33 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Go to the bottom of the class that glib but wrong answer. Try again. And if you get it wrong this time, I will begin to suspect you had a state education.

 

 

I did have a state education.

 

I sent my children to few paying schools because of the smaller class sizes and lack of bullying. Bedales.

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Agree that Brexit and the deal should have been debated more across parliament as soon as the result was known. The deal? Well who really knows who did what when that was put together - no information, detailed progress reports or transparency (plenty of press conferences which gave away nothing). This "deal" is awful.

 

But the problem with people like Boles is that he must have had a fair idea of what his voters interpreted as Brexit when he stood in 2017 and also what his voters expected of him. His local party association will have spent time, money and effort to help him get elected. He knew his own party manifesto and, after voting to trigger Article 50, I would hope and expect that he knew that it includes the possibility of leaving with no deal after 2 years. It's no good protesting against no deal after voting for the trigger. That's why I regard Boles and the rest as deselectable.

 

 

By all means deselect candidates. Don't use it as a threat or be prepared to have your threat handed back with garnishes

5 hours ago, Grouse said:

What a silly comment

No it wasnt a silly comment , it was a fact .

It is an undeniable fact , which you couldnt deny  , so, you just said it was "silly"

Yes, you and your like, when you have no answer to facts , just start name calling .

You cannot deal with the fact that I posted .

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

By all means deselect candidates. Don't use it as a threat or be prepared to have your threat handed back with garnishes

Make me sneeze!

5 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The most relevant word you have used there is trust.

I think it's the correct word. I think one should trust an MP to act in whichever way he believes is best for their constituents and country. Some constituents are not going to be 100% happy. I reiterate constituents, not just those constituents who voted CON or happen to be members of the Conservative association in the area.

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

He's treating bullies with the contempt they deserve. Good.

 

Any others who are threatened should act in the same way.

 

Who exactly are Conservative Associations? Golfers? Free Masons? Are they the arbiters of democracy now? Our constitution has been standing for a very long time; I don't want it changed by a bunch of anally retentive gammons thank you.

 

 

He's on Marr later. It's a pity the latter isn't Robin Day.

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I think it's the correct word. I think one should trust an MP to act in whichever way he believes is best for their constituents and country. Some constituents are not going to be 100% happy. I reiterate constituents, not just those constituents who voted CON or happen to be members of the Conservative association in the area.

Perhaps he should have stood as an independent then? Then he wouldn't have had to con the Cons! I think you like him because he favours your pet N+ plan, at least temporarily. 

14 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I did have a state education.

 

I sent my children to few paying schools because of the smaller class sizes and lack of bullying. Bedales.

Now I know where the inferiority complex comes from!

6 minutes ago, sanemax said:

No it wasnt a silly comment , it was a fact .

It is an undeniable fact , which you couldnt deny  , so, you just said it was "silly"

Yes, you and your like, when you have no answer to facts , just start name calling .

You cannot deal with the fact that I posted .

Well I looked at your post again, considered it and conclude that it is indeed silly.

 

In a GE, ones vote is acted upon immediately. You can vote for someone else five years later. I don't care for fixed term parliaments BTW

 

In the referendum, you were asked if you favoured leaving or remaining in the EU. The CONs agreed to implement your decision; period. AND foolish.

 

Even though you didn't vote, I believe, parliament has acted on your advice. Much time and money and effort has been concentrated on this for two years. Much information has now been provided and all sorts of things have been discovered. I for one have learned a great deal. If you haven't, then I am sorry for you.

 

Nothing has been implemented. The meaningful vote has not passed parliament. Brexit leaving day is in two weeks and could be stopped if parliament so decrees.

 

To say that people can not vote again on the basis of what has need discovered over that past three years is indeed silly. I am being polite.

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Well I looked at your post again, considered it and conclude that it is indeed silly.

 

In a GE, ones vote is acted upon immediately. You can vote for someone else five years later. I don't care for fixed term parliaments BTW

 

In the referendum, you were asked if you favoured leaving or remaining in the EU. The CONs agreed to implement your decision; period. AND foolish.

 

Even though you didn't vote, I believe, parliament has acted on your advice. Much time and money and effort has been concentrated on this for two years. Much information has now been provided and all sorts of things have been discovered. I for one have learned a great deal. If you haven't, then I am sorry for you.

 

Nothing has been implemented. The meaningful vote has not passed parliament. Brexit leaving day is in two weeks and could be stopped if parliament so decrees.

 

To say that people can not vote again on the basis of what has need discovered over that past three years is indeed silly. I am being polite.

Yes very polite. Are you OK?

Just now, Grouse said:

Well I looked at your post again, considered it and conclude that it is indeed silly.

 

In a GE, ones vote is acted upon immediately. You can vote for someone else five years later. I don't care for fixed term parliaments BTW

 

In the referendum, you were asked if you favoured leaving or remaining in the EU. The CONs agreed to implement your decision; period. AND foolish.

 

Even though you didn't vote, I believe, parliament has acted on your advice. Much time and money and effort has been concentrated on this for two years. Much information has now been provided and all sorts of things have been discovered. I for one have learned a great deal. If you haven't, then I am sorry for you.

 

Nothing has been implemented. The meaningful vote has not passed parliament. Brexit leaving day is in two weeks and could be stopped if parliament so decrees.

 

To say that people can not vote again on the basis of what has need discovered over that past three years is indeed silly. I am being polite.

You misunderstood my post ,(I will refrain from commenting on your intelligence levels , I will leave that sort of thing to you ) .

   I shall explain again  . 

There is one specific election , one day for people to caste their vote .

Once a person has caste their vote for that election , once polling day is over , once all the votes have been counted , people cannot go back and ask for their vote to be changed .

   They can change their minds , but , they cannot change their vote .

They can change their mind and vote in future elections , but they cannot change the previous elections vote .

 

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

So that's the view from people who do the night shift in Liverpool! We should all take their advice. ????

You have it slightly wrong bro'.

 

Ron meets up with these people during the week and records his findings. Each week between 200 and 300 people cast their votes. This is not a legally binding poll. It is the thoughts of the good people of Liverpool*.

 

It does, however, reflect the feelings of the populous in those parts. His finding have been remarkably accurate.

 

You may not fully agree Grouse, but if A50 gets an extension then the euro elections will be, in effect, the so-called "people's vote".

 

* City in the North West of England. Great cultural traditions. Great music traditions. Great football pedigree.

 

Also, have a dock called Liverpool dock. And Williamson tunnels.

Edited March 17, 20197 yr by owl sees all

Interesting fact : Something like 80 % of the money that the E.U. spends (billions) goes to farmers and fisheries .

  The E.U. spends the money on subsidizing farmers , this caused over production and the farmers were told to stop growing things , yet they still receive their E.U. subsidy .

  Land owners are getting paid by the E.U for growing/doing nothing .

The Queen of England receives a large subsidy from the E.U , for growing nothing on her vast land .

2 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Interesting fact : Something like 80 % of the money that the E.U. spends (billions) goes to farmers and fisheries .

  The E.U. spends the money on subsidizing farmers , this caused over production and the farmers were told to stop growing things , yet they still receive their E.U. subsidy .

  Land owners are getting paid by the E.U for growing/doing nothing .

The Queen of England receives a large subsidy from the E.U , for growing nothing on her vast land .

Lucky for Remainers we didn't know all this before the Referendum. Otherwise, we'd have won by a landslide!

37 minutes ago, sanemax said:

You misunderstood my post ,(I will refrain from commenting on your intelligence levels , I will leave that sort of thing to you ) .

   I shall explain again  . 

There is one specific election , one day for people to caste their vote .

Once a person has caste their vote for that election , once polling day is over , once all the votes have been counted , people cannot go back and ask for their vote to be changed .

   They can change their minds , but , they cannot change their vote .

They can change their mind and vote in future elections , but they cannot change the previous elections vote .

 

Shergar mate ????

(Dead 'orse!)

30 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Interesting fact : Something like 80 % of the money that the E.U. spends (billions) goes to farmers and fisheries .

  The E.U. spends the money on subsidizing farmers , this caused over production and the farmers were told to stop growing things , yet they still receive their E.U. subsidy .

  Land owners are getting paid by the E.U for growing/doing nothing .

The Queen of England receives a large subsidy from the E.U , for growing nothing on her vast land .

So there is a lot of money coming back into the UK from the EU...it didnt say that on the side of the bus

Just now, bomber said:

So there is a lot of money coming back into the UK from the EU...it didnt say that on the side of the bus

People usually  read books to get information, rather than sides of buses

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

I think it's the correct word. I think one should trust an MP to act in whichever way he believes is best for their constituents and country. Some constituents are not going to be 100% happy. I reiterate constituents, not just those constituents who voted CON or happen to be members of the Conservative association in the area.

Not in the case of a single issue neverendum that is subsequently enhanced by their GE manifesto and support of A50.

If they had any integrity they'd step down and fight a by election.

Given your own pomposity i'm surprised you cannot see it.

20 hours ago, billd766 said:

So if we ever get Brexit and it is no deal then we simply slap 100% tariffs on goods in transit from Eire to the EU. They can't whine about that.

 

Then we blame the EU commissioner in charge of agriculture, Phil Hogan.

The point was Bill, its another cherry picking exercise. Despite what many seem to think the WTO is not a "do as you please" scenario, their rules are that all members are treated equally.

Of course we realise that does not mean much to TM, she tried to circumvent the UK rules, she tried to circumvent the EU rules and now she is trying to circumvent the WTO rules.

18 minutes ago, sandyf said:

The point was Bill, its another cherry picking exercise. Despite what many seem to think the WTO is not a "do as you please" scenario, their rules are that all members are treated equally.

Of course we realise that does not mean much to TM, she tried to circumvent the UK rules, she tried to circumvent the EU rules and now she is trying to circumvent the WTO rules.

Is that what is meant by ‘Britannia waives the rules’? Quite a popular expression in the other EU Member States..........????

Edited March 17, 20197 yr by damascase
Typo

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

I think it's the correct word. I think one should trust an MP to act in whichever way he believes is best for their constituents and country. Some constituents are not going to be 100% happy. I reiterate constituents, not just those constituents who voted CON or happen to be members of the Conservative association in the area.

Can I refer you to the words of Edmund Burke, Political Philosopher, when defining the standards of elected representatives...………….

"It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfaction, to constituents; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interests to his own".

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

Perhaps he should have stood as an independent then? Then he wouldn't have had to con the Cons! I think you like him because he favours your pet N+ plan, at least temporarily. 

Does he? That's good! I know he wants a softer Brexit and wants ratification by the electorate. Sounds like a reasonable type whatever you think of his Brexit views.

48 minutes ago, aright said:

Can I refer you to the words of Edmund Burke, Political Philosopher, when defining the standards of elected representatives...………….

"It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfaction, to constituents; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interests to his own".

I am a big fan of Burke. We may be having an agreement here. Are you sure you understand his quote? 

3 hours ago, nauseus said:

Perhaps he should have stood as an independent then? Then he wouldn't have had to con the Cons! I think you like him because he favours your pet N+ plan, at least temporarily. 

The man spoke well on Andrew Marr. Made the local Conservative Association Chairman look a total pillock 

 

This man wants a single market. He's been made a member of the national CON party. He's talking with the CON whips AND Corbyn. He backs May's deal. He's a one nation Tory.

 

We should support people like him.

7 hours ago, evadgib said:

You need not distract the board any further by trawling for evidence to back that up 49 but please accept my thanks for keeping the board entertained last night while ???????????????????????????? were cocking up the ???? 

 Again, you display the level of 'wit' which must make you popular with small children.

 

It's a shame that you can't bring that vast intellect to bear on actually answering questions and debating points.

 

Such as how do you feel now that your poster boy Jacob has indicated his probable support for May's deal in the next vote?

 

BTW, very telling that you consider providing evidence to back up a fact or an opinion as a distraction! 

Edited March 17, 20197 yr by 7by7
Addendum

4 hours ago, Grouse said:

It is astonishing to me that a person of your years and experience does not know how our representative democracy works, or at least is supposed to work. You, having the privilege of a vote, have the ability to select someone who you trust to take decisions in the best interests of ALL of all their constituents AND the country as a whole. I am getting very bored of explaining this to people who will not listen. Do you just take orders? Or can you think this through rationally? I believe that you are a former military man? What were you defending? The crown? The people? British democracy? What? If you want a different constitution then vote to change it!

What you seem not to understand is that most aspiring MPs are selected by the relevant party and few of them actually live in the constituency. They are presented to the local party and have rarely been challenged. 

 

IMHO at the next GE that will change as the voters and the local parties will not necessarily accept a candidate just because the party says so.

 

They have seen the totale debacle caused by the MPs representing themselves, their principle and their consciences and they are not happy about it. MPs, despite what you think and say are elected to represent their constituencies and NOT themselves.

 

Yes I am a former military man and I PROUDLY served my Queen and my country for 25 years. How about you? Were you another cadet bone spurs?

 

Yes I can think things through rationally which Is why I voted Brexit and a good reason why I get fed up with people like you who carp and niggle all the time and insult people when you don't have an answer.

 

Democracy is accepting that you have lost and not whining about it as you do on a daily basis.

 

BTW please show me where the constitution of the UK is laid down.

 

  4 hours ago, Grouse said:

He's treating bullies with the contempt they deserve. Good.

 

Any others who are threatened should act in the same way.

 

Who exactly are Conservative Associations? Golfers? Free Masons? Are they the arbiters of democracy now? Our constitution has been standing for a very long time; I don't want it changed by a bunch of anally retentive gammons thank you.

 

There you go once again, insulting people who you believe are not of your "superior class".

 

Nobody cares what you want, nor do people like being called a bunch of anally retentive gammons by some over educated person like you.

7 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

It would make for a more productive debate if you were to refrain from flogging the dead horse of alleged Brexiteer ignorance and give us your take on the Withdrawal Agreement.

 I already have, several times!

 

At the risk of incurring @evadgib's faux wrath by 'trawling back' to provide evidence; the two latest being

But you are correct; asking Brexiteers here to express their own opinion is flogging a dead horse; Only two have made any attempt to do so and both of those clammed up when I attempted to discuss their views further.

3 hours ago, sanemax said:

Interesting fact : Something like 80 % of the money that the E.U. spends (billions) goes to farmers and fisheries .

  The E.U. spends the money on subsidizing farmers , this caused over production and the farmers were told to stop growing things , yet they still receive their E.U. subsidy .

  Land owners are getting paid by the E.U for growing/doing nothing .

The Queen of England receives a large subsidy from the E.U , for growing nothing on her vast land .

Interesting remark but facts are innacurate. The CAP represents 37.7% of the EU budget and fisheries should not be much.

http://bruegel.org/2018/02/eu-budget-common-agricultural-policy-and-regional-policy-en-route-to-reform/

 

2 hours ago, damascase said:

Is that what is meant by ‘Britannia waives the rules’? Quite a popular expression in the other EU Member States..........????

Actually it was an attempt to lighten the day with humour.

 

Sorry that you didn't understand it.

1 minute ago, candide said:

Interesting remark but facts are innacurate. The CAP represents 37.7% of the EU budget and fisheries should not be much.

http://https://www.theweek.co.uk/91393/how-does-the-eu-spend-its-moneybrhttps://www.theweek.co.uk/91393/how-does-the-eu-spend-its-money

https://www.theweek.co.uk/91393/how-does-the-eu-spend-its-money