Brexit campaigner Boris Johnson to stand as next Conservative leader

[melvinmelvin]

With BJ in the driving seat, I am sure the Tories will sort out a Brexit deal with the EU and the UK Parliament

quite swiftly.

 

[7by7]

9 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Sorry but you're wrong. Investment management companies have a duty to investors to look after their interests. By opening up a Dublin fund in anticipation of Brexit, it will allow investors from the EU to put their money into a fund that is still under MIFID II rules. If the UK leaves the EU without a deal, it's possible EU investors would have to move their money out of Somerset Capital's investment funds, and the clients would suffer financially as a result. So they opened a Dublin fund to protect their clients. And of course so they can still make performance fees out of those clients - I'm not suggesting they do it purely out of kindness! 

Yes, investment companies do have a duty to look after the interests of their clients. Which is why they opened a fund in Dublin to protect their clients from the effects of Brexit etc. as you say. Clients including one Jacob Rees-Mogg; not just a client but also a partner.

 

But he tells us all the UK will be so much better off post Brexit; so why do he and his clients need protecting from the effects of Brexit when he tells us those effects will be so beneficial?

 

9 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Bomber was suggesting that JRM has moved his business to Dublin. That is simply not true. 

Suggesting Rees-Mogg had moved some of his business to Dublin; which is true.

 

Ok, maybe that was not his decision, but by going ahead with the move and keeping his money in that fund whilst telling the rest of us that the UK, not the EU, is the place to be smacks of hypocrisy.

 

9 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

People with differing points of view should all be able to vote. I've never suggested otherwise. 

Really?

 

So what does

49 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

If this is how you interpret things I do hope you don't vote... 

mean?

[tebee]

14 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

With BJ in the driving seat, I am sure the Tories will sort out a Brexit deal with the EU and the UK Parliament

quite swiftly.

 

Another brexiter that still trust Tory politicians....

[CG1 Blue]

2 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Yes, investment companies do have a duty to look after the interests of their clients. Which is why they opened a fund in Dublin to protect their clients from the effects of Brexit etc. as you say. Clients including one Jacob Rees-Mogg; not just a client but also a partner.

 

But he tells us all the UK will be so much better off post Brexit; so why do he and his clients need protecting from the effects of Brexit when he tells us those effects will be so beneficial?

 

Suggesting Rees-Mogg had moved some of his business to Dublin; which is true.

 

Ok, maybe that was not his decision, but by going ahead with the move and keeping his money in that fund whilst telling the rest of us that the UK, not the EU, is the place to be smacks of hypocrisy.

 

Really?

 

So what does

mean?

Saying that overall the UK will be better off outside the EU whilst allowing the company you part own to protect it's clients from a potential regulatory change is perfectly reasonable if you ask me. 

 

"So what does

"If this is how you interpret things I do hope you don't vote..."

mean?"

 

It means I hope he doesn't vote, because he completely misinterprets and misrepresents the facts. I can't stop him from voting though. 

 

 

[7by7]

24 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Saying that overall the UK will be better off outside the EU whilst allowing the company you part own to protect it's clients from a potential regulatory change is perfectly reasonable if you ask me. 

So, despite telling us all that the UK will be infinitely better off outside the EU and all the warnings of possible regulatory change and other possible adverse effects from the remain campaign were merely project fear, Rees-Mogg believes it is prudent to protect himself by moving some of his money to Dublin where it will remain in the EU and so be safe from these adverse effects.

 

Meanwhile it's tough titties to us proles who don't have his kind of money if (when?) Brexit all goes belly up!

 

I repeat; hypocrite.

 

31 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

"So what does

"If this is how you interpret things I do hope you don't vote..."

mean?"

 

It means I hope he doesn't vote, because he completely misinterprets and misrepresents the facts. I can't stop him from voting though. 

You are right; you can't stop him from voting; although you obviously wish that you could!

 

Do you also hope people who misinterpret and misrepresent facts don't stand for office? That would mean you hope Boris doesn't!

[bomber]

1 hour ago, melvinmelvin said:

With BJ in the driving seat, I am sure the Tories will sort out a Brexit deal with the EU and the UK Parliament

quite swiftly.

 

tusk and co will laff at sackless Boris,he would go to brussels and come back with nothing better than anything may got and "here we go AGAIN"  he said live on TV mays deal just needed a little tinkering,so brexiteers dont expect anything suicidal,unless of coarse he was telling more porkies,all makes no difference anyway hard brexit and no deal wont get through parliament,most tories want to remain so a remain leader it shall be,should only take a few months to get A50 revoked,tories might then just get enough votes to see off labour at the GE,leave with a no deal and they are toast.

[bomber]

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

Saying that overall the UK will be better off outside the EU whilst allowing the company you part own to protect it's clients from a potential regulatory change is perfectly reasonable if you ask me. 

 

"So what does

"If this is how you interpret things I do hope you don't vote..."

mean?"

 

It means I hope he doesn't vote, because he completely misinterprets and misrepresents the facts. I can't stop him from voting though. 

 

 

i think you should invest in business,you never know you might make back the £10-15k brexit has cost you so far,btw is the rate below 40 yet or is it still hanging on by a faaaannnnyys hair????????

[CG1 Blue]

4 hours ago, 7by7 said:

So, despite telling us all that the UK will be infinitely better off outside the EU and all the warnings of possible regulatory change and other possible adverse effects from the remain campaign were merely project fear, Rees-Mogg believes it is prudent to protect himself by moving some of his money to Dublin where it will remain in the EU and so be safe from these adverse effects.

 

Meanwhile it's tough titties to us proles who don't have his kind of money if (when?) Brexit all goes belly up!

 

I repeat; hypocrite.

 

You are right; you can't stop him from voting; although you obviously wish that you could!

 

Do you also hope people who misinterpret and misrepresent facts don't stand for office? That would mean you hope Boris doesn't!

I'm not a Boris fan.  In my opinion he has little substance, and I've never heard him debate Brexit in a meaningful or intelligent way. 

Unlike yourself (it appears), I'm able to recognise people's shortcomings even if they're 'on my side'. 

 

And talking of hypocrites, you're defending your remainer buddy who was making false claims (i.e. that JRM has moved his company to Dublin), while criticising somebody on the Brexit side who made false claims. Come out of your echo chamber! 

 

 

[CG1 Blue]

3 hours ago, bomber said:

i think you should invest in business,you never know you might make back the £10-15k brexit has cost you so far,btw is the rate below 40 yet or is it still hanging on by a faaaannnnyys hair????????

Brexit has cost me £10-15k? Are you from another planet or something? 

[malagateddy]

I have asked you, and others, many, many times before why you consider May's deal to be BRINO, what it is you find so bad about it; but as you all always dodged the question by utilising petty sloganising I gave up asking it.
 
But I'll try again.
 
Under May's original deal we would leave the CAP; don't you want that?
 
We would leave the CFP; don't you want that?
 
We would leave the customs union; don't you want that?
 
We would leave the FoM directive and the other three freedoms; don't you want that?
 
We would leave the jurisdiction of the ECJ; don't you want that?
 
Maybe it's the guarantee of the rights of EU nationals currently living in the UK that you don't like? Remember though, this also guarantees the rights of UK nationals currently living in the other 27; don't you want that?
 
Maybe it's the agreement to honour our financial commitments made before the referendum that you don't like? OK, to those who rely on slogans and lies (Boris) this is a major stumbling block. Personally, I believe in honouring agreements and commitments already made. If we don't, how can we make trade agreements with anyone post Brexit? Who would trust us?
 
That leaves the Irish backstop, whatever it turns out to be. Some Brexiteers say the people of Northern Ireland should be forced into leaving the UK and joining the RoI. Surely not you, though; aren't you a believer in democracy?
 
I've been away, and have missed many posts, didn't have time to read them all before that either, but I am assuming you are not so stupid as to believe no deal and joining Mauritania in becoming the second country to trade purely on WTO terms to be a viable option.
 
So, what is your alternative to May's deal?
 
Other Brexiteers, feel free to answer as well.

NO DEAL

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[dick dasterdly]

10 hours ago, 7by7 said:

I have asked you, and others, many, many times before why you consider May's deal to be BRINO, what it is you find so bad about it; but as you all always dodged the question by utilising petty sloganising I gave up asking it.

 

But I'll try again.

 

Under May's original deal we would leave the CAP; don't you want that?

 

We would leave the CFP; don't you want that?

 

We would leave the customs union; don't you want that?

 

We would leave the FoM directive and the other three freedoms; don't you want that?

 

We would leave the jurisdiction of the ECJ; don't you want that?

 

Maybe it's the guarantee of the rights of EU nationals currently living in the UK that you don't like? Remember though, this also guarantees the rights of UK nationals currently living in the other 27; don't you want that?

 

Maybe it's the agreement to honour our financial commitments made before the referendum that you don't like? OK, to those who rely on slogans and lies (Boris) this is a major stumbling block. Personally, I believe in honouring agreements and commitments already made. If we don't, how can we make trade agreements with anyone post Brexit? Who would trust us?

 

That leaves the Irish backstop, whatever it turns out to be. Some Brexiteers say the people of Northern Ireland should be forced into leaving the UK and joining the RoI. Surely not you, though; aren't you a believer in democracy?

 

I've been away, and have missed many posts, didn't have time to read them all before that either, but I am assuming you are not so stupid as to believe no deal and joining Mauritania in becoming the second country to trade purely on WTO terms to be a viable option.

 

So, what is your alternative to May's deal?

 

Other Brexiteers, feel free to answer as well.

Yes, you have asked the question previously - and it was answered previously by myself and others.  Just because you didn't like/agree with the answers doesn't mean it wasn't answered!

 

I can't be bothered to trawl back through the hundreds of pages of existing and earlier brexit threads to prove this, so without going to the effort (yet again) of pointing out all the reasons why the may/eu deal is BRINO - one quick example (and probably the most immediately obvious) is that the eu has to agree to release the uk from the 'backstop arrangements'.  And, (IIRC) everything stays the same until then.

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Yes, you have asked the question previously - and it was answered previously by myself and others.  Just because you didn't like/agree with the answers doesn't mean it wasn't answered!

 

I can't be bothered to trawl back through the hundreds of pages of existing and earlier brexit threads to prove this, so without going to the effort (yet again) of pointing out all the reasons why the may/eu deal is BRINO - one quick example (and probably the most immediately obvious) is that the eu has to agree to release the uk from the 'backstop arrangements'.  And, (IIRC) everything stays the same until then.

I mostly agree with that, where I disagree is that the 'BRINO' implies that all existing  EU laws, regulations and obligations remain in place, they do not.

 

It should come as no surprise that while accepting many EU obligations the Tory Brexit Deal omits commitments wrt to Worker Rights, Environmental Protection, Common Standards across everything from food production to industry and agriculture, and of course (because its the Tories) measures to combat tax evasion.

 

Brexit, funded by a handful of tax shy billionaires, millionaires and hedge fund managers turns out to be a deregulation of everything that protects ordinary people's rights while protecting the tax evasion of the hyper wealthy and big business. 

 

No surprises there then. 

 

[Rimmer]

Some posts and replies have been removed please see the following forum  rule:

 

7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members, (flaming) Stalking of members on either the forum or via PM will not be allowed.
 

 

 

[Basil B]

Just got a News Flash...

 

The press is jostling for position as they have been told May will be making a statement shortly...

 

Speculation is she is resigning... 

[Basil B]

She's going

 

Standing down 7th June...

Conceded Brexit as a lost cause...

[7by7]

On ‎5‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 11:21 PM, CG1 Blue said:

I'm not a Boris fan.  In my opinion he has little substance, and I've never heard him debate Brexit in a meaningful or intelligent way. 

Unlike yourself (it appears), I'm able to recognise people's shortcomings even if they're 'on my side'. 

 

And talking of hypocrites, you're defending your remainer buddy who was making false claims (i.e. that JRM has moved his company to Dublin), while criticising somebody on the Brexit side who made false claims. Come out of your echo chamber! 

 

 

I am defending no one except where stating the facts does so.

 

An investment firm in which Rees-Mogg is a partner opened a fund in Dublin to protect it's clients from the effects of Brexit; fact.

 

Rees-Mogg moved a substantial amount of his personal money into that fund; fact.

 

If he did not do so in order to protect himself from the effects of Brexit, why did he do so?

 

 

 

 

[7by7]

On ‎5‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 5:22 PM, 7by7 said:

<snip>

I am assuming you are not so stupid as to believe no deal and joining Mauritania in becoming the second country to trade purely on WTO terms to be a viable option.

 

So, what is your alternative to May's deal?

 

On ‎5‎/‎24‎/‎2019 at 3:05 AM, malagateddy said:

NO DEAL

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

 That's one vote for the stupid option!

 

Any more?

[7by7]

On ‎5‎/‎24‎/‎2019 at 3:35 AM, dick dasterdly said:

Yes, you have asked the question previously - and it was answered previously by myself and others.  Just because you didn't like/agree with the answers doesn't mean it wasn't answered!

 

I can't be bothered to trawl back through the hundreds of pages of existing and earlier brexit threads to prove this, so without going to the effort (yet again) of pointing out all the reasons why the may/eu deal is BRINO - one quick example (and probably the most immediately obvious) is that the eu has to agree to release the uk from the 'backstop arrangements'.  And, (IIRC) everything stays the same until then.

 I asked the question several times in attempts to get someone on the Brexit side to answer; with no success.

 

The last time I asked the question you finally responded with the same excuse as above; that you had previously answered the question and were not going to do so again.

 

Oddly, though, you had not answered it in any of the topics in which I asked it!

 

I explained that as I have a family, life and job I simply do not have the time to sit through every pots in every Brexit topic so i asked you if you would be kind enough to say in which topic your answer was, as it was not in any which I had posted in.

 

You ignored me.

 

It is not that I don't like your answer, it is that I have never seen it; because you refused to show it to me!

 

Yes, you have mentioned the backstop before; the only time you actually responded directly to my question. Yes, the UK would have to remain in the customs union until that issue was resolved to both sides satisfaction. But just the customs union and it's regulations; we would leave the rest.

 

But how would you resolve the Irish border problem?

 

Infuriate the Republican minority by closing the border and so breaking the Good Friday Agreement?

Or

Infuriate the Unionist majority by at best placing a hard customs border between that part of the UK and the rest; or worse forcing Northern Ireland into leaving the UK completely and becoming part of the Republic against the will of the majority? Surely not; I thought you believed in Democracy!

 

You may now say that all this is academic following May's resignation. You'd be wrong. 

 

Whoever takes over from her will have to come up with a new deal which is acceptable to both the EU and Parliament, persuade Parliament to accept this deal or persuade Parliament to commit the UK to economic suicide by leaving with no deal.

 

 

[7by7]

On ‎5‎/‎24‎/‎2019 at 3:54 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

I mostly agree with that, where I disagree is that the 'BRINO' implies that all existing  EU laws, regulations and obligations remain in place, they do not.

 

It should come as no surprise that while accepting many EU obligations the Tory Brexit Deal omits commitments wrt to Worker Rights, Environmental Protection, Common Standards across everything from food production to industry and agriculture, and of course (because its the Tories) measures to combat tax evasion.

 

Brexit, funded by a handful of tax shy billionaires, millionaires and hedge fund managers turns out to be a deregulation of everything that protects ordinary people's rights while protecting the tax evasion of the hyper wealthy and big business. 

 

No surprises there then. 

 

 If you leave the club, the rules of that club no longer apply.

 

The EU's regulations on worker's rights and the other points you mention will no longer apply as we will no longer be a member.

 

However, the European Withdrawal Bill repeals the European Communities Act 1972 and contains provisions to bring all the points you mention, and more, into UK law.

 

Of course, as we will no longer be a member of the EU future governments will be under no obligation to retain any of those provisions and will be able, with the approval of Parliament, be able to remove, amend or add to them.

 

But isn't that what Brexiteers wanted? Decisions made in Westminster not Brussels?

[CG1 Blue]

3 hours ago, 7by7 said:

I am defending no one except where stating the facts does so.

 

An investment firm in which Rees-Mogg is a partner opened a fund in Dublin to protect it's clients from the effects of Brexit; fact.

 

Rees-Mogg moved a substantial amount of his personal money into that fund; fact.

 

If he did not do so in order to protect himself from the effects of Brexit, why did he do so?

 

 

 

 

"Rees-Mogg moved a substantial amount of his personal money into that fund; fact."

 

Is that a fact? How much of his personal money did he move into the Dublin fund then? 

 

If he did not do so in order to protect himself from the effects of Brexit, why did he do so?

 

Somerset Capital opened the Dublin fund so that their clients from the EU can still put their money into one of their funds post Brexit. Not sure why you don't understand that. 

 

 

 

[malagateddy]

I am defending no one except where stating the facts does so.
 
An investment firm in which Rees-Mogg is a partner opened a fund in Dublin to protect it's clients from the effects of Brexit; fact.
 
Rees-Mogg moved a substantial amount of his personal money into that fund; fact.
 
If he did not do so in order to protect himself from the effects of Brexit, why did he do so?
 
 
 
 

Email JRM and ask him??

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[malagateddy]

 That's one vote for the stupid option!
 
Any more?

Millions of us are rooting for NO DEAL..

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[7by7]

17 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

"Rees-Mogg moved a substantial amount of his personal money into that fund; fact."

 

Is that a fact? How much of his personal money did he move into the Dublin fund then?

He refuses to disclose how much, saying it's a private matter. 

 

Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg is estimated to have earnt £7m from investments since the referendum according to investigation by Channel 4 Dispatches .

Quote

Asked if the figure of £7m is accurate, Mr Rees-Mogg told Dispatches: “The amount that I received is not for public disclosure. I’m entitled to the same privacy in my affairs as anyone else in parliament is.”

He is, of course, technically correct. But surely as he is an ardent opponent of the EU and all it's works the answer to this is in the public interest. One wonders what he has to hide.

 

Whilst the actual amount he has moved from the UK to Dublin may be peanuts to him (and you?) I bet it's substantial to us ordinary folk.

 

BTW, from that link

Quote

House of Commons Register of Interests that he is paid £500 an hour for his work at SCM and takes home around £15,000 a month on top of his MPs salary.

 

22 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

If he did not do so in order to protect himself from the effects of Brexit, why did he do so?

 

Somerset Capital opened the Dublin fund so that their clients from the EU can still put their money into one of their funds post Brexit. Not sure why you don't understand that. 

A company 25% owned by an ardent Brexiteer, a man who declares himself against the EU and all it's works still wants to be able to invest in the EU and he is not only happy that it does so, but takes advantage of it himself!

 

So I ask you again, if he did not do this to protect himself from the effects of Brexit, why did he?

 

Going to answer this time, or in typical Brexiteer fashion dodge the difficult questions yet again? 

[7by7]

15 minutes ago, malagateddy said:

3 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 That's one vote for the stupid option!
 
Any more?

Millions of us are rooting for NO DEAL.

You know this how?

 

Contrary to your low opinion of them, most UK resident Brexiteers are not that stupid.

[soalbundy]

1 minute ago, 7by7 said:

He refuses to disclose how much, saying it's a private matter. 

 

Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg is estimated to have earnt £7m from investments since the referendum according to investigation by Channel 4 Dispatches .

He is, of course, technically correct. But surely as he is an ardent opponent of the EU and all it's works the answer to this is in the public interest. One wonders what he has to hide.

 

Whilst the actual amount he has moved from the UK to Dublin may be peanuts to him (and you?) I bet it's substantial to us ordinary folk.

 

BTW, from that link

 

A company 25% owned by an ardent Brexiteer, a man who declares himself against the EU and all it's works still wants to be able to invest in the EU and he is not only happy that it does so, but takes advantage of it himself!

 

So I ask you again, if he did not do this to protect himself from the effects of Brexit, why did he?

 

Going to answer this time, or in typical Brexiteer fashion dodge the difficult questions yet again? 

He has a sh1t load of kids to feed and knows exactly what is going to happen to the pound if a no deal comes around

[CG1 Blue]

4 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

He refuses to disclose how much, saying it's a private matter. 

 

Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg is estimated to have earnt £7m from investments since the referendum according to investigation by Channel 4 Dispatches .

He is, of course, technically correct. But surely as he is an ardent opponent of the EU and all it's works the answer to this is in the public interest. One wonders what he has to hide.

 

Whilst the actual amount he has moved from the UK to Dublin may be peanuts to him (and you?) I bet it's substantial to us ordinary folk.

 

BTW, from that link

 

A company 25% owned by an ardent Brexiteer, a man who declares himself against the EU and all it's works still wants to be able to invest in the EU and he is not only happy that it does so, but takes advantage of it himself!

 

So I ask you again, if he did not do this to protect himself from the effects of Brexit, why did he?

 

Going to answer this time, or in typical Brexiteer fashion dodge the difficult questions yet again? 

You said he moved a substantial amount of his wealth to the Dublin fund. You are unable to substantiate that. Instead you start talking about what he has earned since the referendum. 

I've already explained that Somerset Capital opened a Dublin fund for their clients to invest in post-Brexit (read about MIFID II rules). It was a sensible business decision by the company. I'm not going to explain this again because it's a waste of time. 

[7by7]

12 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

You said he moved a substantial amount of his wealth to the Dublin fund. You are unable to substantiate that. Instead you start talking about what he has earned since the referendum. 

Do you deny that he has moved money into that account? He never has. As I said, while the actual amount may be peanuts to him, it's certainly going to be substantial to the rest of us.

 

14 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

I've already explained that Somerset Capital opened a Dublin fund for their clients to invest in post-Brexit (read about MIFID II rules). It was a sensible business decision by the company. I'm not going to explain this again because it's a waste of time.

A sensible business decision because of the dire effects Brexit will have upon UK based investments; at least for the short term? Definitely. 

 

Quote

Rees-Mogg was grilled by the presenter on his links to hedge fund manager Somerset Capital Management, in which he owns a 15 per cent stake. There was plenty of mirth last year among the Brexiteer’s political counterparts – on both sides of the Irish Sea – when it emerged that Somerset had set up two funds in Dublin, which will give it access to the European Union after Brexit.

Britain’s exit from the EU, so craved by Rees-Mogg, was listed as a risk factor in the Dublin funds’ documentation (Source)

So Somerset Capital themselves acknowledge the risk of Brexit, and use that risk as an inducement to invest in one or both of their new Dublin funds!

 

An honest decision by a man who constantly tells us the UK will be far better off post Brexit? No. A pure and obvious case of do as I say, not as I do.

 

 

[malagateddy]

You know this how?
 
Contrary to your low opinion of them, most UK resident Brexiteers are not that stupid.

I DO NOT have a low opinion of UK based Brexiteers for your information.
Lets wait and see how the Brexit Party gets on re the mep vote shall we[emoji6]

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[7by7]

6 minutes ago, malagateddy said:

I DO NOT have a low opinion of UK based Brexiteers for your information.

 Then why do you say 'millions of us' want the disaster of a no deal Brexit?

 

6 minutes ago, malagateddy said:

Lets wait and see how the Brexit Party gets on re the mep vote shall we

Indeed; I'm sure Nige will be delighted if this meaningless vote gives him a prolonged period with his snout in the MEP trough; more MEP salary and expenses paid for by the British taxpayer. The increased MEP pension and severance money this will give him; also paid for by the British taxpayer.

 

But we will see; remember the drubbing Brexit parties received at the local elections? The same might just have happened on Thursday!

[malagateddy]

Indeed; I'm sure Nige will be delighted if this meaningless vote gives him a prolonged period with his snout in the MEP trough; more MEP salary and expenses paid for by the British taxpayer. The increased MEP pension and severance money this will give him; also paid for by the British taxpayer.
 
But we will see; remember the drubbing Brexit parties received at the local elections? The same might just have happened on Thursday!

Think you mean the drubbing that Ukip got.
I honestly think that you are rather perturbed and anxious re the popularity of the Brecit Party.
The eu mep results will be interesting.
Imo..the so called populist parties will do rather well..must to the displeasure of likes of junkard.tusk.barnier.mecron.merkel etc etc.
Great fun for all the anti eu citizens throughout europe.
Bad news for the europhile federalists [emoji2][emoji2][emoji2]

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app