candidate in the debates at the end of this month. The three in front of her are more established in voters’ minds, Biden and Sanders far more so. She could have a further surge, justifying her current betting odds, or be back in the chasing pack with Buttigieg.
An important dynamic with this race is that, for the September debates, the "entrance requirements" have doubled.
The consequence of which is that only five candidates have definitely qualified for them (Biden, Harris, Warren, Sanders and Buttigieg), and then there are two or three with a chance (O'Rourke, Kloubacher, Castro).
We could go from two debates with twenty candidates, to one debate with five or six.
I also suspect that those who do not qualify for the September debate, are effectively out the race.
If O’Rourke goes out, who inherits all those Texas votes ? Buttigieg, I think, polled as his followers’ second preference, but he might well not be in the race at that point, either.
Warren has some hard thinking to do on policy. Thus far, she’s more or less managed ambiguity on several issues, but I think will get targeted on this come the next debate.
Buttigieg has already qualified for the September debates, O'Rourke has not.
Also, Buttigieg topped the fundraising charts in Q2, raising $25m (2.5x what Harris pulled in and 5x O'Rourke), so I don't think he's dropping out any time soon.
Bernie topped the charts
Bernie has raised the biggest sums in total, but in Q2 he was fourth behind Buttigieg, Biden and Warren.
The problem with Cyclefree's thesis is that, whilst it is correct, it assumes that some of the systems that support our democracy have not already been subverted to the extent that they are no longer fit fir purpose and can no longer be considered impartial and working for the good of the country.
There is nothing written in stone that says these institutions will always remain impartial nor that they will not be subverted by politicians and civil servants who think they can get away with it. Blair horribly politicised the civil service to the extent that many of us simply no longer trust it to be impartial in any way.
Similarly the police have been politicised - or have politicised themselves - to the extent that there are large swathes of otherwise law abiding citizens who wouldn't trust them as far as we could throw them. The Andrew Mitchell affair was a classic example of this and simply reinforced what many of us have long thought of the police.
The idea that it is Brexit that has caused this or even brought it to the fore is rubbish. Many of these institutions have, through their actions over many years, shown they do not deserve our trust or our faith that they are acting in the best interests of the country and the public.
As for Parliament. There are far too many people on here (and in Parliament) suggesting it is okay for MPs to sweep aside legal and constitutional arrangements and laws with little or no debate simply because they get in the way of their aims. It is they who are doing damage to our democracy just as much as the idiots talking about prorogation.
Indeed. That's why I wrote - "Perhaps the Brexit referendum caused this. Maybe these tendencies were always there and were exacerbated by it."
Whatever the multiple reasons, politicians should be thinking about the long-term future of our democracy. They are not, it seems to me. And that worries me.
Apologies if you thought I was attacking you or your piece by the way. I do agree with your thesis. I just fear that at least some of these institutions have brought this upon themselves to some extent by allowing themselves to be manipulated by politicians because they agreed with their aims.
Edit. I would add that one of the worst examples of this is The Speaker who has been thoroughly inconsistent and partisan in the way he has chosen to change long standing conventions when it suited him.
No apology needed. I did not think that.
I agree that some of our institutions have themselves forgotten about the need to stand apart from party politics. I fear that we are degrading our civic and political institutions and that this will cause real harm to us at at time when we need them most.
I'm back! Ms Brisk has buggered off to bed, besides I was checking on my ipad (I know, right; but in case I get hospitalised again it's kind of de riguer nowadays; although mine doesn't play out gangsta rap in various languages) the whole time, very naughty.
I think me and Cyclefree can just let this one lie.
If Cyclefree can write such long paragraphs I'm sure she can answer the simple question of whether she respects the 2016 referendum result.
I understand that you, along with millions of others, were disenfranchised. Can we be sure the result would be the same if they had voted?
I think this is the worst reasoning yet for EUref2. Brisky disenfranchised (glad you care) so we should run it again????
I'm not in any sort of argument with you. You seem to have picked on me. Not quite sure why.
I shall try and write a short piece next time, just for you. It might just contain a lot of 4-letter words about Boris. Though maybe it is time to take a break from inflicting my views on current affairs.
As Mr Bennett put it: "You have delighted us long enough. Let one of the other young ladies have a go."
Clearly the hot take will be Harris surging to 16%.
Rather that she possibly has more to win, and more to lose than any other candidate in the debates at the end of this month. The three in front of her are more established in voters’ minds, Biden and Sanders far more so. She could have a further surge, justifying her current betting odds, or be back in the chasing pack with Buttigieg.
An important dynamic with this race is that, for the September debates, the "entrance requirements" have doubled.
The consequence of which is that only five candidates have definitely qualified for them (Biden, Harris, Warren, Sanders and Buttigieg), and then there are two or three with a chance (O'Rourke, Kloubacher, Castro).
We could go from two debates with twenty candidates, to one debate with five or six.
I also suspect that those who do not qualify for the September debate, are effectively out the race.
If O’Rourke goes out, who inherits all those Texas votes ? Buttigieg, I think, polled as his followers’ second preference, but he might well not be in the race at that point, either.
Warren has some hard thinking to do on policy. Thus far, she’s more or less managed ambiguity on several issues, but I think will get targeted on this come the next debate.
Buttigieg has already qualified for the September debates, O'Rourke has not.
Also, Buttigieg topped the fundraising charts in Q2, raising $25m (2.5x what Harris pulled in and 5x O'Rourke), so I don't think he's dropping out any time soon.
I’m thinking about beyond September. As far as funding goes, it will be really interesting to see what was raised this month.
without wanting to be like the kebab shop guy who bets on south American football - we can still ask for a Rooney dividend can't we? Whenever he scores it's on sky news and I've only seen it twice.
without wanting to be like the kebab shop guy who bets on south American football - we can still ask for a Rooney dividend can't we? Whenever he scores it's on sky news and I've only seen it twice.
Such an illiquid market - yuk.
I'm up there if you fancy a patriotic punt though.
without wanting to be like the kebab shop guy who bets on south American football - we can still ask for a Rooney dividend can't we? Whenever he scores it's on sky news and I've only seen it twice.
Such an illiquid market - yuk.
I'm up there if you fancy a patriotic punt though.
He's not even on the Subs bench.
Makes me suspicious that Team Red Bull only turned up their engine cus they heard of a famous PB Forum better
without wanting to be like the kebab shop guy who bets on south American football - we can still ask for a Rooney dividend can't we? Whenever he scores it's on sky news and I've only seen it twice.
Such an illiquid market - yuk.
I'm up there if you fancy a patriotic punt though.
He's not even on the Subs bench.
Makes me suspicious that Team Red Bull only turned up their engine cus they heard of a famous PB Forum better
Clearly the hot take will be Harris surging to 16%.
Rather that she possibly has more to win, and more to lose than any other candidate in the debates at the end of this month. The three in front of her are more established in voters’ minds, Biden and Sanders far more so. She could have a further surge, justifying her current betting odds, or be back in the chasing pack with Buttigieg.
An important dynamic with this race is that, for the September debates, the "entrance requirements" have doubled.
The consequence of which is that only five candidates have definitely qualified for them (Biden, Harris, Warren, Sanders and Buttigieg), and then there are two or three with a chance (O'Rourke, Kloubacher, Castro).
We could go from two debates with twenty candidates, to one debate with five or six.
I also suspect that those who do not qualify for the September debate, are effectively out the race.
If O’Rourke goes out, who inherits all those Texas votes ? Buttigieg, I think, polled as his followers’ second preference, but he might well not be in the race at that point, either.
Warren has some hard thinking to do on policy. Thus far, she’s more or less managed ambiguity on several issues, but I think will get targeted on this come the next debate.
Pledging money from a soak the rich tax, history and logistics show doesn’t bring in that sort of money? If her opponents can’t take such a sandy foundation apart they shouldn’t be in politics in the first place.
without wanting to be like the kebab shop guy who bets on south American football - we can still ask for a Rooney dividend can't we? Whenever he scores it's on sky news and I've only seen it twice.
Is the kebab shop guy like the chip shop chap who says he's Elvis?
Hello from a very wet Glasgow - the good news being that the more rain gets dumped here tonight the less there is to dump on me tomorrow as I head for Skye.
In an also grey and soggy Labour world, there are now counter letters being circulated. One gives councillors the opportunity to pledge fealty to Jezbollah. The other condemns the absurd mock expulsion of Hilary Anderson.
I know that there are all kinds of rumors circulating round about planned Tory defections and plots. The same is very much true in the Labour Party. Fun times - at least we've both chosen a quiet time in British politics where there is no urgency to decide to smash the post war settlement...
I've signed the first, though if I saw it I'd also sign the second. But I'd prefer a world where no such letters were needed and we just got on with preparing for government.
without wanting to be like the kebab shop guy who bets on south American football - we can still ask for a Rooney dividend can't we? Whenever he scores it's on sky news and I've only seen it twice.
Is the kebab shop guy like the chip shop chap who says he's Elvis?
No it's not a groovy song - it's an anti-betting ad where some WWC lad bets on some Costa Rican (?iirc) footie match that's about to kick off post pub/club time on his smart phone. Obviously not particularly relevent to us refined PB types, but still, it's a good effort for what it is.
The Independent Group for Change has sacked all but one of its members of staff following its poor performance in the European elections, The Sunday Telegraph has learned.
Party bosses confirmed that the group, formerly known as Change UK, had undergone a “restructuring” and now only employs one member of staff, down from ten.
without wanting to be like the kebab shop guy who bets on south American football - we can still ask for a Rooney dividend can't we? Whenever he scores it's on sky news and I've only seen it twice.
Is the kebab shop guy like the chip shop chap who says he's Elvis?
No it's not a groovy song - it's an anti-betting ad where some WWC lad bets on some Costa Rican (?iirc) footie match that's about to kick off post pub/club time on his smart phone. Obviously not particularly relevent to us refined PB types, but still, it's a good effort for what it is.
It's well known that some people, especially when bored, will bet on anything. Time of next pro-Boris post from HYUFD anyone? (I'm not interested in golf and the grandchildren have gone to bed.)
without wanting to be like the kebab shop guy who bets on south American football - we can still ask for a Rooney dividend can't we? Whenever he scores it's on sky news and I've only seen it twice.
Is the kebab shop guy like the chip shop chap who says he's Elvis?
No it's not a groovy song - it's an anti-betting ad where some WWC lad bets on some Costa Rican (?iirc) footie match that's about to kick off post pub/club time on his smart phone. Obviously not particularly relevent to us refined PB types, but still, it's a good effort for what it is.
It's well known that some people, especially when bored, will bet on anything. Time of next pro-Boris post from HYUFD anyone? (I'm not interested in golf and the grandchildren have gone to bed.)
I don't have a clue - does he tend to be nightshift.
Fast track expulsion in clearest cut cases...they already do that...ohhhh you mean those actually posting the antisemitic stuff, rather than criticising it.
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
The Independent Group for Change has sacked all but one of its members of staff following its poor performance in the European elections, The Sunday Telegraph has learned.
Party bosses confirmed that the group, formerly known as Change UK, had undergone a “restructuring” and now only employs one member of staff, down from ten.
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
You see: that was all Theresa May needed: a can-do spirit! FFS. Fiona's spaff some money on some geeks had more detail.
Pretty weak stuff from our new overlord indeed. The GFA needs re-negotiated; the sooner everyone accepts this the better.
Why does the GFA need to be renegotiated? It was a pretty masterful bit of compromise that just about got everyone to stop killing each other and which has transformed Northern Ireland. I certainly don't believe the issues surrounding the border are insurmountable, nor does having a border break the GFA. The idea that we need to start renegotiating it seems unjustified.
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
You see: that was all Theresa May needed: a can-do spirit! FFS. Fiona's spaff some money on some geeks had more detail.
Pretty weak stuff from our new overlord indeed. The GFA needs re-negotiated; the sooner everyone accepts this the better.
Why does the GFA need to be renegotiated? It was a pretty masterful bit of compromise that just about got everyone to stop killing each other and which has transformed Northern Ireland. I certainly don't believe the issues surrounding the border are insurmountable, nor does having a border break the GFA. The idea that we need to start renegotiating it seems unjustified.
Sorry, I thought that the open border was key in the GFA.
The Independent Group for Change has sacked all but one of its members of staff following its poor performance in the European elections, The Sunday Telegraph has learned.
Party bosses confirmed that the group, formerly known as Change UK, had undergone a “restructuring” and now only employs one member of staff, down from ten.
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
You see: that was all Theresa May needed: a can-do spirit! FFS. Fiona's spaff some money on some geeks had more detail.
Pretty weak stuff from our new overlord indeed. The GFA needs re-negotiated; the sooner everyone accepts this the better.
Renegotiated to say what? Are you thinking of joint sovereignty and strengthened North-South cooperation?
This is the crux of the problem. The GFA gives the Irish state some jurisdiction over NI. We agreed to it because we were tired of terrorism and our ruling class thought the Republic would always be compliant. While we were in the EU and UK/IRE moved in sync, this was not a problem. But now we are leaving and Ireland isn't as easy to push around, and our ruling class refuses to come to grips with this. @JBriskinindyref2 is horribly correct, but (as I have all-too-frequently said) our ruling classes find it very difficult to cope with the facts in Ireland.
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
It's so cool that Brian Cox has become so very very clever that he's actually psychic and knows what everyone in the country is thinking without asking them.
But I guess if he did actually ever try speaking to anyone who doesn't already agree with them, he'd just know that what they were saying about why they voted the way they did wasn't actually why they voted that way. Because of how very very clever he is.
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
You see: that was all Theresa May needed: a can-do spirit! FFS. Fiona's spaff some money on some geeks had more detail.
Pretty weak stuff from our new overlord indeed. The GFA needs re-negotiated; the sooner everyone accepts this the better.
Why does the GFA need to be renegotiated? It was a pretty masterful bit of compromise that just about got everyone to stop killing each other and which has transformed Northern Ireland. I certainly don't believe the issues surrounding the border are insurmountable, nor does having a border break the GFA. The idea that we need to start renegotiating it seems unjustified.
Sorry, I thought that the open border was key in the GFA.
Happy to be corrected.
Whilst it talks about various cross border institutions, (9 of the 10 mentions of the border in the agreement are referring to 'cross-border' institutions) the GFA does not actually mention the border itself once. It makes no reference to border infrastructure nor to the nature of the border.
Whilst clearly there are issues with the border as far as Brexit is concerned, the GFA itself is not one of them.
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
You see: that was all Theresa May needed: a can-do spirit! FFS. Fiona's spaff some money on some geeks had more detail.
Pretty weak stuff from our new overlord indeed. The GFA needs re-negotiated; the sooner everyone accepts this the better.
Why does the GFA need to be renegotiated? It was a pretty masterful bit of compromise that just about got everyone to stop killing each other and which has transformed Northern Ireland. I certainly don't believe the issues surrounding the border are insurmountable, nor does having a border break the GFA. The idea that we need to start renegotiating it seems unjustified.
Sorry, I thought that the open border was key in the GFA.
Happy to be corrected.
Whilst it talks about various cross border institutions, (9 of the 10 mentions of the border in the agreement are referring to 'cross-border' institutions) the GFA does not actually mention the border itself once. It makes no reference to border infrastructure nor to the nature of the border.
Whilst clearly there are issues with the border as far as Brexit is concerned, the GFA itself is not one of them.
One day there was a border - then the next day, after the GFA, - there wasn't one. A lot of good will at play from the brits in that case.
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
Nope, politicians are just as capable of spouting bullshit as Cox.
Which partilcular part of Cox's tweet do you think is bullshit?
The whole lot from start to finish. It is a perfect illustration of how the Remain side have utterly failed to understand Brexit from start to finish. A classic case of wilful ignorance by Remainers that is insurmountable because they lack the basic tools to understand it.
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
It wasn't a frictionless re-entry. In fact, it was a very friction-y re-entry. The Command Module relied on friction with the Earth's atmosphere to slow it down enough to be recaptured by the Earth's gravity. That's why it had a heatshield. So it could survive the ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF FRICTION.
What do they teach people in whatever middle-class arts subject he did?
It's so cool that Brian Cox has become so very very clever that he's actually psychic and knows what everyone in the country is thinking without asking them.
But I guess if he did actually ever try speaking to anyone who doesn't already agree with them, he'd just know that what they were saying about why they voted the way they did wasn't actually why they voted that way. Because of how very very clever he is.
"This is perhaps the most important point of all. If we left the EU, we would end this sterile debate, and we would have to recognise that most of our problems are not caused by “Bwussels”, but by chronic British short-termism, inadequate management, sloth, low skills, a culture of easy gratification and under-investment in both human and physical capital and infrastructure." - Boris, 2013.
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
It wasn't a frictionless re-entry. In fact, it was a very friction-y re-entry. The Command Module relied on friction with the Earth's atmosphere to slow it down enough to be recaptured by the Earth's gravity. That's why it had a heatshield. So it could survive the ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF FRICTION.
What do they teach people in whatever middle-class arts subject he did?
Yes and they built that heatshield and got that re entry and went to the moon despite the naysayers with a bit of self belief, something we sorely need now
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
It wasn't a frictionless re-entry. In fact, it was a very friction-y re-entry. The Command Module relied on friction with the Earth's atmosphere to slow it down enough to be recaptured by the Earth's gravity. That's why it had a heatshield. So it could survive the ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF FRICTION.
What do they teach people in whatever middle-class arts subject he did?
Yes and they built that heatshield and got that re entry and went to the moon despite the naysayers with a bit if self belief, something we sorely need now
The self belief was necessary. But so was careful and diligent analysis of the problem and many man hours of thought and work.
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
It wasn't a frictionless re-entry. In fact, it was a very friction-y re-entry. The Command Module relied on friction with the Earth's atmosphere to slow it down enough to be recaptured by the Earth's gravity. That's why it had a heatshield. So it could survive the ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF FRICTION.
What do they teach people in whatever middle-class arts subject he did?
I think it was Classics wasn't it. (like Bernard from Yes, minister)
This week we will have a new PM who campaigned for and won the Brexit referendum on a global Britain platform and a Britain willing to stand up and take more of its own decisions, and Boris will finally deliver Brexit, despite the premature obituaries of Nelson and Cox
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
It wasn't a frictionless re-entry. In fact, it was a very friction-y re-entry. The Command Module relied on friction with the Earth's atmosphere to slow it down enough to be recaptured by the Earth's gravity. That's why it had a heatshield. So it could survive the ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF FRICTION.
What do they teach people in whatever middle-class arts subject he did?
Yes and they built that heatshield and got that re entry and went to the moon despite the naysayers with a bit if self belief, something we sorely need now
And what is our great prize: to successfully inconvenience people on the island of Ireland in order to implement something they didn't vote for? Don't you think this is evidence that we've lost the plot?
Nope, politicians are just as capable of spouting bullshit as Cox.
Which partilcular part of Cox's tweet do you think is bullshit?
The whole lot from start to finish. It is a perfect illustration of how the Remain side have utterly failed to understand Brexit from start to finish. A classic case of wilful ignorance by Remainers that is insurmountable because they lack the basic tools to understand it.
Firstly: if we Remainers all 'lack the basic tools to understand' Brexit I don't see how we can also be accused of 'wilful ingorance'.
Secondly: we been told many times on here by Leavers that our big mistake was basing arguements on economics and logic when many/most leave voters voted on emotion.
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
It wasn't a frictionless re-entry. In fact, it was a very friction-y re-entry. The Command Module relied on friction with the Earth's atmosphere to slow it down enough to be recaptured by the Earth's gravity. That's why it had a heatshield. So it could survive the ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF FRICTION.
What do they teach people in whatever middle-class arts subject he did?
Yes and they built that heatshield and got that re entry and went to the moon despite the naysayers with a bit if self belief, something we sorely need now
The self belief was necessary. But so was careful and diligent analysis of the problem and many man hours of thought and work.
There are plenty of highly intelligent people e.g. Dominic Cummings, who spent not just hours but years of hard work preparing for Brexit and in Boris they will finally have a PM prepared to listen to them and believe in Brexit rather than see it as a damage limitation exercise
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
The alternative theory which has gained traction over the years is the Apollo 11 moon landing never happened. It was just smoke and mirrors. Maybe the NASA reference is just another clever coded Brexit message from Johnson?
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
It wasn't a frictionless re-entry. In fact, it was a very friction-y re-entry. The Command Module relied on friction with the Earth's atmosphere to slow it down enough to be recaptured by the Earth's gravity. That's why it had a heatshield. So it could survive the ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF FRICTION.
What do they teach people in whatever middle-class arts subject he did?
Yes and they built that heatshield and got that re entry and went to the moon despite the naysayers with a bit if self belief, something we sorely need now
And what is our great prize: to successfully inconvenience people on the island of Ireland in order to implement something they didn't vote for? Don't you think this is evidence that we've lost the plot?
I think this post is evidence that you've lost track of the thread. Step away from the tennents
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
It wasn't a frictionless re-entry. In fact, it was a very friction-y re-entry. The Command Module relied on friction with the Earth's atmosphere to slow it down enough to be recaptured by the Earth's gravity. That's why it had a heatshield. So it could survive the ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF FRICTION.
What do they teach people in whatever middle-class arts subject he did?
Yes and they built that heatshield and got that re entry and went to the moon despite the naysayers with a bit if self belief, something we sorely need now
And what is our great prize: to successfully inconvenience people on the island of Ireland in order to implement something they didn't vote for? Don't you think this is evidence that we've lost the plot?
Boris has said quite clearly he will not impose a hard border on the British side in Ireland, whether through technology or other means, if the Republic and EU choose to on their side so be it
Nope, politicians are just as capable of spouting bullshit as Cox.
Which partilcular part of Cox's tweet do you think is bullshit?
The whole lot from start to finish. It is a perfect illustration of how the Remain side have utterly failed to understand Brexit from start to finish. A classic case of wilful ignorance by Remainers that is insurmountable because they lack the basic tools to understand it.
Firstly: if we Remainers all 'lack the basic tools to understand' Brexit I don't see how we can also be accused of 'wilful ingorance'.
Secondly: we been told many times on here by Leavers that our big mistake was basing arguements on economics and logic when many/most leave voters voted on emotion.
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
It wasn't a frictionless re-entry. In fact, it was a very friction-y re-entry. The Command Module relied on friction with the Earth's atmosphere to slow it down enough to be recaptured by the Earth's gravity. That's why it had a heatshield. So it could survive the ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF FRICTION.
What do they teach people in whatever middle-class arts subject he did?
Yes and they built that heatshield and got that re entry and went to the moon despite the naysayers with a bit if self belief, something we sorely need now
The self belief was necessary. But so was careful and diligent analysis of the problem and many man hours of thought and work.
There are plenty of highly intelligent people e.g. Dominic Cummings, who spent not just hours but years of hard work preparing for Brexit and in Boris they will finally have a PM prepared to listen to then and believe in Brexit rather than see it as a damage limitation exercise
What was this 'frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere' Boris was talking about... was it in fact, like most of the rest of the stuff he spouts, just bollocks?
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
It wasn't a frictionless re-entry. In fact, it was a very friction-y re-entry. The Command Module relied on friction with the Earth's atmosphere to slow it down enough to be recaptured by the Earth's gravity. That's why it had a heatshield. So it could survive the ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF FRICTION.
What do they teach people in whatever middle-class arts subject he did?
Yes and they built that heatshield and got that re entry and went to the moon despite the naysayers with a bit if self belief, something we sorely need now
And what is our great prize: to successfully inconvenience people on the island of Ireland in order to implement something they didn't vote for? Don't you think this is evidence that we've lost the plot?
Boris has said quite clearly he will not impose a hard border on the British side in Ireland, whether through technology or other means, if the Republic and EU choose to on their side so be it
The technology to avoid a hard border will impose new processes and bureaucracy on people, otherwise how could it work?
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
It wasn't a frictionless re-entry. In fact, it was a very friction-y re-entry. The Command Module relied on friction with the Earth's atmosphere to slow it down enough to be recaptured by the Earth's gravity. That's why it had a heatshield. So it could survive the ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF FRICTION.
What do they teach people in whatever middle-class arts subject he did?
Yes and they built that heatshield and got that re entry and went to the moon despite the naysayers with a bit if self belief, something we sorely need now
The self belief was necessary. But so was careful and diligent analysis of the problem and many man hours of thought and work.
There are plenty of highly intelligent people e.g. Dominic Cummings, who spent not just hours but years of hard work preparing for Brexit and in Boris they will finally have a PM prepared to listen to them and believe in Brexit rather than see it as a damage limitation exercise
Are you for real? Dominic Cummings specifically said there was no plan and that creating a plan was almost impossible.
Creating an exit plan that makes sense and which all reasonable people could unite around seems an almost insuperable task. Even if one succeeded, the sheer complexity of leaving would involve endless questions of detail that cannot be answered in such a plan even were it to be 20,000 pages long, and the longer it is the more errors are likely.
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
You see: that was all Theresa May needed: a can-do spirit! FFS. Fiona's spaff some money on some geeks had more detail.
Pretty weak stuff from our new overlord indeed. The GFA needs re-negotiated; the sooner everyone accepts this the better.
nor does having a border break the GFA. The idea that we need to start renegotiating it seems unjustified.
Quite significant misunderstanding of NI.
Not at all and yet again you are relying on partial quoting to try and make a point that was never suggested. You have been picked up on this particular little fraud before.
The point I was making (and very clearly in spite of your attempts to misquote) was that there is no need to renegotiate the GFA and every reason not to.
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
The alternative theory which has gained traction over the years is the Apollo 11 moon landing never happened. It was just smoke and mirrors. Maybe the NASA reference is just another clever coded Brexit message from Johnson?
'...gained traction over the years...' with flat-earthers and conspiracy theorists.
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
You see: that was all Theresa May needed: a can-do spirit! FFS. Fiona's spaff some money on some geeks had more detail.
Pretty weak stuff from our new overlord indeed. The GFA needs re-negotiated; the sooner everyone accepts this the better.
nor does having a border break the GFA. The idea that we need to start renegotiating it seems unjustified.
Quite significant misunderstanding of NI.
Not at all and yet again you are relying on partial quoting to try and make a point that was never suggested. You have been picked up on this particular little fraud before.
The point I was making (and very clearly in spite of your attempts to misquote) was that there is no need to renegotiate the GFA and every reason not to.
Just to include that line whatever the context shows how clueless you are.
Boris Johnson: Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Northern Irish border problem
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
Comments
In an also grey and soggy Labour world, there are now counter letters being circulated. One gives councillors the opportunity to pledge fealty to Jezbollah. The other condemns the absurd mock expulsion of Hilary Anderson.
I know that there are all kinds of rumors circulating round about planned Tory defections and plots. The same is very much true in the Labour Party. Fun times - at least we've both chosen a quiet time in British politics where there is no urgency to decide to smash the post war settlement...
And where you have voters that don’t see Brexit as the main determinant of their vote, such alliances could actually end up having the opposite effect to that intended, by artificially restricting voter choice they could actually be driven towards the “wrong” candidate.
Also whilst you could do this sort of thing in a single election, I would imagine that parties standing down would want some input into the candidates being put forward, and the manifestos they are standing on.
Warren has some hard thinking to do on policy. Thus far, she’s more or less managed ambiguity on several issues, but I think will get targeted on this come the next debate.
There is nothing written in stone that says these institutions will always remain impartial nor that they will not be subverted by politicians and civil servants who think they can get away with it. Blair horribly politicised the civil service to the extent that many of us simply no longer trust it to be impartial in any way.
Similarly the police have been politicised - or have politicised themselves - to the extent that there are large swathes of otherwise law abiding citizens who wouldn't trust them as far as we could throw them. The Andrew Mitchell affair was a classic example of this and simply reinforced what many of us have long thought of the police.
The idea that it is Brexit that has caused this or even brought it to the fore is rubbish. Many of these institutions have, through their actions over many years, shown they do not deserve our trust or our faith that they are acting in the best interests of the country and the public.
As for Parliament. There are far too many people on here (and in Parliament) suggesting it is okay for MPs to sweep aside legal and constitutional arrangements and laws with little or no debate simply because they get in the way of their aims. It is they who are doing damage to our democracy just as much as the idiots talking about prorogation.
I think me and Cyclefree can just let this one lie. I think this is the worst reasoning yet for EUref2. Brisky disenfranchised (glad you care) so we should run it again????
Also, Buttigieg topped the fundraising charts in Q2, raising $25m (2.5x what Harris pulled in and 5x O'Rourke), so I don't think he's dropping out any time soon.
Whatever the multiple reasons, politicians should be thinking about the long-term future of our democracy. They are not, it seems to me. And that worries me.
Edit. I would add that one of the worst examples of this is The Speaker who has been thoroughly inconsistent and partisan in the way he has chosen to change long standing conventions when it suited him.
See: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2020-democratic-presidential-candidate-campaign-finance/
I agree that some of our institutions have themselves forgotten about the need to stand apart from party politics. I fear that we are degrading our civic and political institutions and that this will cause real harm to us at at time when we need them most.
I'm not in any sort of argument with you. You seem to have picked on me. Not quite sure why.
I shall try and write a short piece next time, just for you. It might just contain a lot of 4-letter words about Boris. Though maybe it is time to take a break from inflicting my views on current affairs.
As Mr Bennett put it: "You have delighted us long enough. Let one of the other young ladies have a go."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-49060734/ocasio-cortez-trump-is-putting-millions-of-americans-in-danger
As far as funding goes, it will be really interesting to see what was raised this month.
Atlanta Vs DC United up next
without wanting to be like the kebab shop guy who bets on south American football - we can still ask for a Rooney dividend can't we? Whenever he scores it's on sky news and I've only seen it twice.
I'm up there if you fancy a patriotic punt though.
Makes me suspicious that Team Red Bull only turned up their engine cus they heard of a famous PB Forum better
Is the kebab shop guy like the chip shop chap who says he's Elvis?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/21/need-can-do-spirit-1960s-america-help-us-get-eu/
clearly the sport of choice amongst PBers is indeed (if quietly) golf.
I should have assumed nothing less from such a high-roller crowd.
Party bosses confirmed that the group, formerly known as Change UK, had undergone a “restructuring” and now only employs one member of staff, down from ten.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/21/independent-group-change-has-one-member-staff-left-poor-performance/
Insert joke here...
(I'm not interested in golf and the grandchildren have gone to bed.)
I go to bed at all sorts of hours given my state sponsored injections so if I do go quiet just assume I've gone to bed.
I'm happy enough with my vanilla MLS
Did you all appreciate my lack of spoilers???
Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the EU with a deal by October 31 if the country rediscovers its “sense of mission” ahead of his expected coronation as Tory leader on Monday.
The front-runner to succeed Theresa May said that if man could find a way to get to the moon and back 50 years ago, “we certainly have the technology” to solve the Northern Irish border problem - the one thing standing in the way of a Brexit deal.
Writing in Monday's Telegraph, he says: “It is time this country recovered some its can-do spirit. We can come out of the EU on October 31, and yes, we certainly have the technology to do so. What we need now is the will and the drive.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/21/boris-johnson-ignore-pessimists-can-put-man-moon-can-solve/
You see: that was all Theresa May needed: a can-do spirit! FFS. Fiona's spaff some money on some geeks had more detail.
Not entirely sure - it's a shame the N Irish vote SF in droves (we have the same problem in Scotland with SNP though)
Personally I'm all for putting Sturgeon and Adams in jail.
But lets re-negotiate first I guess.
No politician could have put it better.
Happy to be corrected.
"If they could use hand-knitted computer code to make a frictionless re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere in 1969, we can solve the problem of frictionless trade at the Northern Irish border."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/21/need-can-do-spirit-1960s-america-help-us-get-eu/
But I guess if he did actually ever try speaking to anyone who doesn't already agree with them, he'd just know that what they were saying about why they voted the way they did wasn't actually why they voted that way. Because of how very very clever he is.
Whilst clearly there are issues with the border as far as Brexit is concerned, the GFA itself is not one of them.
Maybe GFA more of a fudge than we imagined.
What do they teach people in whatever middle-class arts subject he did?
- Boris, 2013.
"Why did I do it? Because I wanted to see what I looked like old.
I couldn’t help myself. It looked like so much fun.
What does this mean?"
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/liberty-vittert-downloaded-faceapp
Secondly: we been told many times on here by Leavers that our big mistake was basing arguements on economics and logic when many/most leave voters voted on emotion.
Still, I am sure you know best.
But that guy in the kebab shop...
Would have been a pretty sweaty 45mins anyway
https://dominiccummings.com/2015/06/23/on-the-referendum-6-exit-plans-and-a-second-referendum/
Creating an exit plan that makes sense and which all reasonable people could unite around seems an almost insuperable task. Even if one succeeded, the sheer complexity of leaving would involve endless questions of detail that cannot be answered in such a plan even were it to be 20,000 pages long, and the longer it is the more errors are likely.
The point I was making (and very clearly in spite of your attempts to misquote) was that there is no need to renegotiate the GFA and every reason not to.