Brexit

First topic message reminder :

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Duty281 wrote:He doesn't have to 'prove his innocence', that's not how the justice system in this country works.

But it's how the world intends it to work.................... it's probably called neo-socialism - ooh, sex-Y!.  
Anti establishment thought crimes to be punishable by no trial and a bullet down some cavernous prison complex dedicated to 're-education' of political dissidents.

Sex crimes as well? I don't see many people one here leaping to Weinstein's defence.

Yep. I would, until and unless he's convicted. Otherwise it's just hearsay and rumour.

So would Arron Banks

Meaning?

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Amazing that the very definition of "democracy" is now one vote, once.

Country be damned.

It's one vote, once, followed by implementing the outcome of that vote. The country voted for this.

But implementation of what? When the Brexit vote was made it was said that a Yes vote would be a clean break with the EU. Where the UK took back control of everything. That is not the case with this deal it is a crazy kind of halfway house akin to the Hokey Cokey. In some ways the UK is out in others they are In.

No, it wasn't. The ballot asked simply, in or out? Nothing about what sort of 'out' that meant and the implications of leaving. The EU aren't making it easy (no surprise) and no 'deal' is going to be palatable to all interested parties. Suck it up, UK. I'd laugh if I wasn't British. The rest of the World must be (not so) quietly giggling.

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Amazing that the very definition of "democracy" is now one vote, once.

Country be damned.

It's one vote, once, followed by implementing the outcome of that vote. The country voted for this.

But implementation of what? When the Brexit vote was made it was said that a Yes vote would be a clean break with the EU. Where the UK took back control of everything. That is not the case with this deal it is a crazy kind of halfway house akin to the Hokey Cokey. In some ways the UK is out in others they are In.

No, it wasn't. The ballot asked simply, in or out? Nothing about what sort of 'out' that meant and the implications of leaving. The EU aren't making it easy (no surprise) and no 'deal' is going to be palatable to all interested parties. Suck it up, UK. I'd laugh if I wasn't British. The rest of the World must be (not so) quietly giggling.

Quite right. Nuance is for idiots.

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Amazing that the very definition of "democracy" is now one vote, once.

Country be damned.

It's one vote, once, followed by implementing the outcome of that vote. The country voted for this.

But implementation of what? When the Brexit vote was made it was said that a Yes vote would be a clean break with the EU. Where the UK took back control of everything. That is not the case with this deal it is a crazy kind of halfway house akin to the Hokey Cokey. In some ways the UK is out in others they are In.

No, it wasn't. The ballot asked simply, in or out? Nothing about what sort of 'out' that meant and the implications of leaving. The EU aren't making it easy (no surprise) and no 'deal' is going to be palatable to all interested parties. Suck it up, UK. I'd laugh if I wasn't British. The rest of the World must be (not so) quietly giggling.

Well the Leave campaign was built on a promise that it would allow the UK to negotiate their own trade deals now that is not happening here with this deal so that is a fail in delivering what Leave was promising. It never spoke about Northern Ireland being kept closer linked to the EU either and I'd hazard a guess there are a lot of other areas where it falls short.

Duty281 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Amazing that the very definition of "democracy" is now one vote, once.

Country be damned.

It's one vote, once, followed by implementing the outcome of that vote. The country voted for this.

Exactly, Prawn struggles to grasp this.

If, after the implementation of the 2016 EU Referendum result, there is sufficient public interest about rejoining the EU, then I welcome a vote on it.

Certainly not 'one vote, once'.

Amazing. You and I agree . Personally, I think this is an utter screw up from start to finish (whatever that is), but 'we' voted for this. Now we have to deal with it, and that doesn't mean having another vote before implementation because we voted 'wrong' last time. It is reversible, but only if the party that initiates that wants to alienate ~52% of the country for the foreseeable future and is happy to deal with the fallout, some of which could easily get violent.

Personally, I hope that Johnson, Rees-Mogg et al are metaphorically hung, drawn and quartered over this. Cameron too. Don't expect you to agree with this last bit though .

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Amazing that the very definition of "democracy" is now one vote, once.

Country be damned.

It's one vote, once, followed by implementing the outcome of that vote. The country voted for this.

But implementation of what? When the Brexit vote was made it was said that a Yes vote would be a clean break with the EU. Where the UK took back control of everything. That is not the case with this deal it is a crazy kind of halfway house akin to the Hokey Cokey. In some ways the UK is out in others they are In.

No, it wasn't. The ballot asked simply, in or out? Nothing about what sort of 'out' that meant and the implications of leaving. The EU aren't making it easy (no surprise) and no 'deal' is going to be palatable to all interested parties. Suck it up, UK. I'd laugh if I wasn't British. The rest of the World must be (not so) quietly giggling.

Well the Leave campaign was built on a promise that it would allow the UK to negotiate their own trade deals now that is not happening here with this deal so that is a fail in delivering what Leave was promising. It never spoke about Northern Ireland being kept closer linked to the EU either and I'd hazard a guess there are a lot of other areas where it falls short.

True, but that has nothing to do with the actual ballot question. If anyone was naive enough to believe a modern politician's word in advance of a vote, more fool them. The Brexiteer politicians never even considered issues like NI etc, either because they are simply too stupid or they never expected to win. Some of them (Rees-Mogg, Johnson to name but two) have their ulterior motives as well, be they financial or political.

One positive thing is that this whole débacle might shake up our pathetic political system for good. Hopefully, for the better, but I won't hold my breath.

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Amazing that the very definition of "democracy" is now one vote, once.

Country be damned.

It's one vote, once, followed by implementing the outcome of that vote. The country voted for this.

But implementation of what? When the Brexit vote was made it was said that a Yes vote would be a clean break with the EU. Where the UK took back control of everything. That is not the case with this deal it is a crazy kind of halfway house akin to the Hokey Cokey. In some ways the UK is out in others they are In.

No, it wasn't. The ballot asked simply, in or out? Nothing about what sort of 'out' that meant and the implications of leaving. The EU aren't making it easy (no surprise) and no 'deal' is going to be palatable to all interested parties. Suck it up, UK. I'd laugh if I wasn't British. The rest of the World must be (not so) quietly giggling.

Well the Leave campaign was built on a promise that it would allow the UK to negotiate their own trade deals now that is not happening here with this deal so that is a fail in delivering what Leave was promising. It never spoke about Northern Ireland being kept closer linked to the EU either and I'd hazard a guess there are a lot of other areas where it falls short.

True, but that has nothing to do with the actual ballot question. If anyone was naive enough to believe a modern politician's word in advance of a vote, more fool them. The Brexiteer politicians never even considered issues like NI etc, either because they are simply too stupid or they never expected to win. Some of them (Rees-Mogg, Johnson to name but two) have their ulterior motives as well, be they financial or political.

One positive thing is that this whole débacle might shake up our pathetic political system for good. Hopefully, for the better, but I won't hold my breath.

I agree with that.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Amazing that the very definition of "democracy" is now one vote, once.

Country be damned.

It's one vote, once, followed by implementing the outcome of that vote. The country voted for this.

Exactly, Prawn struggles to grasp this.

If, after the implementation of the 2016 EU Referendum result, there is sufficient public interest about rejoining the EU, then I welcome a vote on it.

Certainly not 'one vote, once'.

Amazing. You and I agree . Personally, I think this is an utter screw up from start to finish (whatever that is), but 'we' voted for this. Now we have to deal with it, and that doesn't mean having another vote before implementation because we voted 'wrong' last time. It is reversible, but only if the party that initiates that wants to alienate ~52% of the country for the foreseeable future and is happy to deal with the fallout, some of which could easily get violent.

Personally, I hope that Johnson, Rees-Mogg et al are metaphorically hung, drawn and quartered over this. Cameron too. Don't expect you to agree with this last bit though .

Politically, I dislike all three of those that you've listed. As things stand, history will not be kind to Johnson and Cameron. Rees-Mogg is a classic Tory bottler - happy to push May under the metaphorical bus, but not brave enough to put himself forward (at least, yet, doesn't look like he will).

Prime Minister Theresa May will hold a news conference at 5pm

navyblueshorts wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Amazing that the very definition of "democracy" is now one vote, once.

Country be damned.

It's one vote, once, followed by implementing the outcome of that vote. The country voted for this.

Exactly, Prawn struggles to grasp this.

If, after the implementation of the 2016 EU Referendum result, there is sufficient public interest about rejoining the EU, then I welcome a vote on it.

Certainly not 'one vote, once'.

Amazing. You and I agree . Personally, I think this is an utter screw up from start to finish (whatever that is), but 'we' voted for this. Now we have to deal with it, and that doesn't mean having another vote before implementation because we voted 'wrong' last time. It is reversible, but only if the party that initiates that wants to alienate ~52% of the country for the foreseeable future and is happy to deal with the fallout, some of which could easily get violent.

Personally, I hope that Johnson, Rees-Mogg et al are metaphorically hung, drawn and quartered over this. Cameron too. Don't expect you to agree with this last bit though .

If the recent Channel 4 survey is anything to go by, that party would be alienating a significantly lower percentage of the population than that.

I don't doubt that many people would have voted Leave regardless of any warnings / promises * made during the campaign. But I also don't doubt that many people voted Leave because they believed what they were being told.

Given what's at stake, the people should be asked again whether they want to do this. Informed consent, and all that.



* Bonus point if you get the cultural reference here!

Duty281 wrote:

Hero wrote:Such a shame that the Government don't appoint you Duty to sort out all the mess.
You read a 585 page document within 24 hours of release and you think the issue of customs and Northern Ireland is easy to sort out despite the EU and Britain's best negotiators spending months in deadlock trying to resolve it (and still haven't).

Based on what the European Parliament have said, we can maintain the common travel area with Northern Ireland and Eire. That's all I've said. I don't believe I've said anything specific about the customs union other than the UK should leave it.

And, please, it isn't really 585 pages of solid text because many of those pages are only half or even quarter-full.

From the Beeb...

Nigel Farage admits to BBC News that he has not read the full withdrawal agreement.
He says his lawyers have read it and of others claiming they have, "they are probably a liar".

Hero wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Hero wrote:Such a shame that the Government don't appoint you Duty to sort out all the mess.
You read a 585 page document within 24 hours of release and you think the issue of customs and Northern Ireland is easy to sort out despite the EU and Britain's best negotiators spending months in deadlock trying to resolve it (and still haven't).

Based on what the European Parliament have said, we can maintain the common travel area with Northern Ireland and Eire. That's all I've said. I don't believe I've said anything specific about the customs union other than the UK should leave it.

And, please, it isn't really 585 pages of solid text because many of those pages are only half or even quarter-full.

From the Beeb...

Nigel Farage admits to BBC News that he has not read the full withdrawal agreement.
He says his lawyers have read it and of others claiming they have, "they are probably a liar".

Damn you, Nige. Still love the guy though. Absolute ledge.

Duty281 wrote:Damn you, Nige. Still love the guy though. Absolute ledge.

If only he'd fall off it.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Damn you, Nige. Still love the guy though. Absolute ledge.

If only he'd fall off it.

And into my arms. I like your thinking.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Amazing that the very definition of "democracy" is now one vote, once.

Country be damned.

It's one vote, once, followed by implementing the outcome of that vote. The country voted for this.

Exactly, Prawn struggles to grasp this.

If, after the implementation of the 2016 EU Referendum result, there is sufficient public interest about rejoining the EU, then I welcome a vote on it.

Certainly not 'one vote, once'.

Amazing. You and I agree . Personally, I think this is an utter screw up from start to finish (whatever that is), but 'we' voted for this. Now we have to deal with it, and that doesn't mean having another vote before implementation because we voted 'wrong' last time. It is reversible, but only if the party that initiates that wants to alienate ~52% of the country for the foreseeable future and is happy to deal with the fallout, some of which could easily get violent.

Personally, I hope that Johnson, Rees-Mogg et al are metaphorically hung, drawn and quartered over this. Cameron too. Don't expect you to agree with this last bit though .

If the recent Channel 4 survey is anything to go by, that party would be alienating a significantly lower percentage of the population than that.

I don't doubt that many people would have voted Leave regardless of any warnings / promises * made during the campaign. But I also don't doubt that many people voted Leave because they believed what they were being told.

Given what's at stake, the people should be asked again whether they want to do this. Informed consent, and all that.



* Bonus point if you get the cultural reference here!

You don't get to have another vote all of a sudden, just because you didn't like the first one. We may well get that, but I'd totally understand the fury it would undoubtedly unleash. Those remainers that didn't vote last time because they thought it wasn't needed might want to take a look at themselves...

Recent C4 survey? Surveys pre-Referendum didn't turn out all that accurate did they? What people say they'll do and what they actually do with pencil in hand at a ballot box are often nowhere near the same thing.

I don't believe the 'fury' would be that great. There'd be fury among those who were anti-EU from the outset, without question, but I don't believe there's a huge number of them - certainly well short of the 52% that voted Leave. I do think that a significant number of people that voted Leave in 2016 are aghast at the way things have turned out, and I don't believe they should just have to take their medicine. Having said that, I do think a painful no-deal Brexit is about the only thing that'll make some people realise our true place in the world, and that the days of empire are long gone.

I know a lot of this is speculation on my part. But I think we should find out for sure. I think it's too important not to find out.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I don't believe the 'fury' would be that great. There'd be fury among those who were anti-EU from the outset, without question, but I don't believe there's a huge number of them - certainly well short of the 52% that voted Leave. I do think that a significant number of people that voted Leave in 2016 are aghast at the way things have turned out, and I don't believe they should just have to take their medicine. Having said that, I do think a painful no-deal Brexit is about the only thing that'll make some people realise our true place in the world, and that the days of empire are long gone.

According to Lord Ashcroft's post-referendum poll, 58% of Leave voters knew how they were going to vote before the campaign began in earnest. So that's around ten million who would be furious. And there's still no evidence of any significant number of Leave voters regretting their choice.

What is 'our true place in the world', out of interest, and who doesn't believe that the 'days of Empire are long gone'?

Hang on, polls are accurate now?

Our place in the world is as a nation equal to any other. We'll be of less value to the US outside the EU than we are as a member state. Those countries queuing up to do trade deals with us won't be bowing and scraping.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Hang on, polls are accurate now?

Our place in the world is as a nation equal to any other. We'll be of less value to the US outside the EU than we are as a member state. Those countries queuing up to do trade deals with us won't be bowing and scraping.

They're a better guideline than someone's personal opinion, certainly. For a definitive example of that, see Rory Stewart this morning - he thought that around 80% of the public would support Theresa's deal, but a YouGov poll pegged the figure at 19%.

Duty281 wrote:...see Rory Stewart this morning - he thought that around 80% of the public would support Theresa's deal...

Oh come on, you know he didn't. He was clumsy and mis-spoke but he didn't actually think that.
Hang on, is Duty trying to mislead us? Surely not!

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:...see Rory Stewart this morning - he thought that around 80% of the public would support Theresa's deal...

Oh come on, you know he didn't. He was clumsy and mis-spoke but he didn't actually think that.
Hang on, is Duty trying to mislead us? Surely not!

He must have misspoke an awful lot! Three times he reiterated this ('this' being the vast majority would support Theresa's deal).

82 are saying they will vote this down on the Tory side..

May won't get 77 Labour mps..

Time....to....go.

Duty281 wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I don't believe the 'fury' would be that great. There'd be fury among those who were anti-EU from the outset, without question, but I don't believe there's a huge number of them - certainly well short of the 52% that voted Leave. I do think that a significant number of people that voted Leave in 2016 are aghast at the way things have turned out, and I don't believe they should just have to take their medicine. Having said that, I do think a painful no-deal Brexit is about the only thing that'll make some people realise our true place in the world, and that the days of empire are long gone.

According to Lord Ashcroft's post-referendum poll, 58% of Leave voters knew how they were going to vote before the campaign began in earnest. So that's around ten million who would be furious. And there's still no evidence of any significant number of Leave voters regretting their choice.

What is 'our true place in the world', out of interest, and who doesn't believe that the 'days of Empire are long gone'?

Easy to decide whether you dislike foreigners or not.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I don't believe the 'fury' would be that great. There'd be fury among those who were anti-EU from the outset, without question, but I don't believe there's a huge number of them - certainly well short of the 52% that voted Leave. I do think that a significant number of people that voted Leave in 2016 are aghast at the way things have turned out, and I don't believe they should just have to take their medicine. Having said that, I do think a painful no-deal Brexit is about the only thing that'll make some people realise our true place in the world, and that the days of empire are long gone.

I know a lot of this is speculation on my part. But I think we should find out for sure. I think it's too important not to find out.

Good point.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:82 are saying they will vote this down on the Tory side..

May won't get 77 Labour mps..

Time....to....go.

Let's see what happens if/when those wonders of the modern political sphere actually have to put their money/careers where their mouths are.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:82 are saying they will vote this down on the Tory side..

May won't get 77 Labour mps..

Time....to....go.

She'll probably survive the no confidence vote. Agree that the deal is pretty much sunk already. Even if she had 400 Tory MPs in the house, it would still be pretty damn tough to get through.

The only thing about a possible VNOC vote is that it is secret ballot....

If her margin isn't healthy she will have a problem...because she has no majority..

Funny piece here:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/20/erg-european-research-group-jacob-rees-mogg

Look at that picture. The future of Britain.

Pr4wn wrote:Funny piece here:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/20/erg-european-research-group-jacob-rees-mogg

Look at that picture. The future of Britain.

Yeah. Tom Peck in the Independent had a similar take:

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jacob-reesmogg-brexit-erg-theresa-may-latest-dads-army-meaningful-vote-steve-baker-a8643296.html

They'd better be careful though or they'll have that loon, Rees-Mogg, complaining that the mainstream media have it in for him. Then again, there's a glaringly obvious reason why that might be...

Indeed. He's clearly a vampire.

Amber Rudd has ruled out No deal saying there isn't a Parliamentary majority for it...which probably means a bollocking for her..

After all it is the threat of No deal that is May's only hope of getting it through...

Next PMQs Mr Corbyn....There is your attack line..

Regardless now of whether it's Deal or No Deal. The Brexit issue is not going to dissipate and go away and calm down. It will be informing elections now for the next 10 to 20 years or more, because the EU itself will not remain static. There are enough internal tensions (disregarding the entire UK question) that will clearly mean other referendums and disruptions within the EU itself. And each time there is a change of direction, the UK will be in a mood to say 'hang on here, if you lot are tearing up or modifying your agreements with each other, then we're tearing up any old agreement we signed with you too.'

It doesn't matter how legally binding agreements are - time changes them or breaks them.

I was under the impression that since A50 was triggered No Deal was the default?

According to write ups of PMQs...The PM threatened dissenting mps with staying in the EU if they voted her deal down and then told them later on the UK would be leaving the EU on March 29 next year come what may..

Deary me..

Interesting poll and breakdown...

Do you support May's deal ???....YouGov

Yes 23%
No 45%

Support...

Con 39%
Lab 13%
Lib 26%

Have no doubts that support will increase with every charm offensive on simpering media..

But Labour opposing the deal does seem to be in order with its vote..

Could be a close run thing..Personally I would like a 2nd referendum....Not sure what happens next !!

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-void-high-court-ruling-arron-banks-investigation-when-december-christmas-a8649001.html

All I want for Christmas...

Even if the High Court did declare the advisory referendum 'void' (an outcome about as likely as Canada winning next year's Rugby World Cup), it would make no impact on the legally binding legislation that has passed through Parliament relating to the referendum in the last two years.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Julius, there's no point. Apparently a referendum two years ago, a GE in which the only pro-leave party didn't win a single seat and the somewhat pro-leave government lost its majority and "further research" - whatever that means - are concrete proof that the majority of people want to leave the EU...

What has any of this got to do with it? There was a referendum, the country voted 'out' at the time ergo the majority of people wanted to leave. End of. There's no new referendum coming and the numbers wanting to leave hasn't noticeably shifted such anyone could justify another referendum.

It was a direct response so Duty's previous post. Keep up.

Calm down.

What you posted was irrelevant whataboutery.

The Police?

Two Labour mps that May was counting on Nandy and Snell have said they will be voting against the Govt...Which leaves only two declared Labour rebels..

I imagine the Govt will cut into these 80 odd Tories that say they are voting against but it still looks a big ask..

Maybe she can do a bit more dancing.....Us mere mortals like her dancing apparently..Perhaps chuck in a few "Magic Money Trees" too..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Two Labour mps that May was counting on Nandy and Snell have said they will be voting against the Govt...Which leaves only two declared Labour rebels..

I imagine the Govt will cut into these 80 odd Tories that say they are voting against but it still looks a big ask..

Maybe she can do a bit more dancing.....Us mere mortals like her dancing apparently..Perhaps chuck in a few "Magic Money Trees" too..

Why not? It's worked before. Did for Corby and his 'abolish fees!' nonsense.

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Two Labour mps that May was counting on Nandy and Snell have said they will be voting against the Govt...Which leaves only two declared Labour rebels..

I imagine the Govt will cut into these 80 odd Tories that say they are voting against but it still looks a big ask..

Maybe she can do a bit more dancing.....Us mere mortals like her dancing apparently..Perhaps chuck in a few "Magic Money Trees" too..

Why not? It's worked before. Did for Corby and his 'abolish fees!' nonsense.

Tuition fees should be abolished for those studying engineering (mech, elec, civ, chem, etc.), physics and maths for example. Those studying politics/law/philosophy/business admin/modern history/media studies etc should pay double and made to clean the digs of the aforementioned, once a week without fail.

The 'cleaning the digs' bit would cause riots on campuses across the country.

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Two Labour mps that May was counting on Nandy and Snell have said they will be voting against the Govt...Which leaves only two declared Labour rebels..

I imagine the Govt will cut into these 80 odd Tories that say they are voting against but it still looks a big ask..

Maybe she can do a bit more dancing.....Us mere mortals like her dancing apparently..Perhaps chuck in a few "Magic Money Trees" too..

Why not? It's worked before. Did for Corby and his 'abolish fees!' nonsense.

How do you know it worked ????.......Need a breakdown of why people voted......Not everyone votes out of self interest.

I don't !!!..

I know the primary reason most people voted Labour was the NHS in 2017...By a big margin..

The Guardian reckons, at the moment, 230 will vote in favour of the deal, with 409 against. 90 Tory rebels in that latter number - would expect at least half to crumble.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Two Labour mps that May was counting on Nandy and Snell have said they will be voting against the Govt...Which leaves only two declared Labour rebels..

I imagine the Govt will cut into these 80 odd Tories that say they are voting against but it still looks a big ask..

Maybe she can do a bit more dancing.....Us mere mortals like her dancing apparently..Perhaps chuck in a few "Magic Money Trees" too..

Why not? It's worked before. Did for Corby and his 'abolish fees!' nonsense.

How do you know it worked ????.......Need a breakdown of why people voted......Not everyone votes out of self interest.

I don't !!!..

I know the primary reason most people voted Labour was the NHS in 2017...By a big margin..

Evidence? The fees comment was in relation to just the demographic that jumped on Corbyn's stupid promise because they'd be direct beneficiaries or have kids who would be. Can't remember what Comrade Corbyn promised for the NHS, but you can bet it was pie in the sky and not honestly costed or with those costs discussed with the voting public. Just for balance, I think the Tories are schidt as well.

Evidence was in the polling taken after the Election..

Brexit was the biggest trigger for Tories.

NHS for Labour...

By quite some way..

Why don't you try to be less hysterical when you post...There is a chance I might take your posts more seriously..

You know Navy, interacting with you isn't fun any more at all. You just condescend and spout bitterness. What happened?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Evidence was in the polling taken after the Election..

Brexit was the biggest trigger for Tories.

NHS for Labour...

By quite some way..

Why don't you try to be less hysterical when you post...There is a chance I might take your posts more seriously..

You ruin so much of what you post with snide comments like this, you know. I was just asking you if you could post to the evidence that the NHS was the issue you suggested it was. My comment re. student HE fees was to illustrate that the use of so-called money trees isn't restricted to the PM. The rest was me commenting (you know, my OPINION) on Corbyn's and Tory behaviour.

Pr4wn wrote:You know Navy, interacting with you isn't fun any more at all. You just condescend and spout bitterness. What happened?

I woke up? I don't see a lot re. Brexit, Trump etc to be anything but bitter about. Condescension? Sometimes maybe. We're all guilty of it at times though aren't we? Even you.

Moving on...

I see a debate has been arranged for Dec 9 between May and Corbyn..

Not sure what the point is ??.....Giving Corbyn a kicking isn't going to convince 360 mps a crap deal is a good one.

All gone very silly Billy..

God, UK are missing Thatcher. Such a dynamic time and yet the Commons so boring. "I replied to the right honourable gentleman some time ago"....................................

It's a sad time indeed when the fireworks, such as they are, are taken care of by a self-preening Speaker, who acts like a smothered cough is rowdy dissent of the highest order. He too should have been around in Thatcher's time. Then he'd know real fire and brimstone taunts and accusations rolling across the aisles.

The good old days