Not only has Farage handed Boris a boost, but the Scunthorpe steel works announcement saving 4,000 jobs plus 20,000 in the supply chain has been accompanied by glowing tributes to the government from all the unions involved in the negotiations
Given you are a reluctant supporter of Boris - being far more of a Conservative Party loyalist than a particular fan of his - I find it odd how you personalize the battle in this way. It's always "Boris" doing great, "Boris" with the momentum, "Boris" surging ahead, rather than the party. Why do you think you do this?
I have not seen this on here, but I know @Cyclefree was talking about it.
"Boris Johnson's Conservative party has received donations from nine Russian donors, with suspected links to the Kremlin, according to an official report which has been suppressed by the prime minister. Johnson chose to block publication of the report amid reported fears it could cost him the upcoming general election. Leaked details from the report tie Johnson's party to London-based Russian oligarchs, some of whom have known ties to the Russian security services. There has been a surge in donations from prominent Russians to the Conservative party over the past year."
Is that the one Charles assured us had nothing in it, otherwise it would already have been leaked ?
Or was the another one ?
It's a very weak attack. 'Long-term Russian-origin UK citizens, opponents of Putin, who have openly and perfectly legally donated to the Conservatives for years have, er, continued to donate openly and perfectly legally to the Conservatives'.
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians who didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
I think he runs the security. It is called "protection"
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians who didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
Ok, so they used to be gangster-oligarchs but are now reputable businessmen we shouldn't be worried about?
But we prefer No Deal as the alternative to the backstop remember, so why is that worse?
And with the backstop gone I think a deal is more likely.
You prefer No Deal, Philip. Let’s see what everyone else is thinking in 12 months’ time.
Why? In 12 months time when we have a deal this whole debate will be history
Once we have left a deal will benefit both sides. Up until now there has always been the glimmer of hope that we might stay and there was no reason to negotiate in good faith.
I have not seen this on here, but I know @Cyclefree was talking about it.
"Boris Johnson's Conservative party has received donations from nine Russian donors, with suspected links to the Kremlin, according to an official report which has been suppressed by the prime minister. Johnson chose to block publication of the report amid reported fears it could cost him the upcoming general election. Leaked details from the report tie Johnson's party to London-based Russian oligarchs, some of whom have known ties to the Russian security services. There has been a surge in donations from prominent Russians to the Conservative party over the past year."
Is that the one Charles assured us had nothing in it, otherwise it would already have been leaked ?
Or was the another one ?
It's a very weak attack. 'Long-term Russian-origin UK citizens, opponents of Putin, who have openly and perfectly legally donated to the Conservatives for years have, er, continued to donate openly and perfectly legally to the Conservatives'.
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Opponents of Boris sit in the HoC..... just saying
But we prefer No Deal as the alternative to the backstop remember, so why is that worse?
And with the backstop gone I think a deal is more likely.
It's worse objectively because it puts a border down the Irish Sea, one of the Boris broken pledges. It's also worse from your point of view because it would simply waste 11 months during which we're paying the hated Danegeld.
And of course it makes a deal much less likely, unless Boris capitulates ignominiously. He now no longer has the fall-back position of the backstop, which was massively to our advantage; instead he'll again be panicking about whether he can shaft the ERG against a hard deadline.
The fallback position of the backstop was not to our advantage as far as we were concerned, we hated it.
You think its worse because it puts a border down the Irish Sea but that's not our view. Remember Brexiteers always preferred Brexit over the Union. You kept dismissing that as crazy, but objectively if Brexit trumps the Union then a proper Brexit with a border down the Irish Sea is better than no proper Brexit and no border in the Irish Sea.
Besides there is no border down the Irish Sea unless that is what those in Northern Ireland want. Unlike in May's Deal there is now proper devolution of the subject to Stormont - if they want out of these arrangements they can vote for that.
I have not seen this on here, but I know @Cyclefree was talking about it.
"Boris Johnson's Conservative party has received donations from nine Russian donors, with suspected links to the Kremlin, according to an official report which has been suppressed by the prime minister. Johnson chose to block publication of the report amid reported fears it could cost him the upcoming general election. Leaked details from the report tie Johnson's party to London-based Russian oligarchs, some of whom have known ties to the Russian security services. There has been a surge in donations from prominent Russians to the Conservative party over the past year."
Is that the one Charles assured us had nothing in it, otherwise it would already have been leaked ?
Or was the another one ?
It's a very weak attack. 'Long-term Russian-origin UK citizens, opponents of Putin, who have openly and perfectly legally donated to the Conservatives for years have, er, continued to donate openly and perfectly legally to the Conservatives'.
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Opponents of Boris sit in the HoC..... just saying
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians who didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
Ok, so they used to be gangster-oligarchs but are now reputable businessmen we shouldn't be worried about?
Odds on Birkenhead with PP and Betfair Frank Field 1/3, Labour 5/2. Seems at odds with the consensus here about independents
I'm not surprised. Birkenhead has a rather independent view of itself [definitely Merseyside but doesn't like being lumped with Liverpool for instance] and Frank Field is extremely well known there.
Not only has Farage handed Boris a boost, but the Scunthorpe steel works announcement saving 4,000 jobs plus 20,000 in the supply chain has been accompanied by glowing tributes to the government from all the unions involved in the negotiations
Given you are a reluctant supporter of Boris - being far more of a Conservative Party loyalist than a particular fan of his - I find it odd how you personalize the battle in this way. It's always "Boris" doing great, "Boris" with the momentum, "Boris" surging ahead, rather than the party. Why do you think you do this?
Is it upsetting you as I really do not want to give that impression
I reported the 5.00pm news from Scunthorpe as a clear boost for the government as that is how it was reported
I would add Boris has to finish off Corbyn for me and not only is he best placed to do it but he could just get us a FTA and move on
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
It is possible of course, that Putin sees their donations to the Brexit obsessed Tory Party as quid pro quo, and therefore reason to leave them alone.
Not only has Farage handed Boris a boost, but the Scunthorpe steel works announcement saving 4,000 jobs plus 20,000 in the supply chain has been accompanied by glowing tributes to the government from all the unions involved in the negotiations
Given you are a reluctant supporter of Boris - being far more of a Conservative Party loyalist than a particular fan of his - I find it odd how you personalize the battle in this way. It's always "Boris" doing great, "Boris" with the momentum, "Boris" surging ahead, rather than the party. Why do you think you do this?
Who is this Boris of whom you speak? Is he Russian?
Thinking about brexit party decision not to stand against Conservatives it might help Cons hold their existing seats....but it makes it more difficult for Cons to gain the seats they need from Labour. Dont think it will help Cons as much as some 'experts' think.
Not only has Farage handed Boris a boost, but the Scunthorpe steel works announcement saving 4,000 jobs plus 20,000 in the supply chain has been accompanied by glowing tributes to the government from all the unions involved in the negotiations
Given you are a reluctant supporter of Boris - being far more of a Conservative Party loyalist than a particular fan of his - I find it odd how you personalize the battle in this way. It's always "Boris" doing great, "Boris" with the momentum, "Boris" surging ahead, rather than the party. Why do you think you do this?
Is it upsetting you as I really do not want to give that impression
I reported the 5.00pm news from Scunthorpe as a clear boost for the government as that is how it was reported
I would add Boris has to finish off Corbyn for me and not only is he best placed to do it but he could just get us a FTA and move on
And as I said, what you reported was misleading - the number of jobs remaining has not been confirmed.
Not only has Farage handed Boris a boost, but the Scunthorpe steel works announcement saving 4,000 jobs plus 20,000 in the supply chain has been accompanied by glowing tributes to the government from all the unions involved in the negotiations
Given you are a reluctant supporter of Boris - being far more of a Conservative Party loyalist than a particular fan of his - I find it odd how you personalize the battle in this way. It's always "Boris" doing great, "Boris" with the momentum, "Boris" surging ahead, rather than the party. Why do you think you do this?
He is slowly being assimilated by the Tory right wing. They are like the Borg in Star Trek. Eventually they get you, by using your fear of Jeremy Corbyn who is the unintelligent place man of a different tribe of Borg, known as Momentum.
Riiiightttt . . . so in 2 posts you've gone from us being "surrounded by a superpower" to "Europe could potentially be a superpower, there's arguments for and against". Funnily enough more arguments against and most of the arguments for preceded Brexit.
Not that it matters. I'd rather be a successful independent nation than part of a superpower we don't need to be a part of. I'd rather be Canadian than American, I'd rather be English than European.
Sorry, what precisely did I say about "surrounded by a superpower"? Are you confusing things someone else said with things I said? I don't really hold a view on superpowerness, it smacks a little of willy-waving. I'm just saying there are reasonable views out there both ways. If you need to argue your point with someone who cares deeply about it one way or another, you're better finding someone else.
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
It is possible of course, that Putin sees their donations to the Brexit obsessed Tory Party as quid pro quo, and therefore reason to leave them alone.
Putin's playbook is clear and obvious. What is good for Europe is bad for Russia, and vice versa.
Of course he wants to undermine the EU. Brexit is a gift to him. Why wouldn't he and his allies support it?
If any Russians are contributing to the Conservative/Brexit party, it is most unlikely they are enemies of Putin.
Can someone explain where the "Tory gammon" phraseology come from? Heard it a lot over past couple of weeks - but never heard it at all before then.
A subset of angry right-wingers are old men with blotchy red and white faces, which get redder when they shout nonsense at Question Time panellists. This gives them a somewhat bacony appearance.
Is it possibly a racist definition?
Maybe, maybe not. I'm just describing the way people use that phraseology, without passing comment on its suitability.
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
It is possible of course, that Putin sees their donations to the Brexit obsessed Tory Party as quid pro quo, and therefore reason to leave them alone.
Putin's playbook is clear and obvious. What is good for Europe is bad for Russia, and vice versa.
Of course he wants to undermine the EU. Brexit is a gift to him. Why wouldn't he and his allies support it?
If any Russians are contributing to the Conservative/Brexit party, it is most unlikely they are enemies of Putin.
My point precisely. It is why Johnson wishes to hush it up.
You think its worse because it puts a border down the Irish Sea but that's not our view. Remember Brexiteers always preferred Brexit over the Union. You kept dismissing that as crazy, but objectively if Brexit trumps the Union then a proper Brexit with a border down the Irish Sea is better than no proper Brexit and no border in the Irish Sea. ...
I do love the capability of Leavers to rewrite history even when it is all extremely well documented!
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
It is possible of course, that Putin sees their donations to the Brexit obsessed Tory Party as quid pro quo, and therefore reason to leave them alone.
Putin's playbook is clear and obvious. What is good for Europe is bad for Russia, and vice versa.
Of course he wants to undermine the EU. Brexit is a gift to him. Why wouldn't he and his allies support it?
If any Russians are contributing to the Conservative/Brexit party, it is most unlikely they are enemies of Putin.
Putin wants chaos - he'll be supporting Corbyn in this election. And those named in that Business Insider article are most definitely not friends of Putin.
You think its worse because it puts a border down the Irish Sea but that's not our view. Remember Brexiteers always preferred Brexit over the Union. You kept dismissing that as crazy, but objectively if Brexit trumps the Union then a proper Brexit with a border down the Irish Sea is better than no proper Brexit and no border in the Irish Sea. ...
I do love the capability of Leavers to rewrite history even when it is all extremely well documented!
What's being rewritten?
Do you disagree with either of these statements?
1: We wanted out of the backstop. 2: We prioritised Brexit over the union.
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
It is possible of course, that Putin sees their donations to the Brexit obsessed Tory Party as quid pro quo, and therefore reason to leave them alone.
Putin's playbook is clear and obvious. What is good for Europe is bad for Russia, and vice versa.
Of course he wants to undermine the EU. Brexit is a gift to him. Why wouldn't he and his allies support it?
If any Russians are contributing to the Conservative/Brexit party, it is most unlikely they are enemies of Putin.
Putin wants chaos - he'll be supporting Corbyn in this election. And those named in that Business Insider article are most definitely not friends of Putin.
Putin does not have friends. He has faithful servants and useful idiots, both of whom do his bidding through his manipulation. Some are the former and some are the latter. He won't care whether Corbyn or Johnson win. He has won either way.
i.e. after the Tory's Wales etc clusterf**ks but before Austin and Woodcocks "dont vote Labour" statements, Farage's withdrawal..etc etc....
True, but the labour share is starting to look ominous with a long way to go for it to potentially rise.
That ominous 29% is very ominous
They only need to close the gap and it was caveated on it rising further.
It’s six days old
Yes, and I'm not saying it definitely will rise or that the Tories cannot in the meantime, hence starting with 'true' and using words like 'potentially'. The Tories need to remain cautious in optimism, as they mostly have done.
You think its worse because it puts a border down the Irish Sea but that's not our view. Remember Brexiteers always preferred Brexit over the Union. You kept dismissing that as crazy, but objectively if Brexit trumps the Union then a proper Brexit with a border down the Irish Sea is better than no proper Brexit and no border in the Irish Sea. ...
I do love the capability of Leavers to rewrite history even when it is all extremely well documented!
What's being rewritten?
Do you disagree with either of these statements?
1: We wanted out of the backstop. 2: We prioritised Brexit over the union.
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
It is possible of course, that Putin sees their donations to the Brexit obsessed Tory Party as quid pro quo, and therefore reason to leave them alone.
Putin's playbook is clear and obvious. What is good for Europe is bad for Russia, and vice versa.
Of course he wants to undermine the EU. Brexit is a gift to him. Why wouldn't he and his allies support it?
If any Russians are contributing to the Conservative/Brexit party, it is most unlikely they are enemies of Putin.
Putin wants chaos - he'll be supporting Corbyn in this election. And those named in that Business Insider article are most definitely not friends of Putin.
Putin does not have friends. He has faithful servants and useful idiots, both of whom do his bidding through his manipulation. Some are the former and some are the latter. He won't care whether Corbyn or Johnson win. He has won either way.
Leavers are merely at the second point of their three point turn (cf @Philip_Thompson's on the union above). In a few weeks it will be "Britain's eternal interests are aligned with Moscow's, as we wisely foresaw at the time of the referendum".
1: We wanted out of the backstop. 2: We prioritised Brexit over the union.
1 is true of the more extreme Leavers, and those conned by the coordinated trashing and misrepresentation of May's deal..
2 is true in practice, but was vehemently denied.
But the particular bit of history I was saying you were trying to rewrite was your statement that "You think it is worse because it puts a border down the Irish Sea but that's not our view." I can't be bothered to dig up the huge long list of prominent Leavers telling us how a border down the Irish Sea was completely unacceptable - I'm sure the DUP could list them all if you're interested - so I'll content myself with what Boris said:
Speaking about Mrs May's Brexit deal at the DUP conference last year, Mr Johnson said: "If we genuinely wanted to do free trade deals, if we wanted to cut tariffs, if we wanted to vary our regulation, then we would have to leave Northern Ireland behind as an economic semi-colony of the EU.
"And we would be damaging the fabric of the Union with regulatory checks and even customs controls between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
"On top of those extra regulatory checks down the Irish Sea that are already envisaged in the withdrawal agreement."
The former London Mayor added: "Now, I have to tell you.
"No British Conservative Government could or should sign up to any such arrangement."
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
It is possible of course, that Putin sees their donations to the Brexit obsessed Tory Party as quid pro quo, and therefore reason to leave them alone.
Putin's playbook is clear and obvious. What is good for Europe is bad for Russia, and vice versa.
Of course he wants to undermine the EU. Brexit is a gift to him. Why wouldn't he and his allies support it?
If any Russians are contributing to the Conservative/Brexit party, it is most unlikely they are enemies of Putin.
Exactly. Putin was part of the push for Brexit, and it's a huge strategic win for him if it goes through. It's important, though, that we analyse whether Brexit is good or bad on its own merits. The fact that a fascist like Putin is in favour of it helps inform us, but doesn't prove the case. Not everything that Putin wants is bad for us. Of course, I believe that Brexit is terrible for us and that is precisely why hostile powers like Russia have helped nudge it along. But it's perfectly valid for others to believe that Putin is bad, he's in favour of Brexit, but that we should still Brexit.
Just catching up on this now. Labour keep on creeping ever upwards...
Robots don't creep. They MARCH.
Exterminate. Exterminate.
Objection! The use of that word imputes Dalek-like qualities to the Labour robo...automata. Daleks are, of course, meant to be terrifyingly intelligent, ruthless and pitiless destroyers, implacably opposed to the existence of any alternative forms of life and genetically stripped of all emotions except hatred. They are the most fearsome creatures in the universe.
In other words, a bit like Far Left agitators. Only with brains.
Labour robo...habit voters, on the other hand, more closely resemble Autons.
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
It is possible of course, that Putin sees their donations to the Brexit obsessed Tory Party as quid pro quo, and therefore reason to leave them alone.
Putin's playbook is clear and obvious. What is good for Europe is bad for Russia, and vice versa.
Of course he wants to undermine the EU. Brexit is a gift to him. Why wouldn't he and his allies support it?
If any Russians are contributing to the Conservative/Brexit party, it is most unlikely they are enemies of Putin.
Exactly. Putin was part of the push for Brexit, and it's a huge strategic win for him if it goes through. It's important, though, that we analyse whether Brexit is good or bad on its own merits. The fact that a fascist like Putin is in favour of it helps inform us, but doesn't prove the case. Not everything that Putin wants is bad for us. Of course, I believe that Brexit is terrible for us and that is precisely why hostile powers like Russia have helped nudge it along. But it's perfectly valid for others to believe that Putin is bad, he's in favour of Brexit, but that we should still Brexit.
Just how much analysis does it need to figure out leaving the world's largest and most successful free trade association is dumb?
The Labour candidate managed to get coverage in The Sun, and The Telegraph about her 2014 comments about poppies. Mhairi Threlfall said that people should not wear a poppy to cheer on the “continued legalised mass murder”.
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
It is possible of course, that Putin sees their donations to the Brexit obsessed Tory Party as quid pro quo, and therefore reason to leave them alone.
Putin's playbook is clear and obvious. What is good for Europe is bad for Russia, and vice versa.
Of course he wants to undermine the EU. Brexit is a gift to him. Why wouldn't he and his allies support it?
If any Russians are contributing to the Conservative/Brexit party, it is most unlikely they are enemies of Putin.
Exactly. Putin was part of the push for Brexit, and it's a huge strategic win for him if it goes through. It's important, though, that we analyse whether Brexit is good or bad on its own merits. The fact that a fascist like Putin is in favour of it helps inform us, but doesn't prove the case. Not everything that Putin wants is bad for us. Of course, I believe that Brexit is terrible for us and that is precisely why hostile powers like Russia have helped nudge it along. But it's perfectly valid for others to believe that Putin is bad, he's in favour of Brexit, but that we should still Brexit.
Just how much analysis does it need to figure out leaving the world's largest and most successful free trade association is dumb?
Some Green Party candidates now standing down in Tory v Labour marginals.
Whereabouts?
Then why are the Lib Dems in some places being asked to stand down in favour of Green Party candidates?
The Green Party, as an organisation, is a bit of a shambles, isn`t i?
I don't know about that. The Greens seem to be building an effective ground game. They made some quite surprising gains in the council elections earlier this year.
Could Labour shaft the Lib Dems by standing down in Richmond Park (and perhaps any other similar ultra close marginals)? It would force the Lib dems to show some reciprocity in Canterbury etc or risk being seen as sabotaging the remain alliance. At which point it becomes clear that Labour are Remain's best bet regardless sof the LD revoke policy (which was only ever if they were to get a majority anyway, and that has been out of the question for a long time now)
You also thought it was going to be very hard to get a deal with the backstop removed didn't you?
And you also thought Johnson made a mistake in making an obsession of the Halloween date and would be suffering in the polls by November with the Brexit Party surging because of Boris's mistake didn't you?
Yes, I was right on the first, and wrong on the second, for the moment. Your point is what, exactly? That the EU are going to accept frictionless, tariff-free access to the Single Market without regulatory protection? Really?
You were wrong on the first, the backstop is gone.
I think Richard could very reasonably argue that it was indeed very hard to get a deal with the backstop removed which is why Boris had to compromise so much. He certainly didn't say it would be impossible. And no one would claim Boris didn't have to make big compromises to get what he wanted.
The compromises were sensible compromises though and ones it is to May's shame she never agreed.
Its an example of why negotiations are often not zero sum. Boris's deal is better for both leavers and the EU than May's original deal was, good job May's original deal was defeated!
I don't disagree with that. But then I have always favoured a deal. All I am saying is that Richard's comment was correct. The EU didn't make it easy and did demand a price.
Not only has Farage handed Boris a boost, but the Scunthorpe steel works announcement saving 4,000 jobs plus 20,000 in the supply chain has been accompanied by glowing tributes to the government from all the unions involved in the negotiations
Given you are a reluctant supporter of Boris - being far more of a Conservative Party loyalist than a particular fan of his - I find it odd how you personalize the battle in this way. It's always "Boris" doing great, "Boris" with the momentum, "Boris" surging ahead, rather than the party. Why do you think you do this?
Who is this Boris of whom you speak? Is he Russian?
Shhh. We don't talk about the Special Passport. Agent Fuckwit's cover must not be blown
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
If they are opponents of Putin, why do they have "links to the Kremlin"?
Which rich Russians who didn't, at some point in the past, have links to the Kremlin? That doesn't mean they are best pals with Putin now. In fact some of them are on his distinctly not-best-pals list, and accordingly pay a lot of money for security.
Ok, so they used to be gangster-oligarchs but are now reputable businessmen we shouldn't be worried about?
And send their kids to Eton, so what possible problem could there be...........oh hell, best to be out of the UK in a few years time.
Comments
Up until now there has always been the glimmer of hope that we might stay and there was no reason to negotiate in good faith.
You think its worse because it puts a border down the Irish Sea but that's not our view. Remember Brexiteers always preferred Brexit over the Union. You kept dismissing that as crazy, but objectively if Brexit trumps the Union then a proper Brexit with a border down the Irish Sea is better than no proper Brexit and no border in the Irish Sea.
Besides there is no border down the Irish Sea unless that is what those in Northern Ireland want. Unlike in May's Deal there is now proper devolution of the subject to Stormont - if they want out of these arrangements they can vote for that.
The reborn Social Democrats want to put social solidarity back on the agenda of British politics."
https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/11/11/the-sdp-a-social-vision-for-post-brexit-britain/
I reported the 5.00pm news from Scunthorpe as a clear boost for the government as that is how it was reported
I would add Boris has to finish off Corbyn for me and not only is he best placed to do it but he could just get us a FTA and move on
I will continue to monitor with interest.
👀
Of course he wants to undermine the EU. Brexit is a gift to him. Why wouldn't he and his allies support it?
If any Russians are contributing to the Conservative/Brexit party, it is most unlikely they are enemies of Putin.
Exterminate. Exterminate.
Do you disagree with either of these statements?
1: We wanted out of the backstop.
2: We prioritised Brexit over the union.
2 is true in practice, but was vehemently denied.
But the particular bit of history I was saying you were trying to rewrite was your statement that "You think it is worse because it puts a border down the Irish Sea but that's not our view." I can't be bothered to dig up the huge long list of prominent Leavers telling us how a border down the Irish Sea was completely unacceptable - I'm sure the DUP could list them all if you're interested - so I'll content myself with what Boris said:
Speaking about Mrs May's Brexit deal at the DUP conference last year, Mr Johnson said: "If we genuinely wanted to do free trade deals, if we wanted to cut tariffs, if we wanted to vary our regulation, then we would have to leave Northern Ireland behind as an economic semi-colony of the EU.
"And we would be damaging the fabric of the Union with regulatory checks and even customs controls between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
"On top of those extra regulatory checks down the Irish Sea that are already envisaged in the withdrawal agreement."
The former London Mayor added: "Now, I have to tell you.
"No British Conservative Government could or should sign up to any such arrangement."
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1192109/brexit-news-boris-johnson-deal-in-full-eu-juncker-irish-sea-northern-ireland-dup-spt
It's important, though, that we analyse whether Brexit is good or bad on its own merits. The fact that a fascist like Putin is in favour of it helps inform us, but doesn't prove the case. Not everything that Putin wants is bad for us.
Of course, I believe that Brexit is terrible for us and that is precisely why hostile powers like Russia have helped nudge it along. But it's perfectly valid for others to believe that Putin is bad, he's in favour of Brexit, but that we should still Brexit.
In other words, a bit like Far Left agitators. Only with brains.
Labour robo...habit voters, on the other hand, more closely resemble Autons.
The Green Party, as an organisation, is a bit of a shambles, isn`t i?
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/green-candidate-filton-bradley-stoke-3523985
The Labour candidate managed to get coverage in The Sun, and The Telegraph about her 2014 comments about poppies. Mhairi Threlfall said that people should not wear a poppy to cheer on the “continued legalised mass murder”.