Richmond Park by-election.
Discussion
///ajd said:
don'tbesilly said:
///ajd said:
brenflys777 said:
jjlynn27 said:
Right. The interview wasn't car crash but all those papers made up headline in order to sell more copies.
I understand that you are not the quickest of cats, so I'll repeat this slowly; I've seen the interview, and I've seen the exact same thing that people outside of Church of St Nige saw. Same thing that even Patric O'Flynn saw.
It must be conspiracy by MSM to portray NF in a bad light.
Which interview? I'm starting to think you've made it up, any chance of a link to the supposed car crash interview? I understand that you are not the quickest of cats, so I'll repeat this slowly; I've seen the interview, and I've seen the exact same thing that people outside of Church of St Nige saw. Same thing that even Patric O'Flynn saw.
It must be conspiracy by MSM to portray NF in a bad light.
Here's a link to Olneys car crash. She doesn't even say I'm going, she just bolts. Pathetic.
http://talkradio.co.uk/news/sarah-olney-talkradio-...
http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien...
Olney should have been better prepared for the JHB interview - but JHB was being a total t
t. She answered the questions reasonably until she thought "had enough of this rampant biased brexiteer attack". JHB and other brexiteers should reflect on the fact that remain were in a way lying when they said "we'd leave the SM" - they were pointing out the cake and eat it aspects of "staying in the SM" and "rejecting EU FMOL". It was, is and will remain a stupid contradictory negotiation objective that will see only losers - both the EU and the UK.
The question back to JHB should be how do you reject FMOL and retain good trading conditions - the only answer is usually a pathetic "that's for the govt to negotiate", or "we buy lots of BMWs".
Its just not good enough or convincing.
///ajd said:
JHB and other brexiteers should reflect on the fact that remain were in a way lying when they said "we'd leave the SM" - they were pointing out the cake and eat it aspects of "staying in the SM" and "rejecting EU FMOL". It was, is and will remain a stupid contradictory negotiation objective that will see only losers - both the EU and the UK.
What utter nonsense.The suggestion Remain were in a way lying is utter garbage, considering you and umpteen others have suggested that prior to the referendum no-one even suggested this would happen (leave the SM), you've used Hannan on more than one occasion to demonstrate as much, and did as much only a week ago.
Stop making sh*t up.
///ajd said:
Its just not good enough or convincing.
Tough, and it is to some.Hannah protested our relationship with the SM would be unaffected. I've said many in the Leave camp dodged the question of leaving the SM and dismissed Remain concerns over FMOL & SM are scaremongering nonsense. Waved away with statements about how much the EU wants to keep us in a good deal due to BMWs etc. Now THAT is looking increasingly like lies.
Recently Hannan has admitted there were many different views on it across Vote Leave, and also outlines a possible cake and eat it approach:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=068xRE1VdrM
Good (presumably he wants to keep) - free movement of good between states
Bad (presumably he doesn't want) - external tariff
I'm not making stuff up to suggest there are a spectrum of views in Vote Leave on the subject.
I'm not making stuff up to suggest some like Davis and Hannan are talking today about how we retain our Single Market benefits.
It is "good enough for some" that there is no credible plan to achieve both SM benefits and FMOL. Well, they should start worrying that it is not good enough, as the loser will be FMOL, which we'll compromise on. I won't mind that, but the overall deal will still be rubbish - still paying, less influence, no change to immigration. No-one will be happy.
Hannan never appeared once in any of the main debates broadcast on TV prior to the the referendum, the majority of leave voters wouldn't know who he was if they met him!
Both Johnson and Gove, both Tory cabinet ministers prior to the referendum stated unequivocally prior to the referendum that the UK would relinquish SM membership on leaving the EU, you know this, it's been posted umpteen times, as has the Youtube clip proving such.
Johnson on the Marr show - 5th June -20 secs in
Gove on the Marr show - 8th June - 12 secs in
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUI5A1Gd5D0
Andrew Neil demolished James McGrory last Sunday on the claims you are still pushing as the truth in regards other views on the SM, you know this too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHzmCHcM7cA
The discussions now are in regards 'access' to the single market, the suggestion that Davis has agreed to pay, is just that a suggestion, one I'd imagine he's acknowledged for the sake of ruling nothing out.
As for FM, it will be a compromise, the compromise being control, which is what 33% of leave voters wanted if you believe Aschcroft, which given the fact that many remain voters use as there source, you'd be a fool to suggest otherwise.
You can carry on using Hannan as your hero in regards your pointless argument regarding the SM, but the reality is Hannan is an irrelevance in the bigger picture, he was prior to the 23rd June, he still is today.
///ajd said:
I'm not making stuff up.
Hannah protested our relationship with the SM would be unaffected. I've said many in the Leave camp dodged the question of leaving the SM and dismissed Remain concerns over FMOL & SM are scaremongering nonsense. Waved away with statements about how much the EU wants to keep us in a good deal due to BMWs etc. Now THAT is looking increasingly like lies.
Recently Hannan has admitted there were many different views on it across Vote Leave, and also outlines a possible cake and eat it approach:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=068xRE1VdrM
Good (presumably he wants to keep) - free movement of good between states
Bad (presumably he doesn't want) - external tariff
I'm not making stuff up to suggest there are a spectrum of views in Vote Leave on the subject.
I'm not making stuff up to suggest some like Davis and Hannan are talking today about how we retain our Single Market benefits.
It is "good enough for some" that there is no credible plan to achieve both SM benefits and FMOL. Well, they should start worrying that it is not good enough, as the loser will be FMOL, which we'll compromise on. I won't mind that, but the overall deal will still be rubbish - still paying, less influence, no change to immigration. No-one will be happy.
Hannan said we should have full access to the SM but acknowledged it wouldn't remain as current because you could no longer have FMOL and be subject to the ECJ. As he said, vote leave had a Boris and Gove both saying bluntly we'd be out along with various others ranging in opinion.Hannah protested our relationship with the SM would be unaffected. I've said many in the Leave camp dodged the question of leaving the SM and dismissed Remain concerns over FMOL & SM are scaremongering nonsense. Waved away with statements about how much the EU wants to keep us in a good deal due to BMWs etc. Now THAT is looking increasingly like lies.
Recently Hannan has admitted there were many different views on it across Vote Leave, and also outlines a possible cake and eat it approach:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=068xRE1VdrM
Good (presumably he wants to keep) - free movement of good between states
Bad (presumably he doesn't want) - external tariff
I'm not making stuff up to suggest there are a spectrum of views in Vote Leave on the subject.
I'm not making stuff up to suggest some like Davis and Hannan are talking today about how we retain our Single Market benefits.
It is "good enough for some" that there is no credible plan to achieve both SM benefits and FMOL. Well, they should start worrying that it is not good enough, as the loser will be FMOL, which we'll compromise on. I won't mind that, but the overall deal will still be rubbish - still paying, less influence, no change to immigration. No-one will be happy.
The public were well aware of this and made their choice accordingly.
The government and Remain both saw talking about leaving the SM and a big stick that would scare the crap out of people and used it as such thinking it would win the day for them.
We've already been here from when you claimed the Tim Farron line about no one said this and you were made to look a little silly when you swallowed the Open Britain propaganda video a week or so ago which showed they were still up to their old tricks and trying to con people even after the result ! I guess they just help themselves produce one more bulls
t video for the true open mouthed Remain swallowers.It seems to grate with you that the sometimes mixed message from Vote Leave was listened to and that people could see this was a mixed group of cross party people who weren't campaigning on a single manifesto which would have to be delivered after the result, but that they would have to take and reject parts of what different people were saying.
AW111 said:
B'stard Child said:
.... Now I appreciate that I've only posted 4 out of my 273 reasons to vote leave so please don't think I'm after a few to add to my list - it's complete already (although one to replace 273 would be appreciated by some who think that the Eurovision contest is nothing to do with the EU - fools all of them 
)
Australia is in the Eurovision song contest...)
It's still a terrible contest, the voting is all based on neighbours get max points? The selection criteria for groups/songs is bizarre and what's more 95% of the songs in the competition are appalling.
The only thing it has in it's favour is its slightly more democratic than the EuSSR.
Gut feel - I'd say it was an early attempt at intergration of multiple individual countries with one common goal of picking a song that makes everyone's ears bleed for a year till the next one.
B'stard Child said:
AW111 said:
B'stard Child said:
.... Now I appreciate that I've only posted 4 out of my 273 reasons to vote leave so please don't think I'm after a few to add to my list - it's complete already (although one to replace 273 would be appreciated by some who think that the Eurovision contest is nothing to do with the EU - fools all of them )
Australia is in the Eurovision song contest...)It's still a terrible contest, the voting is all based on neighbours get max points? The selection criteria for groups/songs is bizarre and what's more 95% of the songs in the competition are appalling.
The only thing it has in it's favour is its slightly more democratic than the EuSSR.
Gut feel - I'd say it was an early attempt at intergration of multiple individual countries with one common goal of picking a song that makes everyone's ears bleed for a year till the next one.
I guess we could negotiate it as part of 'access' to the single market, but no longer being in the Eurovision song contest wasn't on my ballot paper, and I'm f*cking apoplectic with rage about it!
Edited by don'tbesilly on Sunday 4th December 00:26
mybrainhurts said:
AW111 said:
Australia is in the Eurovision song contest...
Just because they're convicts on a far off isle, doesn't mean they're not Brits.People who list their ancestry as English or Scottish are less than 50%, according to the 2011 census.
B'stard Child said:
Your point is?
It's still a terrible contest, the voting is all based on neighbours get max points? The selection criteria for groups/songs is bizarre and what's more 95% of the songs in the competition are appalling.
The only thing it has in it's favour is its slightly more democratic than the EuSSR.
Gut feel - I'd say it was an early attempt at intergration of multiple individual countries with one common goal of picking a song that makes everyone's ears bleed for a year till the next one.
I think it's silly to include Australia, but my point (what little there was of it) was that Eurovision is not synonymous with the EU.It's still a terrible contest, the voting is all based on neighbours get max points? The selection criteria for groups/songs is bizarre and what's more 95% of the songs in the competition are appalling.
The only thing it has in it's favour is its slightly more democratic than the EuSSR.
Gut feel - I'd say it was an early attempt at intergration of multiple individual countries with one common goal of picking a song that makes everyone's ears bleed for a year till the next one.
I think it may be an attempt to unite Europe in derision of the winner.
don'tbesilly said:
B'stard Child said:
AW111 said:
B'stard Child said:
.... Now I appreciate that I've only posted 4 out of my 273 reasons to vote leave so please don't think I'm after a few to add to my list - it's complete already (although one to replace 273 would be appreciated by some who think that the Eurovision contest is nothing to do with the EU - fools all of them )
Australia is in the Eurovision song contest...)It's still a terrible contest, the voting is all based on neighbours get max points? The selection criteria for groups/songs is bizarre and what's more 95% of the songs in the competition are appalling.
The only thing it has in it's favour is its slightly more democratic than the EuSSR.
Gut feel - I'd say it was an early attempt at intergration of multiple individual countries with one common goal of picking a song that makes everyone's ears bleed for a year till the next one.
I guess we could negotiate it as part of 'access' to the single market, but no longer being in the Eurovision song contest wasn't on my ballot paper, and I'm f*cking apoplectic with rage about it!
I'm slightly annoyed at being goaded into posting reason to leave 273 before it's time
It was on my ballot paper - it clearly said leave the Eu--------rovision
Of course I stuck my X in that box - a lifetime without bleeding ears - who the bloody hell wouldn't sign up for that
AW111 said:
mybrainhurts said:
AW111 said:
Australia is in the Eurovision song contest...
Just because they're convicts on a far off isle, doesn't mean they're not Brits.People who list their ancestry as English or Scottish are less than 50%, according to the 2011 census.
B'stard Child said:
Your point is?
It's still a terrible contest, the voting is all based on neighbours get max points? The selection criteria for groups/songs is bizarre and what's more 95% of the songs in the competition are appalling.
The only thing it has in it's favour is its slightly more democratic than the EuSSR.
Gut feel - I'd say it was an early attempt at intergration of multiple individual countries with one common goal of picking a song that makes everyone's ears bleed for a year till the next one.
I think it's silly to include Australia, but my point (what little there was of it) was that Eurovision is not synonymous with the EU.It's still a terrible contest, the voting is all based on neighbours get max points? The selection criteria for groups/songs is bizarre and what's more 95% of the songs in the competition are appalling.
The only thing it has in it's favour is its slightly more democratic than the EuSSR.
Gut feel - I'd say it was an early attempt at intergration of multiple individual countries with one common goal of picking a song that makes everyone's ears bleed for a year till the next one.
I think it may be an attempt to unite Europe in derision of the winner.
AW111 said:
mybrainhurts said:
AW111 said:
Australia is in the Eurovision song contest...
Just because they're convicts on a far off isle, doesn't mean they're not Brits.People who list their ancestry as English or Scottish are less than 50%, according to the 2011 census.
HTH.
They're still bloody convicts, of course...
mybrainhurts said:
AW111 said:
mybrainhurts said:
AW111 said:
Australia is in the Eurovision song contest...
Just because they're convicts on a far off isle, doesn't mean they're not Brits.People who list their ancestry as English or Scottish are less than 50%, according to the 2011 census.
HTH.
They're still bloody convicts, of course...
For now
mybrainhurts said:
I was joking.
HTH.
They're still bloody convicts, of course...
There is an old story about the little old lady (in Australia) who won the lottery.HTH.
They're still bloody convicts, of course...
She was being interviewed about what she'd do with the money, and replied that she'd always wanted to travel.
"Will you be going to England?"
"Of course not - that's where all the convicts came from!"
Anyway, this is all a bit tangential as to whether the byelection can be considered a vote on leaving the Eurovision song contest
B'stard Child said:
AW111 said:
Anyway, this is all a bit tangential as to whether the byelection can be considered a vote on leaving the Eurovision song contest
Now you are being sillyThe by election wasn't - the referendum was
Remoaners are like Gina G - oooh argh just a little bit - whilst the rest are happy with 'making your mind up'... time to move on before we end up with all the costs and aggro of nil points and none of the glory!
brenflys777 said:
B'stard Child said:
AW111 said:
Anyway, this is all a bit tangential as to whether the byelection can be considered a vote on leaving the Eurovision song contest
Now you are being sillyThe by election wasn't - the referendum was
Remoaners are like Gina G - oooh argh just a little bit - whilst the rest are happy with 'making your mind up'... time to move on before we end up with all the costs and aggro of nil points and none of the glory!
I had no idea that my reason to leave number 273 would have so much support - it really was my room 101 B'stard Child said:
I had no idea that my reason to leave number 273 would have so much support - it really was my room 101 brenflys777 said:
B'stard Child said:
I had no idea that my reason to leave number 273 would have so much support - it really was my room 101 You are advocating change from within........
B'stard Child said:
You aren't talking about Eurovision now are you??
You are advocating change from within........
I missed out the smilie. The UK would have as much hope of successfully reforming EUrovision from within as Cameron had renegotiating with the EU! You are advocating change from within........
Nil points. Terry Wogans corpse would be as likely to succeed.
RYH64E said:
Of the areas in your table, are there any where you'd choose to live?
The point was made in response to your comment about change, I was suggesting that those living a comfortable, affluent life in leafy Richmond are less likely to vote for change than the good people of Boston, or Great Yarmouth, or Mansfield, or Thurrock. I'm not suggesting that change was the only reason why people voted as they did, but it was certainly a factor, as was the desire to stick two fingers up to the establishment (something else that the good folk of Richmond didn't feel the need to do).
On that we also come back to the whole "more educated" vote remain question.The point was made in response to your comment about change, I was suggesting that those living a comfortable, affluent life in leafy Richmond are less likely to vote for change than the good people of Boston, or Great Yarmouth, or Mansfield, or Thurrock. I'm not suggesting that change was the only reason why people voted as they did, but it was certainly a factor, as was the desire to stick two fingers up to the establishment (something else that the good folk of Richmond didn't feel the need to do).
The constant spin we have on this is that this means they have a better understanding of the issues. In today's economy the better educated are also usually far more affluent and far better placed to benefit from the age of globalisation. If rising house prices, and rental prices, increase the value of your London town house and rental property portfolio then they are "good things" to you. There has been no deep analysis of the effect on the country as a whole, just naked self interest.
Many of the remainers aligned their own self interest with that of the country, which is why they found the leave vote incomprehensible.
Edited by JagLover on Sunday 4th December 08:23
JagLover said:
On that we also come back to the whole "more educated" vote remain question.
Exactly this.I've had this 'discussion' rammed down my throat by a family member & his other half & also my boss & various work colleagues. What I find amusing is that out of all of them, I am the most highly qualified in terms of education, yet I voted out! The 'discussion' went something along the lines of: 'only the bloody chav scum with no education voted out - how dare they, they are not worthy! We were all lied to (only) by the leave campaign! There must be a second vote to avoid ambiguity!'
I am startled at this take on 'democracy', particularly by people who say they fought for our values, independence & democracy during WW2. It seems 17 million people in this country are uneducated, gullible chavs. The logical conclusion is that you should only be given the vote based on your university results, &/or IQ. Its been voted for, please can the powers that be just bloody well get on with it!
Biker 1 said:
JagLover said:
On that we also come back to the whole "more educated" vote remain question.
Exactly this.I've had this 'discussion' rammed down my throat by a family member & his other half & also my boss & various work colleagues. What I find amusing is that out of all of them, I am the most highly qualified in terms of education, yet I voted out! The 'discussion' went something along the lines of: 'only the bloody chav scum with no education voted out - how dare they, they are not worthy! We were all lied to (only) by the leave campaign! There must be a second vote to avoid ambiguity!'
I am startled at this take on 'democracy', particularly by people who say they fought for our values, independence & democracy during WW2. It seems 17 million people in this country are uneducated, gullible chavs. The logical conclusion is that you should only be given the vote based on your university results, &/or IQ. Its been voted for, please can the powers that be just bloody well get on with it!
"Clever" leave voters, if you're not happy with the way things are going why not get angry The Tories rather than the EU?
JagLover said:
RYH64E said:
Of the areas in your table, are there any where you'd choose to live?
The point was made in response to your comment about change, I was suggesting that those living a comfortable, affluent life in leafy Richmond are less likely to vote for change than the good people of Boston, or Great Yarmouth, or Mansfield, or Thurrock. I'm not suggesting that change was the only reason why people voted as they did, but it was certainly a factor, as was the desire to stick two fingers up to the establishment (something else that the good folk of Richmond didn't feel the need to do).
On that we also come back to the whole "more educated" vote remain question.The point was made in response to your comment about change, I was suggesting that those living a comfortable, affluent life in leafy Richmond are less likely to vote for change than the good people of Boston, or Great Yarmouth, or Mansfield, or Thurrock. I'm not suggesting that change was the only reason why people voted as they did, but it was certainly a factor, as was the desire to stick two fingers up to the establishment (something else that the good folk of Richmond didn't feel the need to do).
The constant spin we have on this is that this means they have a better understanding of the issues. In today's economy the better educated are also usually far more affluent and far better placed to benefit from the age of globalisation. If rising house prices, and rental prices, increase the value of your London town house and rental property portfolio then they are "good things" to you. There has been no deep analysis of the effect on the country as a whole, just naked self interest.
Many of the remainers aligned their own self interest with that of the country, which is why they found the leave vote incomprehensible.
Edited by JagLover on Sunday 4th December 08:23
We were discussing change and whether it was a good thing or something to be feared, I made the seemingly uncontroversial point that the affluent folk of Richmond were less likely to need, want or welcome change than those living in areas suffering various economic ails.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff