RayC

Bad food? 50 years ago you were right. Nowadays - thanks to immigrants mainly - choice and quality of cuisine has greatly improved. Bad teeth? Maybe but those braces and uniform pearly whites seen in the US mean that sunglasses are a necessity. Speak funny? Now you are 'aving a larf?

And yet by following the same EU directives and regulations as the UK, the French energy sector has thrived. Very strange.

Neither have many recent chancellors e.g. Osborne, kwarteng.

Can I interest anyone in a bowl of whale head soup or, perhaps, some bear cub pate?

Another of your private conversations?😉 In any event, that may or may not be the case, but it's not the answer to the question which I posed.

Where is the evidence to support that contention?

Didn't you state previously that "Oirish" - your often used prefix - Joe Biden was anti-British? However, you now suggest that American Liberals - presumably this grouping includes Biden? - are obsequious in their dealings with British Royalty. Seems contradictory.

So basically women are money-grabbing prostitutes in your eyes?

Nothing like the same thing. And btw in your example a crime will have been committed.

Thanks for posting a fact. Unfortunately, it lives in splendid isolation amongst the bias, misogynist opinion in this thread. I have no idea whether a rape took place as I haven't followed the case or read the evidence. However, trivialities such as having a prior knowledge of the details of the case do not stop the misogynists knowing that McGregor has no case to answer. Instead, they know intuitively that the woman was an opportunist, who was influenced by McGregor's purse for the Mayweather fight among other things to gain a 'pay day'.

The Pfizer executive did not say that the vaccine "did not stop transmission". Pfizer stated that their vaccine was not tested to see whether it reduced the incidence of transmission before it was launched. However, Initial studies did indeed suggest that the vaccine reduced the incidence of transmission of the virus, although later studies have questioned this conclusion (hindsight is a wonderful thing). Given what was known at the time (2021), why should an individual, who didn't wish to be vaccinated, be permitted to increase my risk of contamination? I certainly didn't sanction it. These individuals knew that by refusing to be vaccinated, they might lose their jobs. The decision whether to vaccinate was forced upon them, but they were not coerced into being vaccinated: The decision was the individual's and the individual's alone.

Perhaps Trump - or someone else - could commission a new bust of Churchill. Imo this one is bloody awful and should be melted down.

No it wasn't. It was a change in the conditions of employment. You either accepted it or you didn't. The choice rested with the individual.

+/-20% of the US population remain unvaccinated against COVID and +/-10% in England. This knocks your theory that the population was forced into taking the vaccine into a cocked hat. Whether to be vaccinated (or not) was, quite rightly, left to the individual.

You appear to believe that it is almost sacreligious to levy any criticism at the Blessed Nig. No, you didn't mention GB News, I did. It is another of Farage's activities which is unrelated to his constituency work. I've no idea how much time Ed Davey spends in his constituency, but it appears that he at least holds some surgeries there, which is more than you can say for Farage https://www.kingstonlibdems.org.uk/eddavey-mp/contact https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1l47e86r39o.amp I am a betting man, and if I can find a bookie offering some decent odds, I'll place a bet on Farage not featuring in the short-list for 'Constituency MP of the Year'.

Ahh ... It's not an invasion. It's nothing more than 'A special Military Operation'. Same same but different. Not in this case. I'm well aware of the size of Russia. You may not believe that Russia wants more terrority but the fact remains that Putin views Ukraine as part of Russia http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181 I can only assume that the set of " ... real experts, professors at highly acclaimed western and eastern universities", to whom you have listened did not extend, for example, to the academics at Dartmouth College or the experts at Chatham House. https://home.dartmouth.edu/news/2023/02/voices-russian-invasion-ukraine-one-year https://www.chathamhouse.org/2021/05/myths-and-misconceptions-debate-russia/myth-01-russia-and-west-are-bad-each-other There are two indisputable pertinent facts, not mere opinion: 1) Ukraine has internationally agreed borders which Russia has violated 2) If Russia had not invaded, the deaths of military personnel - on both sides - and of innocent, Ukrainian citizens would not have occurred. Those simple, undeniable facts mean that Putin has blood on his hands.

I clearly am. Not sure how I missed that? Thanks for pointing it out. Imo increased globalization meant that simply remaining as a trading block was never an option. I accept that the EU is far from perfect. For example, Imo transferring some functions from the Commission to the Parliament would improve transparency and accountability. More importantly, it is difficult to see how monetary union can be made to work efficiently and effectively for all members at the same moment in time. Nevertheless, I still believe that the UK is better off inside the tent than outside.

For the third time: "The topic is about what the Trump presidency might mean for the UK. This naturally leads to a discussion about how the UK might mitigate any potential negative effects. One suggestion is to forge closer ties with our European neighbours, so discussion about EU/UK relations is very much 'on topic'." (Potentially rejoining the EU forms part of a discussion of EU/UK relations so, again, very much 'on topic')"

So that's it. Farage's prime responsibility is to the viewers of GB News rather than his constituents in Clacton? You'll clearly hear no criticism of the blessed Nig.

Have a look at yourself. Your response when challenged about anything in this thread is to either reply with a bored emoji or some ridiculous one-liner. I agree. No point us continuing this type of puerile exchange. Bye. How a nice weekend.

What a bizarre comment. Why would you expect the elected leader of the EU to be apolitical? Why would someone not interested in politics want to stand for the position?

It's me and me alone. There is no one else among the 70 million UK inhabitants or UK voters overseas who thinks that we should have closer ties with our European neighbours. You really are getting desperate 🤦

AV is a form of PR. No, I don't. His full-time job should be looking after the interests of his constituents. That is what he was elected to do. His role as leader of Reform is secondary. If he has got too much on his plate, then he needs to prioritise. Perhaps, he could start by cutting down on the amount of time that he spends in the US. I doubt that very many of the 4 million Reform voters reside there.

My point was that most of the current UK trade deals have nothing nothing to do with Brexit. The UK doesn't seem to be making much progress on sorting out its' own deals. The UK/ CPTPP deal was meant to be signed in 2022, but has been delayed by a dispute regarding access to the UK agricultural market, a problem which caused talks about a bi-lateral UK-Canada deal to be curtailed. It is by no means certain that the UK/ CPTPP deal will be signed. Moreover, welcome as any deals may be, the estimated financial benefit of joining CPTPP are small compared to the estimated losses of leaving the single market: Modelling suggests joining CPTPP could boost UK GDP by around £13.5 billion every year in the long-run (Source: gov.uk). To put this into context, the Centre for European Research estimated that leaving the Single Market cost the UK £12.9 billion in December 2021 alone (https://www.cer.eu/insights/cost-brexit-december-2021#:~:text=For%20many%20months%2C%20the%20CER's,the%20month%20(Chart%201). Nevertheless, you are correct any bi-lateral trade deals struck by the UK since Brexit - including CPTPP - would present a stumbling block to rejoining. We would probably face a stark choice i.e. rip up these deals or remain outside of the EU. If it's a purely financial decision, imo the choice seems obvious.

It is a bit disingenuous to focus solely on the 2024 election when highlighting the anomalies caused by FPTP. No government has won more than 50% of the vote since 1935. The current Labour government has as much of a mandate to govern as any other elected under FPTP. Notwithstanding that, I am in total agreement with you about the unfairness of the FPTP system. Unfortunately, the UK electorate did not share our view and rejected PR. I would think that support for PR has increased over the past decade - although I have no empirical evidence to support that claim - but whether those of us who favour PR are now in a majority is unlikely. Imo Farage has been one of the most important political voices in the UK this century. Without him, I doubt that there would have been a Brexit referendum, so his influence is clear. However, if The Guardian article is factually correct, then, to date, Farage has spent a risible proportion of his time since the election in Clacton. If he wishes to voice his support for overseas causes and politicians that is his perojective, but it should not be at the expense of his constituents. Farage is not a minister, so his focus should be the same as any other MP i.e. on the needs of his constituents.