politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boris Johnson Invites Himself to the Battle of Ipsus
Comments
-
BellendJBriskinindyref2 said:Nice to see the indyref2 campaign off to a nice, definitely not divisive, start
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/riot-police-used-to-quell-protesters-in-glasgow-as-irish-unity-march-sparks-significant-disorder/ar-AAGBFhN?ocid=spartanntp0 -
aha - so they get this great deal and then at a referendum campaign against it?OnlyLivingBoy said:
Labour's policy is to negotiate a different deal based on different red lines and put it to the electorate in a referendum. To get there they want to legislate to prevent no deal and hold a general election that they want to win so they are in a position to negotiate a different deal. This plan is not particularly cunning but it is definitely one with its own defined objective and is not simply about saying no.algarkirk said:Good article. But will the anti-Boris people find a cunning plan which is pro something instead of against something?
And of course the EU will negotiate a great deal with a counter party that will recommend against its acceptance.
Do you realise how stupid that looks?1 -
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.0 -
Carlotta pines from afar, concerned she will not be able to get union jack pants after brexit, emigrants are the worst losers.Black_Rook said:
No, Ruth Davidson's departure doesn't mean the end of the Union. It's already clinically dead. At least a third of the Scottish population are now dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who are desperate to be rid of the UK, and most of the rest are sticking to nurse for fear of something worse.CarlottaVance said:At this point, I’d like to declare a new law of political discourse, possibly “Hague’s Law” in honour of Kevin Hague, serial entrepreneur, chair of the pro-Union think tank These Islands, GERS obsessive, and scourge of the Twitter cybernats. This law says that:
As an online discussion on Scottish independence grows longer, the probability that the pro-Union participants will be accused of believing Scotland to be “too wee, too poor, too stupid to be independent” approaches one.
It doesn’t matter whether you’ve said anything of the sort. You’re just accused of being dismissive of Scotland, regardless of whether you’re Scottish yourself, and therefore anything that you might have had the temerity to present as “facts” are questionable due to your motivations.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/ruth-davidsons-departure-doesnt-mean-the-end-of-the-union/
Scotland only voted no to independence in 2014 because a sufficient segment of public opinion was frightened that it would impact Government spending and result in cuts to public services and/or tax hikes. If Scotland were in surplus relative to the rest of the UK, in the same way as Catalonia is within Spain, there would have been a stampede for the exit door.
The British state is finished. It's simply a matter of time.0 -
Which was that?malcolmg said:
BellendJBriskinindyref2 said:Nice to see the indyref2 campaign off to a nice, definitely not divisive, start
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/riot-police-used-to-quell-protesters-in-glasgow-as-irish-unity-march-sparks-significant-disorder/ar-AAGBFhN?ocid=spartanntp
Civic?
Or Joyous?1 -
Isn't that true for several prominent Nats, too?malcolmg said:
Carlotta pines from afar, concerned she will not be able to get union jack pants after brexit, emigrants are the worst losers.Black_Rook said:
No, Ruth Davidson's departure doesn't mean the end of the Union. It's already clinically dead. At least a third of the Scottish population are now dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who are desperate to be rid of the UK, and most of the rest are sticking to nurse for fear of something worse.CarlottaVance said:At this point, I’d like to declare a new law of political discourse, possibly “Hague’s Law” in honour of Kevin Hague, serial entrepreneur, chair of the pro-Union think tank These Islands, GERS obsessive, and scourge of the Twitter cybernats. This law says that:
As an online discussion on Scottish independence grows longer, the probability that the pro-Union participants will be accused of believing Scotland to be “too wee, too poor, too stupid to be independent” approaches one.
It doesn’t matter whether you’ve said anything of the sort. You’re just accused of being dismissive of Scotland, regardless of whether you’re Scottish yourself, and therefore anything that you might have had the temerity to present as “facts” are questionable due to your motivations.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/ruth-davidsons-departure-doesnt-mean-the-end-of-the-union/
Scotland only voted no to independence in 2014 because a sufficient segment of public opinion was frightened that it would impact Government spending and result in cuts to public services and/or tax hikes. If Scotland were in surplus relative to the rest of the UK, in the same way as Catalonia is within Spain, there would have been a stampede for the exit door.
The British state is finished. It's simply a matter of time.
*innocent face*0 -
exasperation at the stupidity of your average unionist.CarlottaVance said:
Which was that?malcolmg said:
BellendJBriskinindyref2 said:Nice to see the indyref2 campaign off to a nice, definitely not divisive, start
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/riot-police-used-to-quell-protesters-in-glasgow-as-irish-unity-march-sparks-significant-disorder/ar-AAGBFhN?ocid=spartanntp
Civic?
Or Joyous?0 -
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
0 -
surely you mean eveningWulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.0 -
who may they be other than StuartRobD said:
Isn't that true for several prominent Nats, too?malcolmg said:
Carlotta pines from afar, concerned she will not be able to get union jack pants after brexit, emigrants are the worst losers.Black_Rook said:
No, Ruth Davidson's departure doesn't mean the end of the Union. It's already clinically dead. At least a third of the Scottish population are now dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who are desperate to be rid of the UK, and most of the rest are sticking to nurse for fear of something worse.CarlottaVance said:At this point, I’d like to declare a new law of political discourse, possibly “Hague’s Law” in honour of Kevin Hague, serial entrepreneur, chair of the pro-Union think tank These Islands, GERS obsessive, and scourge of the Twitter cybernats. This law says that:
As an online discussion on Scottish independence grows longer, the probability that the pro-Union participants will be accused of believing Scotland to be “too wee, too poor, too stupid to be independent” approaches one.
It doesn’t matter whether you’ve said anything of the sort. You’re just accused of being dismissive of Scotland, regardless of whether you’re Scottish yourself, and therefore anything that you might have had the temerity to present as “facts” are questionable due to your motivations.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/ruth-davidsons-departure-doesnt-mean-the-end-of-the-union/
Scotland only voted no to independence in 2014 because a sufficient segment of public opinion was frightened that it would impact Government spending and result in cuts to public services and/or tax hikes. If Scotland were in surplus relative to the rest of the UK, in the same way as Catalonia is within Spain, there would have been a stampede for the exit door.
The British state is finished. It's simply a matter of time.
*innocent face*0 -
Not if the Tories are annihilated at the next election.basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...). The trouble with this is that eventually they lose the power either to persuade or influence.
Our eventual departure from the EU and a BoJo victory at the next election is going to come as a nasty shock to many here..0 -
Sir Sean Connery?malcolmg said:
who may they be other than StuartRobD said:
Isn't that true for several prominent Nats, too?malcolmg said:
Carlotta pines from afar, concerned she will not be able to get union jack pants after brexit, emigrants are the worst losers.Black_Rook said:
No, Ruth Davidson's departure doesn't mean the end of the Union. It's already clinically dead. At least a third of the Scottish population are now dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who are desperate to be rid of the UK, and most of the rest are sticking to nurse for fear of something worse.CarlottaVance said:At this point, I’d like to declare a new law of political discourse, possibly “Hague’s Law” in honour of Kevin Hague, serial entrepreneur, chair of the pro-Union think tank These Islands, GERS obsessive, and scourge of the Twitter cybernats. This law says that:
As an online discussion on Scottish independence grows longer, the probability that the pro-Union participants will be accused of believing Scotland to be “too wee, too poor, too stupid to be independent” approaches one.
It doesn’t matter whether you’ve said anything of the sort. You’re just accused of being dismissive of Scotland, regardless of whether you’re Scottish yourself, and therefore anything that you might have had the temerity to present as “facts” are questionable due to your motivations.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/ruth-davidsons-departure-doesnt-mean-the-end-of-the-union/
Scotland only voted no to independence in 2014 because a sufficient segment of public opinion was frightened that it would impact Government spending and result in cuts to public services and/or tax hikes. If Scotland were in surplus relative to the rest of the UK, in the same way as Catalonia is within Spain, there would have been a stampede for the exit door.
The British state is finished. It's simply a matter of time.
*innocent face*0 -
Writing shit articles about the end of democracy is an act of desperation......Scott_P said:0 -
The proprietor of Wings, to name another?malcolmg said:
who may they be other than StuartRobD said:
Isn't that true for several prominent Nats, too?malcolmg said:
Carlotta pines from afar, concerned she will not be able to get union jack pants after brexit, emigrants are the worst losers.Black_Rook said:
No, Ruth Davidson's departure doesn't mean the end of the Union. It's already clinically dead. At least a third of the Scottish population are now dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who are desperate to be rid of the UK, and most of the rest are sticking to nurse for fear of something worse.CarlottaVance said:At this point, I’d like to declare a new law of political discourse, possibly “Hague’s Law” in honour of Kevin Hague, serial entrepreneur, chair of the pro-Union think tank These Islands, GERS obsessive, and scourge of the Twitter cybernats. This law says that:
As an online discussion on Scottish independence grows longer, the probability that the pro-Union participants will be accused of believing Scotland to be “too wee, too poor, too stupid to be independent” approaches one.
It doesn’t matter whether you’ve said anything of the sort. You’re just accused of being dismissive of Scotland, regardless of whether you’re Scottish yourself, and therefore anything that you might have had the temerity to present as “facts” are questionable due to your motivations.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/ruth-davidsons-departure-doesnt-mean-the-end-of-the-union/
Scotland only voted no to independence in 2014 because a sufficient segment of public opinion was frightened that it would impact Government spending and result in cuts to public services and/or tax hikes. If Scotland were in surplus relative to the rest of the UK, in the same way as Catalonia is within Spain, there would have been a stampede for the exit door.
The British state is finished. It's simply a matter of time.
*innocent face*0 -
have not heard a peep from him for many many yearsydoethur said:
Sir Sean Connery?malcolmg said:
who may they be other than StuartRobD said:
Isn't that true for several prominent Nats, too?malcolmg said:
Carlotta pines from afar, concerned she will not be able to get union jack pants after brexit, emigrants are the worst losers.Black_Rook said:
No, Ruth Davidson's departure doesn't mean the end of the Union. It's already clinically dead. At least a third of the Scottish population are now dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who are desperate to be rid of the UK, and most of the rest are sticking to nurse for fear of something worse.CarlottaVance said:At this point, I’d like to declare a new law of political discourse, possibly “Hague’s Law” in honour of Kevin Hague, serial entrepreneur, chair of the pro-Union think tank These Islands, GERS obsessive, and scourge of the Twitter cybernats. This law says that:
As an online discussion on Scottish independence grows longer, the probability that the pro-Union participants will be accused of believing Scotland to be “too wee, too poor, too stupid to be independent” approaches one.
It doesn’t matter whether you’ve said anything of the sort. You’re just accused of being dismissive of Scotland, regardless of whether you’re Scottish yourself, and therefore anything that you might have had the temerity to present as “facts” are questionable due to your motivations.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/ruth-davidsons-departure-doesnt-mean-the-end-of-the-union/
Scotland only voted no to independence in 2014 because a sufficient segment of public opinion was frightened that it would impact Government spending and result in cuts to public services and/or tax hikes. If Scotland were in surplus relative to the rest of the UK, in the same way as Catalonia is within Spain, there would have been a stampede for the exit door.
The British state is finished. It's simply a matter of time.
*innocent face*0 -
It's the sun-bed wot won it?CarlottaVance said:
Bercow is reportedly plotting from his sun-bed in Turkey.....Alanbrooke said:Since MPs have neither cancelled their holidays nor abandoned party conferences wheres the time shortage on "the most important issue of our generation" ?
0 -
Can’t the President declassify at will?CarlottaVance said:0 -
Did I not just post that .............. Stuart CampbellRobD said:
The proprietor of Wings, to name another?malcolmg said:
who may they be other than StuartRobD said:
Isn't that true for several prominent Nats, too?malcolmg said:
Carlotta pines from afar, concerned she will not be able to get union jack pants after brexit, emigrants are the worst losers.Black_Rook said:
No, Ruth Davidson's departure doesn't mean the end of the Union. It's already clinically dead. At least a third of the Scottish population are now dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who are desperate to be rid of the UK, and most of the rest are sticking to nurse for fear of something worse.CarlottaVance said:At this point, I’d like to declare a new law of political discourse, possibly “Hague’s Law” in honour of Kevin Hague, serial entrepreneur, chair of the pro-Union think tank These Islands, GERS obsessive, and scourge of the Twitter cybernats. This law says that:
As an online discussion on Scottish independence grows longer, the probability that the pro-Union participants will be accused of believing Scotland to be “too wee, too poor, too stupid to be independent” approaches one.
It doesn’t matter whether you’ve said anything of the sort. You’re just accused of being dismissive of Scotland, regardless of whether you’re Scottish yourself, and therefore anything that you might have had the temerity to present as “facts” are questionable due to your motivations.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/ruth-davidsons-departure-doesnt-mean-the-end-of-the-union/
Scotland only voted no to independence in 2014 because a sufficient segment of public opinion was frightened that it would impact Government spending and result in cuts to public services and/or tax hikes. If Scotland were in surplus relative to the rest of the UK, in the same way as Catalonia is within Spain, there would have been a stampede for the exit door.
The British state is finished. It's simply a matter of time.
*innocent face*0 -
If this is the best deal we can get, but Parliament has made clear it isn’t acceptable, then we have no choice but to leave without a dealeek said:
No, Boris feels he can force the EU to change their mind.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Hammond considers that the only route the UK can leave is by asking the EU to name their price, in the knowledge that in those circumstances the EU will and has asked for the earth, so as to dissuade the UK from leaving, the outcome that both the EU and Hammond want. Johnson is right that the only circumstances where the EU could be brought to make a half reasonable offer (effective before or after we leave) is one where the UK renders unavoidable the default position that the EU fears. And yet Hammond claims that his efforts to undermine the UK's leverage are made in the name of delivering Brexit!dr_spyn said:Philip of not Macedon.
https://twitter.com/PhilipHammondUK/status/1167816985889165312
Hammond and others understand that the Backstop is not negotiable so we already have the best deal we can get.0 -
the whingers will not accept that is what is happeningCharles said:
If this is the best deal we can get, but Parliament has made clear it isn’t acceptable, then we have no choice but to leave without a dealeek said:
No, Boris feels he can force the EU to change their mind.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Hammond considers that the only route the UK can leave is by asking the EU to name their price, in the knowledge that in those circumstances the EU will and has asked for the earth, so as to dissuade the UK from leaving, the outcome that both the EU and Hammond want. Johnson is right that the only circumstances where the EU could be brought to make a half reasonable offer (effective before or after we leave) is one where the UK renders unavoidable the default position that the EU fears. And yet Hammond claims that his efforts to undermine the UK's leverage are made in the name of delivering Brexit!dr_spyn said:Philip of not Macedon.
https://twitter.com/PhilipHammondUK/status/1167816985889165312
Hammond and others understand that the Backstop is not negotiable so we already have the best deal we can get.0 -
They didn’t sit yesterday or today... that would have made up half the extra time lostAlanbrooke said:Since MPs have neither cancelled their holidays nor abandoned party conferences wheres the time shortage on "the most important issue of our generation" ?
0 -
Alan Cumming (who bought a flat thinking it would also buy him a vote - it didn't)?ydoethur said:
Sir Sean Connery?malcolmg said:
who may they be other than StuartRobD said:
Isn't that true for several prominent Nats, too?malcolmg said:
Carlotta pines from afar, concerned she will not be able to get union jack pants after brexit, emigrants are the worst losers.Black_Rook said:
No, Ruth Davidson's departure doesn't mean the end of the Union. It's already clinically dead. At least a third of the Scottish population are now dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who are desperate to be rid of the UK, and most of the rest are sticking to nurse for fear of something worse.CarlottaVance said:At this point, I’d like to declare a new law of political discourse, possibly “Hague’s Law” in honour of Kevin Hague, serial entrepreneur, chair of the pro-Union think tank These Islands, GERS obsessive, and scourge of the Twitter cybernats. This law says that:
As an online discussion on Scottish independence grows longer, the probability that the pro-Union participants will be accused of believing Scotland to be “too wee, too poor, too stupid to be independent” approaches one.
It doesn’t matter whether you’ve said anything of the sort. You’re just accused of being dismissive of Scotland, regardless of whether you’re Scottish yourself, and therefore anything that you might have had the temerity to present as “facts” are questionable due to your motivations.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/ruth-davidsons-departure-doesnt-mean-the-end-of-the-union/
Scotland only voted no to independence in 2014 because a sufficient segment of public opinion was frightened that it would impact Government spending and result in cuts to public services and/or tax hikes. If Scotland were in surplus relative to the rest of the UK, in the same way as Catalonia is within Spain, there would have been a stampede for the exit door.
The British state is finished. It's simply a matter of time.
*innocent face*
Brian Cox?0 -
Trump is happy to say he didn't do it. But he knows a guy who might have....Charles said:
Can’t the President declassify at will?CarlottaVance said:0 -
Who can forget "Sir" Andy Murray ?CarlottaVance said:
Alan Cumming (who bought a flat thinking it would also buy him a vote - it didn't)?ydoethur said:
Sir Sean Connery?malcolmg said:
who may they be other than StuartRobD said:
Isn't that true for several prominent Nats, too?malcolmg said:
Carlotta pines from afar, concerned she will not be able to get union jack pants after brexit, emigrants are the worst losers.Black_Rook said:
No, Ruth Davidson's departure doesn't mean the end of the Union. It's already clinically dead. At least a third of the Scottish population are now dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who are desperate to be rid of the UK, and most of the rest are sticking to nurse for fear of something worse.CarlottaVance said:At this point, I’d like to declare a new law of political discourse, possibly “Hague’s Law” in honour of Kevin Hague, serial entrepreneur, chair of the pro-Union think tank These Islands, GERS obsessive, and scourge of the Twitter cybernats. This law says that:
As an online discussion on Scottish independence grows longer, the probability that the pro-Union participants will be accused of believing Scotland to be “too wee, too poor, too stupid to be independent” approaches one.
It doesn’t matter whether you’ve said anything of the sort. You’re just accused of being dismissive of Scotland, regardless of whether you’re Scottish yourself, and therefore anything that you might have had the temerity to present as “facts” are questionable due to your motivations.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/ruth-davidsons-departure-doesnt-mean-the-end-of-the-union/
Scotland only voted no to independence in 2014 because a sufficient segment of public opinion was frightened that it would impact Government spending and result in cuts to public services and/or tax hikes. If Scotland were in surplus relative to the rest of the UK, in the same way as Catalonia is within Spain, there would have been a stampede for the exit door.
The British state is finished. It's simply a matter of time.
*innocent face*
Brian Cox?0 -
Charles said:
Can’t the President declassify at will?CarlottaVance said:
Quite possibly - but I suspect there's more to it than tweeting a photo he's taken with his phone....0 -
Calling people morons and casting aspersions on their IQ is a sign that the writer has nothing of interest to say and is just sounding off. Best policy is to skip such contributors.basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...). The trouble with this is that eventually they lose the power either to persuade or influence.
Our eventual departure from the EU and a BoJo victory at the next election is going to come as a nasty shock to many here..
0 -
Or stay - because it is an even better deal.Charles said:
If this is the best deal we can get, but Parliament has made clear it isn’t acceptable, then we have no choice but to leave without a dealeek said:
No, Boris feels he can force the EU to change their mind.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Hammond considers that the only route the UK can leave is by asking the EU to name their price, in the knowledge that in those circumstances the EU will and has asked for the earth, so as to dissuade the UK from leaving, the outcome that both the EU and Hammond want. Johnson is right that the only circumstances where the EU could be brought to make a half reasonable offer (effective before or after we leave) is one where the UK renders unavoidable the default position that the EU fears. And yet Hammond claims that his efforts to undermine the UK's leverage are made in the name of delivering Brexit!dr_spyn said:Philip of not Macedon.
https://twitter.com/PhilipHammondUK/status/1167816985889165312
Hammond and others understand that the Backstop is not negotiable so we already have the best deal we can get.0 -
wow 3 people who live abroad, cancel indyref2 immediately, you people are sad sacks. Best you can do is whinge and lie, pathetic creatures.CarlottaVance said:
Alan Cumming (who bought a flat thinking it would also buy him a vote - it didn't)?ydoethur said:
Sir Sean Connery?malcolmg said:
who may they be other than StuartRobD said:
Isn't that true for several prominent Nats, too?malcolmg said:
Carlotta pines from afar, concerned she will not be able to get union jack pants after brexit, emigrants are the worst losers.Black_Rook said:
No, Ruth Davidson's departure doesn't mean the end of the Union. It's already clinically dead. At least a third of the Scottish population are now dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who are desperate to be rid of the UK, and most of the rest are sticking to nurse for fear of something worse.CarlottaVance said:At this point, I’d like to declare a new law of political discourse, possibly “Hague’s Law” in honour of Kevin Hague, serial entrepreneur, chair of the pro-Union think tank These Islands, GERS obsessive, and scourge of the Twitter cybernats. This law says that:
As an online discussion on Scottish independence grows longer, the probability that the pro-Union participants will be accused of believing Scotland to be “too wee, too poor, too stupid to be independent” approaches one.
It doesn’t matter whether you’ve said anything of the sort. You’re just accused of being dismissive of Scotland, regardless of whether you’re Scottish yourself, and therefore anything that you might have had the temerity to present as “facts” are questionable due to your motivations.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/ruth-davidsons-departure-doesnt-mean-the-end-of-the-union/
Scotland only voted no to independence in 2014 because a sufficient segment of public opinion was frightened that it would impact Government spending and result in cuts to public services and/or tax hikes. If Scotland were in surplus relative to the rest of the UK, in the same way as Catalonia is within Spain, there would have been a stampede for the exit door.
The British state is finished. It's simply a matter of time.
*innocent face*
Brian Cox?0 -
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?0 -
village idiot has woken upJBriskinindyref2 said:
Who can forget "Sir" Andy Murray ?CarlottaVance said:
Alan Cumming (who bought a flat thinking it would also buy him a vote - it didn't)?ydoethur said:
Sir Sean Connery?malcolmg said:
who may they be other than StuartRobD said:
Isn't that true for several prominent Nats, too?malcolmg said:
Carlotta pines from afar, concerned she will not be able to get union jack pants after brexit, emigrants are the worst losers.Black_Rook said:
No, Ruth Davidson's departure doesn't mean the end of the Union. It's already clinically dead. At least a third of the Scottish population are now dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who are desperate to be rid of the UK, and most of the rest are sticking to nurse for fear of something worse.CarlottaVance said:At this point, I’d like to declare a new law of political discourse, possibly “Hague’s Law” in honour of Kevin Hague, serial entrepreneur, chair of the pro-Union think tank These Islands, GERS obsessive, and scourge of the Twitter cybernats. This law says that:
As an online discussion on Scottish independence grows longer, the probability that the pro-Union participants will be accused of believing Scotland to be “too wee, too poor, too stupid to be independent” approaches one.
It doesn’t matter whether you’ve said anything of the sort. You’re just accused of being dismissive of Scotland, regardless of whether you’re Scottish yourself, and therefore anything that you might have had the temerity to present as “facts” are questionable due to your motivations.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/ruth-davidsons-departure-doesnt-mean-the-end-of-the-union/
Scotland only voted no to independence in 2014 because a sufficient segment of public opinion was frightened that it would impact Government spending and result in cuts to public services and/or tax hikes. If Scotland were in surplus relative to the rest of the UK, in the same way as Catalonia is within Spain, there would have been a stampede for the exit door.
The British state is finished. It's simply a matter of time.
*innocent face*
Brian Cox?0 -
Claiming the UK sends them too much money is a lie? I thought it was an opinion.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?0 -
So @malcolmg I’m keen to hear your thoughts. When is the SNP going to act re. independence? After a GE? After no deal? Never?
What will they do when the ref. is refused?0 -
What happens if the rebels manage to pass a law compelling Boris to ask for an extension and they refuse?
After all to comply with the law all he has to do is ask for one but he could do so in a way which will put them off.
For example 'I don't want any extension but the UK Parliament has complled me to ask for one so that the UK can get a better deal off of you' .0 -
You know what I mean.RobD said:
Claiming the UK sends them too much money is a lie? I thought it was an opinion.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?0 -
Just a giant whopper, usual grifters want everything for nothing.RobD said:
Claiming the UK sends them too much money is a lie? I thought it was an opinion.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?0 -
The £350mn gross figure? I think that was also in the ONS' pink book of the same year.Gallowgate said:
You know what I mean.RobD said:
Claiming the UK sends them too much money is a lie? I thought it was an opinion.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?0 -
It was misleading and you know it.RobD said:
The £350mn gross figure? I think that was also in the ONS' pink book of the same year.Gallowgate said:
You know what I mean.RobD said:
Claiming the UK sends them too much money is a lie? I thought it was an opinion.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?0 -
I believe this question has been asked and answered in the context of a previous indiscretion. I believe it is that the President cannot leak classified information because the act of him making it public declassifies it.CarlottaVance said:Charles said:
Can’t the President declassify at will?CarlottaVance said:
Quite possibly - but I suspect there's more to it than tweeting a photo he's taken with his phone....
That is not the same as saying it is sensible - indeed, the capabilities of spying technologies should always be protected until they are otherwise in the public domain.0 -
After the EU Council meeting (I think Parliament reconvenes on Oct 14 and the EU meeting is Oct 17)SandyRentool said:Have Bozo or Moggster given any indication of when parliament might get to debate and vote on their super improved Brexit deal?
0 -
I thought it was quite accurate.Gallowgate said:
It was misleading and you know it.RobD said:
The £350mn gross figure? I think that was also in the ONS' pink book of the same year.Gallowgate said:
You know what I mean.RobD said:
Claiming the UK sends them too much money is a lie? I thought it was an opinion.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?0 -
They have the mandate so if they don't do it before 2021 election there will be huge trouble. Sturgeon has always said it will be after Brexit sorted and plan is supposedly for 2020. Whether they accelerate if as it seems we exit No Deal in October, but people want it and soon as possible.Gallowgate said:So @malcolmg I’m keen to hear your thoughts. When is the SNP going to act re. independence? After a GE? After no deal? Never?
What will they do when the ref. is refused?0 -
Of all the bizarre political phenomena conjured by Brexit, the recent spectacle of liberal and even left-wing people beseeching the stars for rescue by Regina ex Machina must be the most intriguing and baffling.
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/queen-brexit-intervention-meme-position0 -
You know for a fact that the implication that we’ll have 350m a week to spend on other things is just incorrect.RobD said:
I thought it was quite accurate.Gallowgate said:
It was misleading and you know it.RobD said:
The £350mn gross figure? I think that was also in the ONS' pink book of the same year.Gallowgate said:
You know what I mean.RobD said:
Claiming the UK sends them too much money is a lie? I thought it was an opinion.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?
I’m sorry but it’s pathetic.0 -
Well half of it disappeared into the EU coffers, and the rest we were told how to spend it. So we didn't have control over that money.Gallowgate said:
You know for a fact that the implication that we’ll have 350m a week to spend on other things is just incorrect.RobD said:
I thought it was quite accurate.Gallowgate said:
It was misleading and you know it.RobD said:
The £350mn gross figure? I think that was also in the ONS' pink book of the same year.Gallowgate said:
You know what I mean.RobD said:
Claiming the UK sends them too much money is a lie? I thought it was an opinion.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?
I’m sorry but it’s pathetic.0 -
I’m not disputing that, but that was’t the implication and you know it.RobD said:
Well half of it disappeared into the EU coffers, and the rest we were told how to spend it. So we didn't have control over that money.Gallowgate said:
You know for a fact that the implication that we’ll have 350m a week to spend on other things is just incorrect.RobD said:
I thought it was quite accurate.Gallowgate said:
It was misleading and you know it.RobD said:
The £350mn gross figure? I think that was also in the ONS' pink book of the same year.Gallowgate said:
You know what I mean.RobD said:
Claiming the UK sends them too much money is a lie? I thought it was an opinion.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?
I’m sorry but it’s pathetic.
Democracy is not democracy when its based on dishonesty.0 -
No it isn't.Beibheirli_C said:
Or stay - because it is an even better deal.Charles said:
If this is the best deal we can get, but Parliament has made clear it isn’t acceptable, then we have no choice but to leave without a dealeek said:
No, Boris feels he can force the EU to change their mind.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Hammond considers that the only route the UK can leave is by asking the EU to name their price, in the knowledge that in those circumstances the EU will and has asked for the earth, so as to dissuade the UK from leaving, the outcome that both the EU and Hammond want. Johnson is right that the only circumstances where the EU could be brought to make a half reasonable offer (effective before or after we leave) is one where the UK renders unavoidable the default position that the EU fears. And yet Hammond claims that his efforts to undermine the UK's leverage are made in the name of delivering Brexit!dr_spyn said:Philip of not Macedon.
https://twitter.com/PhilipHammondUK/status/1167816985889165312
Hammond and others understand that the Backstop is not negotiable so we already have the best deal we can get.0 -
Completely wrong and failing to understand why people voted to leavenoneoftheabove said:
Succintly put and spot on.FF43 said:
Any deal is about negotiating worse terms than we already have, in a managed way. It's why no-one is engaged or realistic. Leavers aren't prepared to admit it is necessarily a downgrade while Remainers don't want to be part of the downgrade.Wulfrun_Phil said:
OK, we have to differ on whether it's half decent. I think that it really is reducing the UK to vassal status and is worse than staying in. Let's just agree to differ for now.ydoethur said:
We've already got 'a half-decent deal,' far better thWulfrun_Phil said:
Hammond considers that the only route the UK can leave is by asking the EU to name their price, in the knowledge that in those circumstances the EU willAnd yet Hammond claims that his efforts to undermine the UK's leverage are made in the name of delivering Brexit!dr_spyn said:Philip of not Macedon.
https://twitter.com/PhilipHammondUK/status/1167816985889165312
It's just dumbarse MPs on both sides keep voting against it, because they're thick and don't understand it, partly because they can't read it.
Hammond, at least, did understand it and did vote for it, even though of all people he owed May no favours. So he's quite within his rights to blame everyone else for the mess we're in.
With hindsight, it's a real pity he let May stand as the unity candidate.
If efforts of parliamentary remainers to block Johnson come to nothing, the EU is I think prepared to offer something better, should it become apparent that the UK will leave with no deal. It will reserve its best offer only for circumstances where Johnson had won a GE held immediately after the UK had already left. Until that point, concessions on their current "offer" would only boost Johnson's chances at the GE. I think that their ultimate contingency plan is to try and bend the rules to offer the UK the opportunity to rejoin immediately on exactly the same terms as we left should a GE result in a change of government. The EU will probably offer nothing until then for fear of boosting Johnson's chances of winning that GE, should it consider that the outcome of that GE is in the balance.
Remain voters use certain criteria (mainly economic but some philosophical) to judge membership of the EU. By these criteria it is a downgrade.
Leave voters have almost a different value judgement, notably putting less importance on economics. And so by their criteria it’s an upgrade.0 -
The implication was we couldn't spend that money as we wished, wasn't it?Gallowgate said:
I’m not disputing that, but that was’t the implication and you know it.
Democracy is not democracy when its based on dishonesty.0 -
I’m sorry but that’s bollocks. Voters were told time and time again that they’d be economically better off by the Leave campaign.Charles said:
Completely wrong and failing to understand why people voted to leavenoneoftheabove said:
Succintly put and spot on.FF43 said:
Any deal is about negotiating worse terms than we already have, in a managed way. It's why no-one is engaged or realistic. Leavers aren't prepared to admit it is necessarily a downgrade while Remainers don't want to be part of the downgrade.Wulfrun_Phil said:
OK, we have to differ on whether it's half decent. I think that it really is reducing the UK to vassal status and is worse than staying in. Let's just agree to differ for now.ydoethur said:
We've already got 'a half-decent deal,' far better thWulfrun_Phil said:
Hammond considers that the only route the UK can leave is by asking the EU to name their price, in the knowledge that in those circumstances the EU willAnd yet Hammond claims that his efforts to undermine the UK's leverage are made in the name of delivering Brexit!dr_spyn said:Philip of not Macedon.
https://twitter.com/PhilipHammondUK/status/1167816985889165312
It's just dumbarse MPs on both sides keep voting against it, because they're thick and don't understand it, partly because they can't read it.
Hammond, at least, did understand it and did vote for it, even though of all people he owed May no favours. So he's quite within his rights to blame everyone else for the mess we're in.
With hindsight, it's a real pity he let May stand as the unity candidate.
If efforts of parliamentary remainers to block Johnson come to nothing, the EU is I think prepared to offer something better, should it become apparent that the UK will leave with no deal. It will reserve its best offer only for circumstances where Johnson had won a GE held immediately after the UK had already left. Until that point, concessions on their current "offer" would only boost Johnson's chances at the GE. I think that their ultimate contingency plan is to try and bend the rules to offer the UK the opportunity to rejoin immediately on exactly the same terms as we left should a GE result in a change of government. The EU will probably offer nothing until then for fear of boosting Johnson's chances of winning that GE, should it consider that the outcome of that GE is in the balance.
Remain voters use certain criteria (mainly economic but some philosophical) to judge membership of the EU. By these criteria it is a downgrade.
Leave voters have almost a different value judgement, notably putting less importance on economics. And so by their criteria it’s an upgrade.1 -
Or they say "sure you can have an extension. The price is your joining the Euro...."DeClare said:What happens if the rebels manage to pass a law compelling Boris to ask for an extension and they refuse?
After all to comply with the law all he has to do is ask for one but he could do so in a way which will put them off.
For example 'I don't want any extension but the UK Parliament has complled me to ask for one so that the UK can get a better deal off of you' .
The Executive is going to have the whip hand even if required to ask for an extension by the Legislature. Any legislation can't require the UK to take a deal, whatever is on offer.
Now, if you assume that the EU and the Conniving Remain C**** are all in cahoots, no doubt they will try and craft a form of words that binds the Executive. But that is a whole different ball of constitutional crisis wax.....0 -
They voted to leave because they believed Bozo about his £350M a week and no more foreigners, deluded fools. The country is full of morons.Charles said:
Completely wrong and failing to understand why people voted to leavenoneoftheabove said:
Succintly put and spot on.FF43 said:
Any deal is about negotiating worse terms than we already have, in a managed way. It's why no-one is engaged or realistic. Leavers aren't prepared to admit it is necessarily a downgrade while Remainers don't want to be part of the downgrade.Wulfrun_Phil said:
OK, we have to differ on whether it's half decent. I think that it really is reducing the UK to vassal status and is worse than staying in. Let's just agree to differ for now.ydoethur said:
We've already got 'a half-decent deal,' far better thWulfrun_Phil said:
Hammond considers that the only route the UK can leave is by asking the EU to name their price, in the knowledge that in those circumstances the EU willAnd yet Hammond claims that his efforts to undermine the UK's leverage are made in the name of delivering Brexit!dr_spyn said:Philip of not Macedon.
https://twitter.com/PhilipHammondUK/status/1167816985889165312
It's just dumbarse MPs on both sides keep voting against it, because they're thick and don't understand it, partly because they can't read it.
Hammond, at least, did understand it and did vote for it, even though of all people he owed May no favours. So he's quite within his rights to blame everyone else for the mess we're in.
With hindsight, it's a real pity he let May stand as the unity candidate.
If efforts of parliamentary remainers to block Johnson come to nothing, the EU is I think prepared to offer something better, should it become apparent that the UK will leave with no deal. It will reserve its best offer only for circumstances where Johnson had won a GE held immediately after the UK had already left. Until that point, concessions on their current "offer" would only boost Johnson's chances at the GE. I think that their ultimate contingency plan is to try and bend the rules to offer the UK the opportunity to rejoin immediately on exactly the same terms as we left should a GE result in a change of government. The EU will probably offer nothing until then for fear of boosting Johnson's chances of winning that GE, should it consider that the outcome of that GE is in the balance.
Remain voters use certain criteria (mainly economic but some philosophical) to judge membership of the EU. By these criteria it is a downgrade.
Leave voters have almost a different value judgement, notably putting less importance on economics. And so by their criteria it’s an upgrade.0 -
No. You are rewriting history. The implication was that suddenly we’ll have an extra free £350m that wasn’t benefiting Britain to spend.RobD said:
The implication was we couldn't spend that money as we wished, wasn't it?Gallowgate said:
I’m not disputing that, but that was’t the implication and you know it.
Democracy is not democracy when its based on dishonesty.
You know that is true and you can’t believe the suckers fell for it can you.
It’s grim. It really is.0 -
No, the implication was we sent £350mn a year to Brussels, that it should be spent on other things, and not on things the EU tell us to spend it on. Isn't that true?Gallowgate said:
No. You are rewriting history. The implication was that suddenly we’ll have an extra free £350m that wasn’t benefiting Britain to spend.RobD said:
The implication was we couldn't spend that money as we wished, wasn't it?Gallowgate said:
I’m not disputing that, but that was’t the implication and you know it.
Democracy is not democracy when its based on dishonesty.
You know that is true and you can’t believe the suckers fell for it can you.
It’s grim. It really is.0 -
Lies. Total lies.RobD said:
No, the implication was we sent £350mn a year to Brussels, and that it should be spent on other things, and not on things the EU tell us to spend it on. Isn't that true?Gallowgate said:
No. You are rewriting history. The implication was that suddenly we’ll have an extra free £350m that wasn’t benefiting Britain to spend.RobD said:
The implication was we couldn't spend that money as we wished, wasn't it?Gallowgate said:
I’m not disputing that, but that was’t the implication and you know it.
Democracy is not democracy when its based on dishonesty.
You know that is true and you can’t believe the suckers fell for it can you.
It’s grim. It really is.0 -
You just said you didn't dispute that a few moments ago!Gallowgate said:
Lies. Total lies.RobD said:
No, the implication was we sent £350mn a year to Brussels, and that it should be spent on other things, and not on things the EU tell us to spend it on. Isn't that true?Gallowgate said:
No. You are rewriting history. The implication was that suddenly we’ll have an extra free £350m that wasn’t benefiting Britain to spend.RobD said:
The implication was we couldn't spend that money as we wished, wasn't it?Gallowgate said:
I’m not disputing that, but that was’t the implication and you know it.
Democracy is not democracy when its based on dishonesty.
You know that is true and you can’t believe the suckers fell for it can you.
It’s grim. It really is.0 -
Brexit has created some very strange bedfellows indeed, but I thought the real left wing were Brexiteers, If only Tony Benn were still alive!CarlottaVance said:Of all the bizarre political phenomena conjured by Brexit, the recent spectacle of liberal and even left-wing people beseeching the stars for rescue by Regina ex Machina must be the most intriguing and baffling.
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/queen-brexit-intervention-meme-position
0 -
The thing is, twelve billion pounds sounds a lot.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?
Even if you accept the total, and it's pretty misleading, it's about twenty five pounds per head across the EU. I'm sure the EU have their price, but it's not that low.0 -
He won't admit it, even though everyone knows it.Gallowgate said:
It was misleading and you know it.RobD said:
The £350mn gross figure? I think that was also in the ONS' pink book of the same year.Gallowgate said:
You know what I mean.RobD said:
Claiming the UK sends them too much money is a lie? I thought it was an opinion.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?0 -
To top it all they are getting shedloads more of the type of foreigners they really wanted to keep from coming as EU immigration has dropped. Deluded suckers.Gallowgate said:
No. You are rewriting history. The implication was that suddenly we’ll have an extra free £350m that wasn’t benefiting Britain to spend.RobD said:
The implication was we couldn't spend that money as we wished, wasn't it?Gallowgate said:
I’m not disputing that, but that was’t the implication and you know it.
Democracy is not democracy when its based on dishonesty.
You know that is true and you can’t believe the suckers fell for it can you.
It’s grim. It really is.0 -
The voters decided otherwiseBeibheirli_C said:
Or stay - because it is an even better deal.Charles said:
If this is the best deal we can get, but Parliament has made clear it isn’t acceptable, then we have no choice but to leave without a dealeek said:
No, Boris feels he can force the EU to change their mind.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Hammond considers that the only route the UK can leave is by asking the EU to name their price, in the knowledge that in those circumstances the EU will and has asked for the earth, so as to dissuade the UK from leaving, the outcome that both the EU and Hammond want. Johnson is right that the only circumstances where the EU could be brought to make a half reasonable offer (effective before or after we leave) is one where the UK renders unavoidable the default position that the EU fears. And yet Hammond claims that his efforts to undermine the UK's leverage are made in the name of delivering Brexit!dr_spyn said:Philip of not Macedon.
https://twitter.com/PhilipHammondUK/status/1167816985889165312
Hammond and others understand that the Backstop is not negotiable so we already have the best deal we can get.0 -
TBF it worked for hundreds of years 🤷♂️Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?0 -
The Commons cannot be recalled unless the government asks for it to be recalled. See Standing Order 13.Charles said:
They didn’t sit yesterday or today... that would have made up half the extra time lostAlanbrooke said:Since MPs have neither cancelled their holidays nor abandoned party conferences wheres the time shortage on "the most important issue of our generation" ?
As for how many days have been lost, a prorogation is not the same as a recess. A prorogation is imposed by the government. The House decides itself by majority vote whether to go into recess.
The government had not put down a motion for a conference recess, so it seems presumptuous to assume that the House would have approved one. The government might not even have proposed such a motion, since it would have presented opponents of the government with an opportunity further to control the order paper.
0 -
And what did the Remain campaign and much of the business community say? How quickly was Stuart Rose silenced?Gallowgate said:
I’m sorry but that’s bollocks. Voters were told time and time again that they’d be economically better off by the Leave campaign.Charles said:
Completely wrong and failing to understand why people voted to leavenoneoftheabove said:
Succintly put and spot on.FF43 said:
Any deal is about negotiating worse terms than we already have, in a managed way. It's why no-one is engaged or realistic. Leavers aren't prepared to admit it is necessarily a downgrade while Remainers don't want to be part of the downgrade.Wulfrun_Phil said:
OK, we have to differ on whether it's half decent. I think that it really is reducing the UK to vassal status and is worse than staying in. Let's just agree to differ for now.ydoethur said:
We've already got 'a half-decent deal,' far better thWulfrun_Phil said:
Hammond consi are made in the name of delivering Brexit!dr_spyn said:Philip of not Macedon.
https://twitter.com/PhilipHammondUK/status/1167816985889165312
It's just dumbarse MPs on both sides keep voting against it, because they're thick and don't understand it, partly because they can't read it.
Hammond, at least, did understand it and did vote for it, even though of all people he owed May no favours. So he's quite within his rights to blame everyone else for the mess we're in.
With hindsight, it's a real pity he let May stand as the unity candidate.
If efforts of parliamentary remainers to block Johnson come to nothing, the EU is I think prepared to offer something better, should it become apparent that the UK will leave with no deal. It will reserve its best offer only for circumstances where Johnson had won a GE held immediately after the UK had already left. Until that point, concessions on their current "offer" would only boost Johnson's chances at the GE. I think that their ultimate contingency plan is to try and bend the rules to offer the UK the opportunity to rejoin immediately on exactly the same terms as we left should a GE result in a change of government. The EU will probably offer nothing until then for fear of boosting Johnson's chances of winning that GE, should it consider that the outcome of that GE is in the balance.
Remain voters use certain criteria (mainly economic but some philosophical) to judge membership of the EU. By these criteria it is a downgrade.
Leave voters have almost a different value judgement, notably putting less importance on economics. And so by their criteria it’s an upgrade.
0 -
It's so very disappointing that Stewart is failing to move on. There has to be a degree to which you accept referenda, and you accept leadership elections, and also you accept general elections.Chris said:
I don't think a dozen will be enough. If it were a question of a simple vote, maybe, but it's not.Scott_P said:
The striking thing is that if Stewart's estimate is true, 95% of Tory MPs have fallen into line behind this suicidal policy.
Admittedly tough times, but he surely has to give the winner of the Tory leadership race at least a little bit of room.
1 -
You're falling into the Cummings trap that the more you argue that It is not x it’s x-y which is still a big number helps the ram the message to those who don’t comprehend that £250m is actually not all that much that it would all go to the NHS. We’re doing the same over stop the coup, reinforcing people v parliament message. We should all go home refuse to vote for anything and make him leave with no deal. If it’s project fear.. fair enough if not then we will be back in in 18 months.Gallowgate said:
I’m not disputing that, but that was’t the implication and you know it.RobD said:
Well half of it disappeared into the EU coffers, and the rest we were told how to spend it. So we didn't have control over that money.Gallowgate said:
You know for a fact that the implication that we’ll have 350m a week to spend on other things is just incorrect.RobD said:
I thought it was quite accurate.Gallowgate said:
It was misleading and you know it.RobD said:
The £350mn gross figure? I think that was also in the ONS' pink book of the same year.Gallowgate said:
You know what I mean.RobD said:
Claiming the UK sends them too much money is a lie? I thought it was an opinion.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?
I’m sorry but it’s pathetic.
Democracy is not democracy when its based on dishonesty.1 -
*clears throat*Gallowgate said:Charles said:
I’m sorry but that’s bollocks. Voters were told time and time again that they’d be economically better off by the Leave campaign.noneoftheabove said:
Completely wrong and failing to understand why people voted to leaveFF43 said:Wulfrun_Phil said:
OK, we have to differ on whether it's half decent. I think that it really is reducing the UK to vassal status and is worse than staying in. Let's just agree to differ for now.ydoethur said:Wulfrun_Phil said:
Hammond considers that the only route the UK can leave is by asking the EU to name their price, in the knowledge that in those circumstances the EU willAnd yet Hammond claims that his efforts to undermine the UK's leverage are made in the name of delivering Brexit!dr_spyn said:Philip of not Macedon.
https://twitter.com/PhilipHammondUK/status/1167816985889165312
If efforts of parliamentary remainers to block Johnson come to nothing, the EU is I think prepared to offer something better, should it become apparent that the UK will leave with no deal. It will reserve its best offer only for circumstances where Johnson had won
Remain voters use certain criteria (mainly economic but some philosophical) to judge membership of the EU. By these criteria it is a downgrade.
Leave voters have almost a different value judgement, notably putting less importance on economics. And so by their criteria it’s an upgrade.
Perhaps somewhat counter-intuitively, the relative positioning and lead messages of the two campaigns also allows for an entirely divergent group of people to tend towards Leave: those willing to accept there might be an economic cost, and even buy into the figures and forecasts provided by the Treasury, Bank of England and IMF, but consider this to be a “price worth paying”. When Arron Banks suggests similar he is laughed at, but as easy as it might seem to dismiss this argument out of hand when it comes from a wealthy individual and prominent donor to UKIP, personal experience suggests that this concept might resonate with a group who will worry the Remain campaign far, far more: pensioners. Many of whom will remember a Britain before EU membership.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/05/16/mortimer-with-a-tip-for-the-more-adventurous-gamblers/0 -
Assuming we do actually leave the EU, the UK will be looking for leverage. What does it have that the EU and its member states want. And use that leverage to get the stuff the UK wants: market access, rules to be drafted n to take account of UK interests.etc.Stuartinromford said:
The thing is, twelve billion pounds sounds a lot.Gallowgate said:
Its true. Its like those who think having a bit of money means you can bend everyone to your will and abuse them.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Cheers pal. Keep taking the Remainer tablets.Gallowgate said:@Wulfrun_Phil money won’t get in the way of the EU project. You are delusional. We’ll be a small island off the coast of a superpower.
For the rest of you, talk amongst yourselves. I have better things to do with the afternoon.
The EU is not poor. Waving money in their face is not going to change anything.
Regardless, one of the key points of the Leave campaign was that we send them too much money (another lie). Which is it?
Even if you accept the total, and it's pretty misleading, it's about twenty five pounds per head across the EU. I'm sure the EU have their price, but it's not that low.
Problem for the UK is that as a consortium of everyone that matters in Europe apart from the UK itself, the EU has vastly more leverage.
So what does the UK have that the EU wants? Diplomatic support for EU initiatives definitely. Participation in the EU army would be interesting particularly to Germany, although maybe a sensitive topic in the UK. Very quickly the UK will get to money. If the UK offers enough money to bridge budget gaps or fund projects that becomes very interesting to the EU.
I expect the UK to spend no less cash after leaving to buy influence than it did as membership fees.0 -
He was not accurate about the effective majority which is 3 - not 1 - because Elphicke will support the Government despite no longer having the Tory Whip. Circa 20 Tory rebels probably needed.Chris said:
I don't think a dozen will be enough. If it were a question of a simple vote, maybe, but it's not.Scott_P said:
The striking thing is that if Stewart's estimate is true, 95% of Tory MPs have fallen into line behind this suicidal policy.0 -
Off-topic:
French motor racing driver Anthoine Hubert has died in an F2 crash at Spa.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/motorsport/495377610 -
0
-
They wont be.Chris said:
Not if the Tories are annihilated at the next election.basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...). The trouble with this is that eventually they lose the power either to persuade or influence.
Our eventual departure from the EU and a BoJo victory at the next election is going to come as a nasty shock to many here..0 -
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.edmundintokyo said:
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Never on PB. Never.....0 -
The poster? Or his post? Or the rioters?malcolmg said:
BellendJBriskinindyref2 said:Nice to see the indyref2 campaign off to a nice, definitely not divisive, start
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/riot-police-used-to-quell-protesters-in-glasgow-as-irish-unity-march-sparks-significant-disorder/ar-AAGBFhN?ocid=spartanntp
If either of the first two then its says a lot more about you than it does about the poster..0 -
We’ll write one then it could be quite amusingbasicbridge said:
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.edmundintokyo said:
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Never on PB. Never.....0 -
yes id like to see it, perhaps it will be full of convincing argumentsnichomar said:
We’ll write one then it could be quite amusingbasicbridge said:
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.edmundintokyo said:
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Never on PB. Never.....
0 -
Actually Alister Meeks and most of our regular thread headers could write one in that vein but we will await you contribution and then when it’s not published you can post it anyway. Put up or f....spire2 said:
yes id like to see it, perhaps it will be full of convincing argumentsnichomar said:
We’ll write one then it could be quite amusingbasicbridge said:
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.edmundintokyo said:
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Never on PB. Never.....0 -
HYUD provides more than sufficient Pro-Bojo comments to make up for any lacking in the headers.nichomar said:
We’ll write one then it could be quite amusingbasicbridge said:
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.edmundintokyo said:
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Never on PB. Never.....0 -
It's a fair point. Johnson is prepared to make a desert and call it Brexit*basicbridge said:
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.edmundintokyo said:
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Never on PB. Never.....
That's new. As a defeatist Remainer, May was never prepared to wreck everything.
(* To add to the classical tone of this piece. And of course the Romans did that to other people, not themselves)0 -
Unfortunately without analysis or commentary which devalues his input because there is more to life than the latest opinion pollrottenborough said:
HYUD provides more than sufficient Pro-Bojo comments to make up for any lacking in the headers.nichomar said:
We’ll write one then it could be quite amusingbasicbridge said:
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.edmundintokyo said:
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Never on PB. Never.....0 -
And what have The Macedonians ever done for us?FF43 said:
It's a fair point. Johnson is prepared to make a desert and call it Brexit*basicbridge said:
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.edmundintokyo said:
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Never on PB. Never.....
That's new. As a defeatist Remainer, May was never prepared to wreck everything.
(* To add to the classical tone of this piece. And of course the Romans did that to other people, not themselves)0 -
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.rottenborough said:https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1167853008341872640
Nandy is proving to be a mature politician.3 -
Yes; waiting for the next opinion poll.nichomar said:
Unfortunately without analysis or commentary which devalues his input because there is more to life than the latest opinion pollrottenborough said:
HYUD provides more than sufficient Pro-Bojo comments to make up for any lacking in the headers.nichomar said:
We’ll write one then it could be quite amusingbasicbridge said:
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.edmundintokyo said:
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Never on PB. Never.....
0 -
Corbyn says next week is the last chance to stop a nodeal Brexit. I assume he’s ruled out whipping his MPs to vote for May’s deal then...
Also, what can be done next week that definitively can’t be done between Oct 15th and Oct 31st?0 -
Well they are like buses you wait ten days without one and the three come at the same timeRobD said:
Yes; waiting for the next opinion poll.nichomar said:
Unfortunately without analysis or commentary which devalues his input because there is more to life than the latest opinion pollrottenborough said:
HYUD provides more than sufficient Pro-Bojo comments to make up for any lacking in the headers.nichomar said:
We’ll write one then it could be quite amusingbasicbridge said:
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.edmundintokyo said:
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...basicbridge said:This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Never on PB. Never.....0 -
I assume it's like the old "24 hours to save the NHS" chestnut.alex. said:Corbyn says next week is the last chance to stop a nodeal Brexit. I assume he’s ruled out whipping his MPs to vote for May’s deal then...
Also, what can be done next week that definitively can’t be done between Oct 15th and Oct 31st?0 -
Or even the pound!RobD said:
I assume it's like the old "24 hours to save the NHS" chestnut.alex. said:Corbyn says next week is the last chance to stop a nodeal Brexit. I assume he’s ruled out whipping his MPs to vote for May’s deal then...
Also, what can be done next week that definitively can’t be done between Oct 15th and Oct 31st?0 -
@Morris_Dancer Interesting thread header. Thank you. Looking at the link I thought it was a typo for the Battle of Ipsos (MORI).
Good evening, everybody.0 -
Didn't the pound have two weeks? That's fourteen NHS collapses later.nichomar said:
Or even the pound!RobD said:
I assume it's like the old "24 hours to save the NHS" chestnut.alex. said:Corbyn says next week is the last chance to stop a nodeal Brexit. I assume he’s ruled out whipping his MPs to vote for May’s deal then...
Also, what can be done next week that definitively can’t be done between Oct 15th and Oct 31st?0 -
Next week is the last chance to initiate a sequence of events which would permit a General Election to be held before October 31st - if we make it to the proposed prorogation without MPs succeeding in blocking it, then that specific route will be firmly closed by the time they come back after conference season. But the option to throw out the current Government and install an alternative amenable to asking for an extension (or revoking A50) is possible almost up until the last minute, I would've thought...?alex. said:Corbyn says next week is the last chance to stop a no deal Brexit. I assume he’s ruled out whipping his MPs to vote for May’s deal then...
0 -
The EU summit is on October 17th - I suspect that has a lot to do with it.RobD said:
I assume it's like the old "24 hours to save the NHS" chestnut.alex. said:Corbyn says next week is the last chance to stop a nodeal Brexit. I assume he’s ruled out whipping his MPs to vote for May’s deal then...
Also, what can be done next week that definitively can’t be done between Oct 15th and Oct 31st?0 -
I’ll raise your NHs with my save the unionRobD said:
Didn't the pound have two weeks? That's fourteen NHS collapses later.nichomar said:
Or even the pound!RobD said:
I assume it's like the old "24 hours to save the NHS" chestnut.alex. said:Corbyn says next week is the last chance to stop a nodeal Brexit. I assume he’s ruled out whipping his MPs to vote for May’s deal then...
Also, what can be done next week that definitively can’t be done between Oct 15th and Oct 31st?0 -
Can't A50 be revoked up until October 31st if the PM was so inclined?eek said:
The EU summit is on October 17th - I suspect that has a lot to do with it.RobD said:
I assume it's like the old "24 hours to save the NHS" chestnut.alex. said:Corbyn says next week is the last chance to stop a nodeal Brexit. I assume he’s ruled out whipping his MPs to vote for May’s deal then...
Also, what can be done next week that definitively can’t be done between Oct 15th and Oct 31st?0 -
Hats off to Caroline Russell.0
-
I thought that he'd mis-spelt the Battle of Issus, until I started to read on of course. I bow to @Morris_Dancer's superior knowledge of ancient history.AnneJGP said:@Morris_Dancer Interesting thread header. Thank you. Looking at the link I thought it was a typo for the Battle of Ipsos (MORI).
Good evening, everybody.
And good evening to you too.0 -
Yes as long as it is not obvious that the intention is to not then reverse the decision the next day and start the two years over again without some fundamental moves to change the status quoRobD said:
Can't A50 be revoked up until October 31st if the PM was so inclined?eek said:
The EU summit is on October 17th - I suspect that has a lot to do with it.RobD said:
I assume it's like the old "24 hours to save the NHS" chestnut.alex. said:Corbyn says next week is the last chance to stop a nodeal Brexit. I assume he’s ruled out whipping his MPs to vote for May’s deal then...
Also, what can be done next week that definitively can’t be done between Oct 15th and Oct 31st?0 -
Great to see Morris Dancer contributing a lead piece. Nice one!1
-
Oh the irony. Angela Smith turns up and tries to give a speech to a pro democracy protest and expects nobody to point out she is a hypocrite.0
