Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:No it isn't, the person who made those comments has been milkshaked four times now. Hopefully, he'll get drenched a few more times, then put in prison.
And who's "you lot"?
Think it depends on how the Brexit talks go.Elizabeth wrote:While it is the case that Labour want a GE before another referendum, what makes you think a new Tory PM will result in a GE?
Well I would say that there's a very strong chance, and if by any chance it's Johnson then it's a virtual certainty because Labour will call for a vote of no confidence in him, and there are a number of Tories who won't vote for him at any price.Elizabeth wrote:While it is the case that Labour want a GE before another referendum, what makes you think a new Tory PM will result in a GE?
I'll ask you again.Lancasterclaret wrote:Think it depends on how the Brexit talks go.
As there is no prospect of a "No Deal" through Parliament, then it might be the only way out of it that isn't a 2nd ref.
Your wrong opinion.gandhisflipflop wrote:Yes it is. And you are part of the deranged left which is what I was referring to. Again, my opinion.
That is your prerogative.Elizabeth wrote:That is pushing it a bit.
If there was a referendum tomorrow with a choice between a 'compromise deal' and 'remain' you would vote for the deal.
I don't believe you
Leave.Elizabeth wrote: If there was another referendum and there were two choices between a compromise deal and remain which way would you vote?
So how would you vote?
I'd have to see the dealElizabeth wrote:OK I'll put it another way.
If there was another referendum and there were two choices between a compromise deal and remain which way would you vote?
You said if there was a choice between No Deal and remain you would vote remain.
So having been clear on that choice it follows that anyone who proclaims themselves consistent since Day1 should be able to say how they would vote in a referendum whatever the choices.
So how would you vote?
That's the option May has given MP's today.Lancasterclaret wrote:That is your prerogative.
That option will not happen so I'm pretty comfortable with my position.
Welcome back Charlie.Juxtaposition wrote:Leave.eu found throwing drinks on politicians hilarious a few days ago.
Now, not so much.
I must've missed the thread from all the right-wingers condemning finding pleasure in such a heinous act of attempted murder. Oh, I forgot you're all hypocrites.
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-st ... -1-6061986" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It's got no chance though, because it's conditionalDamo wrote:That's the option May has given MP's today.
Again, your prerogative.Elizabeth wrote:Let me put this to you.
Based on how you have argued from Day 1, I am sure that there would be no compromise deal that you would be happy with. You would always find a reason to say any deal would not be in the economic interests of the UK.
I would go further and claim that you voted remain and would always vote remain in any referendum.
I don't think you have the courage to admit that
Whose being personal?Elizabeth wrote:You see that's the problem I have.
And seeing as you have brought this down to a personal level I will respond, with politeness.
You like to wear as a badge of honour what you perceive as your consistency. When in fact it could well be a badge of dishonour.
You say I know you have been consistent. Well I don't, only in calling genuine posters who have different views names such as racists and idiots. You even went as far as challenging the moderators to ban you last week after another of your rants against the racists on this board.
Name calling is easy, anyone could do that. However most of us choose to make our points in a more assertive way and let others decide.
Yup, and her husband admitted that the C4 story was true as well.ClaretAndJew wrote:At least Elizabeth knows there are racists on here.
They have been mainly funded by over 100,000 people paying £25. The electoral commission found no evidence of misuse at all.Lancasterclaret wrote:They clearly want to hide who funds them though.
Thats why C4 have been banned.
We will.Lowbankclaret wrote:They have been mainly funded by over 100,000 people paying £25. The electoral commission found no evidence of misuse at all.
You cannot hide who funds you, it has to be declared if it’s over £500.
Because the current political parties are scared they are trying every tactic in the book to discredit the Brexit Party.
They don’t have a manifesto yet as they are only 5 weeks old.
The plan is to involve the whole 100,000 members in the creation of the manifesto. That could be a good thing or it could be a car crash. We will have to wait and see.
They're not just five weeks old though are they, they were founded last year. Change UK have managed a manifesto and are a lot newer.Lowbankclaret wrote: They don’t have a manifesto yet as they are only 5 weeks old.
The plan is to involve the whole 100,000 members in the creation of the manifesto. That could be a good thing or it could be a car crash. We will have to wait and see.
I think you've mixed up months and weeks there.Lowbankclaret wrote:They have been mainly funded by over 100,000 people paying £25. The electoral commission found no evidence of misuse at all.
You cannot hide who funds you, it has to be declared if it’s over £500.
Because the current political parties are scared they are trying every tactic in the book to discredit the Brexit Party.
They don’t have a manifesto yet as they are only 5 weeks old.
The plan is to involve the whole 100,000 members in the creation of the manifesto. That could be a good thing or it could be a car crash. We will have to wait and see.
There appear to be questions over the number of people signing up:Lowbankclaret wrote:They have been mainly funded by over 100,000 people paying £25. The electoral commission found no evidence of misuse at all.
You cannot hide who funds you, it has to be declared if it’s over £500.
Because the current political parties are scared they are trying every tactic in the book to discredit the Brexit Party.
They don’t have a manifesto yet as they are only 5 weeks old.
The plan is to involve the whole 100,000 members in the creation of the manifesto. That could be a good thing or it could be a car crash. We will have to wait and see.
I wouldn't put too much weight on that story. That method of traffic analysis isn't particularly accurate so it's not really conclusive either way.AndrewJB wrote:There appear to be questions over the number of people signing up:
https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/stat ... 7719426049" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
its been three years Damo, everything has been tried to get a Brexit that doesn't f**k the country. Everything.Damo wrote:May came out in parliament yesterday and said that it's her deal (not Brexit.) Or no Brexit at all.
Do you seriously think brexiteers care who is donating, and how much to the brexit party?
You are going to have to come up with a better reason than that to convince people who have been completely ignored by our elected government, that the Brexit party are the dodgy lot
However, I think this is a very dangerous stance which I find difficult to reconcile. Complaining that on the one hand that politicians are ignoring the people but on the other hand you don't care if they receive millions in pounds in secret don't seem to be two stances that go together.Damo wrote:I couldn't care less who pays for the junk mail that gets posted through my door. Or who's house Farage lives in.
Not when you compare it to having my vote completely ignored by the people we elected
I've explained plenty of times pal.Lancasterclaret wrote:its been three years Damo, everything has been tried to get a Brexit that doesn't f**k the country. Everything.
You are possibly the most sensible Brexit voter on here, and you've always seen where people like me are coming from.
But you still want it (and I'm sure you are not alone!)
I don't know how to convince someone that Farage is a dodgy chancer, when its really obvious he's a dodgy chancer. He's set up a party, with thousands of pounds worth of funding (how to do it dodgily highlighted by me further up the thread) and no real controls over what he does.
Its got to be questioned, and when it is, the news organisations are banned.
Alarm bells are ringing like mad in my head, why are they not in yours?
It’s nothing to do with backbone, it’s two irreconcilable sets of red lines. The EU aren’t going to budge and we aren’t going to budge and in those circumstances it’s probably true that May’s deal was the best we can get.Damo wrote:I've explained plenty of times pal.
I dont want no deal, but what has been negotiated is pathetic. MP's ruled out no deal, and in the process, took away any kind of bargaining power we had.
I'm not happy with May's deal (is anybody?)
I would rather article 50 be revoked and have it all done again by someone with some backbone. Be that Farrage, Johnsone or someone else.
It shouldn't matter what she is paid and who she is paid by (obviously it does, but I'm making a point here)aggi wrote:Theresa May £100m a year in secret would you have no issue with that?
No.Steve1956 wrote:Forgive me I don't tend to follow these type of threads are Ringo & Elizabeth an item? Or even the same person?
Should the senior positions in the civil service, those permanent under secretary positions for example, the chief executives and heads of service at the Council also be voted in?Damo wrote:It shouldn't matter what she is paid and who she is paid by (obviously it does, but I'm making a point here)
May should answer to the electorate.
So should the ministers in the council of the European commission.
That is basically my whole issue with the EU.
It's nothing to do with immigration, or subsidies or anything else.
I want the people who make decisions that affect the people to be accountable for them. Every 5 years or so
You are incredibly two-faced aren't you?RingoMcCartney wrote:What a joy to behold.
Sore loser message board Remoaners arguing the toss as to when the Brexit Party was formed/founded/launched.!
The electoral commission leaving the Brexit Partys office with their tale between their Establishment legs! Being forced to admit to giving them a clean bill of health!
Guardian journalists with an anti Brexit Party agenda desperately flailing round to find any bit of mud to sling!
Seeing the gap toothed Guy Verhofstat getting increasingly hysterical about the rise of parties all over Europe!
CONCLUSION- The unprecedented phenomenonal rise of the Brexit Party as got 'em well and truly rattled!
This is what you said yesterday and here you are, belittling everyone who voted to remain!RingoMcCartney wrote:Nobody is saying the losing side in the referendum should be silenced.
They seem to have destroyed their own story (while of course not actually rewriting it or making it clear that it was, essentially, garbage written by people who didn't know what they were talking about)AndrewJB wrote:There appear to be questions over the number of people signing up:
https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/stat ... 7719426049" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I said "Nobody is saying the losing side in the referendum should be silenced."Spijed wrote:You are incredibly two-faced aren't you?
This is what you said yesterday and here you are, belittling everyone who voted to remain!
Lowbankclaret wrote:They have been mainly funded by over 100,000 people paying £25. The electoral commission found no evidence of misuse at all.
You cannot hide who funds you, it has to be declared if it’s over £500.
Because the current political parties are scared they are trying every tactic in the book to discredit the Brexit Party.
They don’t have a manifesto yet as they are only 5 weeks old.
The plan is to involve the whole 100,000 members in the creation of the manifesto. That could be a good thing or it could be a car crash. We will have to wait and see.
The fact you've said "obviously it does" suggests that you don't really agree with your own point.Damo wrote:It shouldn't matter what she is paid and who she is paid by (obviously it does, but I'm making a point here)
May should answer to the electorate.
So should the ministers in the council of the European commission.
That is basically my whole issue with the EU.
It's nothing to do with immigration, or subsidies or anything else.
I want the people who make decisions that affect the people to be accountable for them. Every 5 years or so