Boris Johnson- Prime Minister (Vol. 2)

[anonymous-user]

gooner1 said:

Without interpretating my post to be asking for you to act as an unpaid intern, could you point out
the posts that have led you to that conclusion ,please. TIA.

Nope. Buy a computer and read stuff that comes up on the screeny bit of it. HTH. If baffled by technology, there is at least one friendly tech adviser currently looking for a new gig. Failing that, ask one of your great grandchildren when you see one of them at their retirement party.

Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 17th November 10:43

[anonymous-user]

turbobloke said:

May wasn't within sniffing distance of brexit but now Boris is, and the electorate has been telling YouGov that by far the most important issue at the General Election is Brexit, with 66% currently citing it as their priority (12 Nov). The next most important issue is Health, some way down at 41%, then the Economy in top spot for 28% of those polled.

This prioritising of issues will be more relevant to Boris remaining PM than pushing a mop.

Scroll down to the third chart.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-repo...

If polls matter and are not just film flam, have you noticed that polls say that the majority of the electorate wish to remain? NB: just polls, but either we ignore all of them or we give them credibility. We cannot just pick the ones we like.

[Derek Smith]

Breadvan72 said:

NB: just polls, but either we ignore all of them or we give them credibility. We cannot just pick the ones we like.

Controversial, and unlikely to gain the support of the majority.

[gooner1]

Breadvan72 said:

Nope. Buy a computer and read stuff that comes up on the screeny bit of it. HTH. If baffled by technology, there is at least one friendly tech adviser currently looking for a new gig. Failing that, ask one of your great grandchildren when you see one of them at their retirement party.

Edited by Breadvan72 on Sunday 17th November 10:43

As I thought, pure bks from the bks himself.

[anonymous-user]

gooner1 said:

Breadvan72 said:

Nope. Buy a computer and read stuff that comes up on the screeny bit of it. HTH. If baffled by technology, there is at least one friendly tech adviser currently looking for a new gig. Failing that, ask one of your great grandchildren when you see one of them at their retirement party.

Edited by Breadvan72 on Sunday 17th November 10:43

As I thought, pure bks from the bks himself.

Gooner I’m sure you’re not as much of a gimp as your posts suggest, despite making that new profile and then posting from the wrong one, hilariously exposing your incompetence.

I can see you’ve got an old man twitch in your y fronts for BV, but you’re not going to win in these arguments, simply because he’s much more intelligent than you and he’s not a liar.

Good luck though.

[glazbagun]

Oilchange said:

I seem to remember Tony Blairs mob apologizing for 'opening the floodgates to immigration' which leads me to believe that uncontrolled immigration did happen.

IIRC from an old post-gov Blair interview, they expected Germany and other members to have the same restrictions as the UK (IE: few) when the EU enlarged.

Instead, all EU countries except the UK, Ireland and Sweden placed restrictions on new member countries, meaning we took a disproportionate amount of economic migrants from the first group of joining countries. This at a time when the internet and cut-price airlines were relatively new, too.

There's a good breakdown of the chaos and policy here-

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/mar/24/how-i...

[chrispmartha]

Breadvan72 said:

turbobloke said:

May wasn't within sniffing distance of brexit but now Boris is, and the electorate has been telling YouGov that by far the most important issue at the General Election is Brexit, with 66% currently citing it as their priority (12 Nov). The next most important issue is Health, some way down at 41%, then the Economy in top spot for 28% of those polled.

This prioritising of issues will be more relevant to Boris remaining PM than pushing a mop.

Scroll down to the third chart.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-repo...

If polls matter and are not just film flam, have you noticed that polls say that the majority of the electorate wish to remain? NB: just polls, but either we ignore all of them or we give them credibility. We cannot just pick the ones we like.

Wonder wether TB thinks graph 5 matters?

[turbobloke]

Breadvan72 said:

turbobloke said:

May wasn't within sniffing distance of brexit but now Boris is, and the electorate has been telling YouGov that by far the most important issue at the General Election is Brexit, with 66% currently citing it as their priority (12 Nov). The next most important issue is Health, some way down at 41%, then the Economy in top spot for 28% of those polled.

This prioritising of issues will be more relevant to Boris remaining PM than pushing a mop.

Scroll down to the third chart.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-repo...

If polls matter and are not just film flam, have you noticed that polls say that the majority of the electorate wish to remain? NB: just polls, but either we ignore all of them or we give them credibility. We cannot just pick the ones we like.

Who has ignored something they don't like?

The reasons are unknown but likely to contain an element of frustration at the process being stymied by crowdfunded grieving remainers, Bercow, and unwarranted faith in forecasts using old data in the wrong sort of economic model.

The unpopularity of a government once elected is a related phenomenon. We don't stage new elections or change the government due to it polling lower than when elected.

[gooner1]

El stovey said:

Gooner I’m sure you’re not as much of a gimp as your posts suggest, despite making that new profile and then posting from the wrong one, hilariously exposing your incompetence.

I can see you’ve got an old man twitch in your y fronts for BV, but you’re not going to win in these arguments, simply because he’s much more intelligent than you and he’s not a liar.

Good luck though.

Well stovey old chap, if you can draw your attention away from the contents of my pants for a short
while, let's take a look at your last sentence.
BV may well be more intelligent than myself, however, that is no measure of honesty.

Eton, Cambridge et al, have turned out some of the biggest liars that ever walked.

" But as with every leaver you will be unable to provide a single fact-based reason for leaving the EU."

Would you say the quote above is factually correct, or a big fat stinking lie?

I know it probably goes against the grain to find fault with your heroes, but have a stab at answering
In an honest fashion.

PS. I'm purely heterosexual, but if that's not your thing it makes no difference to me mate.

[anonymous-user]

turbobloke said:

Breadvan72 said:

turbobloke said:

May wasn't within sniffing distance of brexit but now Boris is, and the electorate has been telling YouGov that by far the most important issue at the General Election is Brexit, with 66% currently citing it as their priority (12 Nov). The next most important issue is Health, some way down at 41%, then the Economy in top spot for 28% of those polled.

This prioritising of issues will be more relevant to Boris remaining PM than pushing a mop.

Scroll down to the third chart.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-repo...

If polls matter and are not just film flam, have you noticed that polls say that the majority of the electorate wish to remain? NB: just polls, but either we ignore all of them or we give them credibility. We cannot just pick the ones we like.

Who has ignored something they don't like?

The reasons are unknown but likely to contain an element of frustration at the process being stymied by crowdfunded grieving remainers, Bercow, and unwarranted faith in forecasts using old data in the wrong sort of economic model.

The unpopularity of a government once elected is a related phenomenon. We don't stage new elections or change the government due to it polling lower than when elected.

So the win in 2016 was for pure reasons untainted by jury nobbling, cheaty people, fibs, or silliness, but the win that would happen in 2020 if there were a ref (there probably will not be a ref) would be tainted by jury nobbling, cheaty people, fibs, and silliness? Thanks as always for the fairminded and bi-partisan analysis.

[anonymous-user]

Eton and Cambridge do indeed turn out some big fibbers. Some very good people too. So I have heard, anyway. I have only been to Cambridge to eat the very good buns that they sell there. I think I once floated past Eton on a rented boat. Might have been Slough. Not sure.

PS: I am not more intelligent than anyone on the planet. I am either slightly or a lot better informed than some people. I am a lot less well informed than some other people.

Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 17th November 12:41

[turbobloke]

Breadvan72 said:

turbobloke said:

Breadvan72 said:

turbobloke said:

May wasn't within sniffing distance of brexit but now Boris is, and the electorate has been telling YouGov that by far the most important issue at the General Election is Brexit, with 66% currently citing it as their priority (12 Nov). The next most important issue is Health, some way down at 41%, then the Economy in top spot for 28% of those polled.

This prioritising of issues will be more relevant to Boris remaining PM than pushing a mop.

Scroll down to the third chart.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-repo...

If polls matter and are not just film flam, have you noticed that polls say that the majority of the electorate wish to remain? NB: just polls, but either we ignore all of them or we give them credibility. We cannot just pick the ones we like.

Who has ignored something they don't like?

The reasons are unknown but likely to contain an element of frustration at the process being stymied by crowdfunded grieving remainers, Bercow, and unwarranted faith in forecasts using old data in the wrong sort of economic model.

The unpopularity of a government once elected is a related phenomenon. We don't stage new elections or change the government due to it polling lower than when elected.

So the win in 2016 was for pure reasons untainted by jury nobbling, cheaty people, fibs, or silliness, but the win that would happen in 2020 if there were a ref (there probably will not be a ref) would be tainted by jury nobbling, cheaty people, fibs, and silliness? Thanks as always for the fairminded and bi-partisan analysis.

Putting words into another's mouth is beyond you and beneath you.

The vote held in 2016 was held due to the European Union Referendum Act 2015, and it was the vote that matters, that's all.

Other attempted reasoning one way or the other - and it's usually one way not the other - represents increasingly desperate clutching at any passing straw by remainers who still cannot cope with the result of the vote that matters.

[anonymous-user]

Why did democracy end in June 2016? No one can provide an answer to this.

Insert usual J M Keynes quotation.

[turbobloke]

Breadvan72 said:

Why did democracy end in June 2016? No one can provide an answer to this.

.

That's because It didn't end in June 2016, nor did it end after the date of any particular general election. Odd question!

Putting up with a result that a person would prefer not to have to deal with is something else that didn't end after June 2016, nor after any particular general election.

[JuanCarlosFandango]

Breadvan72 said:

If polls matter and are not just film flam, have you noticed that polls say that the majority of the electorate wish to remain? NB: just polls, but either we ignore all of them or we give them credibility. We cannot just pick the ones we like.

But you can pick and choose referendum results?

[anonymous-user]

I would ignore an election result declared unlawful by an election court. Why should I pay any attention to a referendum result that, if the ref had been an election, would have been declared unlawful by an election court? I would say the same if remain had similarly stolen a result. People say respect the result, but why respect a thing that is not respectable? People say that we should respect a person’s opinion, but what if that opinion is that all people with disabilities should be euthanised? I use an extreme example to make the point that not every thing is respectable.

That is one point. The other point is that, even if the result had been spotlessly legit, three and a half years have passed and the situational map has changed. More voting is more democracy, not less. Democracy is always the better choice.

[gooner1]

Breadvan72 said:

Eton and Cambridge do indeed turn out some big fibbers. Some very good people too. So I have heard, anyway. I have only been to Cambridge to eat the very good buns that they sell there. I think I once floated past Eton on a rented boat. Might have been Slough. Not sure.

PS: I am not more intelligent than anyone on the planet. I am either slightly or a lot better informed than some people. I am a lot less well informed than some other people.

Edited by Breadvan72 on Sunday 17th November 12:41

I think stovey may well be sobbing if he's read this post.

[james_GTI]

Breadvan72 said:

I would ignore an election result declared unlawful by an election court. Why should I pay any attention to a referendum result that, if the ref had been an election, would have been declared unlawful by an election court?

Based on what?

Breadvan72 said:

I would say the same if remain had similarly stolen a result. People say respect the result, but why respect a thing that is not respectable? People say that we should respect a person’s opinion, but what if that opinion is that all people with disabilities should be euthanised? I use an extreme example to make the point that not every thing is respectable.

That is one point. The other point is that, even if the result had been spotlessly legit, three and a half years have passed and the situational map has changed. More voting is more democracy, not less. Democracy is always the better choice.

Yawn. Presumably it should be another 'non-binding' referendum?

[anonymous-user]

Based on electoral law and proven facts. If the ref had been an election, the court would have quashed the result. Info available via Google or Ecosia . Choose the latter to make Greta less glum.

[james_GTI]

Breadvan72 said:

Based on electoral law and proven facts. If the ref had been an election, the court would have quashed the result. Info available via Google or Ecosia . Choose the latter to make Greta less glum.

Funny how you expect others to provide links to support their claims but never do so yourself.

Source: Google.