13 hours ago, Loiner said:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1144557/Brexit-Party-reveals-it-will-legally-challenge-Peterborough-by-election

Brexit party lost...perhaps they should get over it?

There is a point to be made about these calls for "head to head debates".

 

The system set up for selecting the leader of the Tory party, the parliamentary party working through candidates until two remain, and then the party membership - after the "hustings" - making the decision was designed to prevent the process from being a driven by and kept within the "Westminster bubble". The powers of the national media to act as "kingmaker" - which they have perhaps come to take as a right, have been removed.

 

Hunt knows that he cannot beat Johnson amongst the party membership. He knows that he is very much the media's annointed choice - to succeed he must get the media back to a position of influence 

2 hours ago, evadgib said:

Did they?

Certainly did. Peterborough is probably the town that is more plagued with problems from Eastern European immigrants than any other in the UK. It's a massive issue in Peterborough. Also, by-elections tend to produce shock results due to protest votes much more than in a General Election. If the Brexit party couldn't win Peterborough in a by-election, particularly when Brexit is such an issue, they aren't going to win any seats in a general election. They knew this and that is why they were so devastated with the result, so much so that they are now making ridiculous appeals to the Electoral Commission to save face.

 

Farage and his party are now dead in the water, so much so that even Farage himself won't win a seat in a General Election.

 

However, the biggest losers were the Conservative Party, coming a distant third in a seat that they have held several times. It's clear, from the voting figures, that there was a mass defection of Conservative voters to the Brexit Party, which was Cameron's fear and the sole reason he called for a referendum.

 

Boris has a massive task to bring Tory voters back into the fold, a task that he's just not up to as most people see him simply as a clown who has spent most of his career painting fake news as facts.

3 hours ago, wilcopops said:

Brexit party lost...perhaps they should get over it?

Labour Party cheated...perhaps they are being prosecuted?

30 minutes ago, petemoss said:

Certainly did. Peterborough is probably the town that is more plagued with problems from Eastern European immigrants than any other in the UK. It's a massive issue in Peterborough. Also, by-elections tend to produce shock results due to protest votes much more than in a General Election. If the Brexit party couldn't win Peterborough in a by-election, particularly when Brexit is such an issue, they aren't going to win any seats in a general election. They knew this and that is why they were so devastated with the result, so much so that they are now making ridiculous appeals to the Electoral Commission to save face.

 

Farage and his party are now dead in the water, so much so that even Farage himself won't win a seat in a General Election.

 

However, the biggest losers were the Conservative Party, coming a distant third in a seat that they have held several times. It's clear, from the voting figures, that there was a mass defection of Conservative voters to the Brexit Party, which was Cameron's fear and the sole reason he called for a referendum.

 

Boris has a massive task to bring Tory voters back into the fold, a task that he's just not up to as most people see him simply as a clown who has spent most of his career painting fake news as facts.

Bold claims but that's all. We will see who can win what after 31st October!

3 hours ago, wilcopops said:

Brexit party lost...perhaps they should get over it?

When there is suspicion/evidence of cheating why should they?

40 minutes ago, Loiner said:

Labour Party cheated...perhaps they are being prosecuted?

No, just sour grapes from the Brexit party who have made accusations with no evidence. Most claims have already been dismisses, the others to follow soon.

15 hours ago, Joinaman said:

interesting

Perhaps you could explain to all us thick ones EXACTLY  what will happen on a no deal, how much damage and what cost, but don't forget to allow for the extra money we won't have to pay for the EU will you I'm sure some MPs would appreciate your knowledge too 

You only have to read the government's own forecast, the BoE, the Chancellor and CBI to understand. As for the MP's they have already voted down a no-deal, so they are well aware of the damage a no deal would cause. And as for the cost, the UK is committed to make payments for at least one year after exit for projects already signed up to.  

 

There's no such thing as a free lunch in this scenario.

25 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Bold claims but that's all. We will see who can win what after 31st October!

Mostly based on facts. The next general election is scheduled for May 2022. Which October 31st are we talking about? We are very unlikely to even be out of the EU by this October 31st, despite Boris's qualified claim.

15 hours ago, Joinaman said:

Isn't it also laughable how the remoaners keep saying how much better off if we stay in the EU, even with the Lisbon Treaty taking away most of  our existing rights and laws, and how much better all the people will be

Perhaps you could explain to us, and most of the business and MPs EXACTLY how staying in and abiding by the Lisbon Treaty will make anyone in the UK better off, cos all i hear. to quote "Bottom" is, Slime in this ear, Slime in this ear

The UK government has published a statement that the UK would be better off remaining in the EU, because it's better than any deal or no deal. 

 

Where I'm coming from is it's better to campaign for change within the EU, where we have a seat at the table, a veto vote, and enough influence to make a difference to the workings of the EU going forward. Outside the EU, we have no cards to play. 

 

4 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

The UK government has published a statement that the UK would be better off remaining in the EU, because it's better than any deal or no deal. 

 

Where I'm coming from is it's better to campaign for change within the EU, where we have a seat at the table, a veto vote, and enough influence to make a difference to the workings of the EU going forward. Outside the EU, we have no cards to play. 

 

Had any of that worked since 1975 or certainly since 1990 when Maggie (the only politician they genuinely feared prior to Farage) was toppled we'd never have wanted to leave.

Edited June 26, 20197 yr by evadgib

BJ and serious ? ? ?

18 minutes ago, petemoss said:

No, just sour grapes from the Brexit party who have made accusations with no evidence. Most claims have already been dismisses, the others to follow soon.

Evidence presented in #171 seemed pretty convincing when I stumbled upon it yesterday.

 

On a lighter note; Here's proof that Brexiters have a sence of humour ????

 

Edited June 26, 20197 yr by evadgib

16 hours ago, nauseus said:

Perhaps all the referendum leave voters decided to stick with their habitual parties or just not vote in a by election that made little difference to Brexit? Perhaps they only like voting in referendums that promise the chance to leave the EU? Perhaps they have become disenchanted with all of the main parties? Perhaps they knew Labour would cheat? Perhaps they just wanted to give you something to talk about? Who knows?

 

But I do think the BP did really well for a brand new party and if the shenanigans had been disallowed I bet they would have won it, too. 

 

2 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Evidence presented in #177 seemed pretty convincing.

What evidence would that be? I only see @nauseus making completely unsubstantiated claims (as usual) about Labour cheating and "shenanigans".

1 minute ago, petemoss said:

 

What evidence would that be? I only see @nauseus making completely unsubstantiated claims (as usual) about Labour cheating and "shenanigans".

See edit (Your trigger finger is quicker than Stompers!)

10 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Had any of that worked since 1975 or certainly since 1990 when Maggie (the only politician they genuinely feared prior to Farage) was toppled we'd never have wanted to leave.

So we didn't get an opt out for the Shengen agreement? We didn't get an opt out for the Euro. Cameron didn't secure a deal which allowed us to restrict benefits for EU migrants for 7 years? We didn't opt out of Merkel's plan to force us to take a percentage of her Syrian refugees?

5 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Had any of that worked since 1975 or certainly since 1990 when Maggie (the only politician they genuinely feared prior to Farage) was toppled we'd never have wanted to leave.

We live in today's world, not yesteryear. Clearly, there is a current backlash from the UK electorate that the government should take more positive action to bring the EU into today's world as well. i'm all for that approach, but it's best dealt with inside the EU than opting out in what i regard as a childish 'throw toys out of pram' huff. 

 

But, and it's a big but, until politics are replaced by things that really matter on a global basis, like climate change, there won't be a lot of genuine movement unless the populous demand it from their various governments. A UK GE, even with Corbyn in-situ, would be a lot better than any Tory government, IMO. 

 

 

8 minutes ago, evadgib said:

See edit (Your trigger finger is quicker than Stompers!)

 

16 hours ago, evadgib said:

More of same for any that missed it. The Guffaw brigade should also note that Richard Tice successfully sued a member of the SNP over unfounded allegations during the same campaign...

 

I see no evidence here either. I see Richard Tice claiming that he has evidence that Tariq Mahmood acted as an agent for the Labour party in the Peterborough by-election, but staunchly refuses to present that evidence. Meanwhile Labour have presented evidence that he did not act as an agent in said by-election.

21 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

We live in today's world, not yesteryear. Clearly, there is a current backlash from the UK electorate that the government should take more positive action to bring the EU into today's world as well. i'm all for that approach, but it's best dealt with inside the EU than opting out in what i regard as a childish 'throw toys out of pram' huff. 

 

But, and it's a big but, until politics are replaced by things that really matter on a global basis, like climate change, there won't be a lot of genuine movement unless the populous demand it from their various governments. A UK GE, even with Corbyn in-situ, would be a lot better than any Tory government, IMO. 

I am inclined to agree but all attempts to bring accountability to the table have been steam-rollered by an organisation that thought they'd get away with it forever. The EU will now reform, but not with us as members & nor will their reforms go anywhere near far enough.

Edited June 26, 20197 yr by evadgib

On 6/25/2019 at 8:12 AM, JonnyF said:

 

No Deal honours the referendum result and also allows us to strike trade deals around the world. It puts us back in control of immigration policy and our fishing waters. We answer to our own courts not the ECJ.

Delusional thinking. The UK is tied up in hundreds of legislative agreements with the EU that will come to an end on 31st Oct. These agreements will only end for the UK, they will remain in place between all other member states. It will be the UK cutting off the branch it is perched on.

As Nov 1st appears on the horizon, Boris will be on his hands and knees looking for an emergency extension to try and get all these agreements reinstated.

Brexiteers do not want the EU, just the membership benefits, brexit has always been about cherrypicking.

11 minutes ago, evadgib said:

I am inclined to agree but all attempts to bring accountability to the table have been steam-rollered by an organisation that thought they'd get away with it forever. The EU will now reform, but not with us as members & nor will their reforms go far enough.

Well, if we leave, we won't be able to contribute to material change, would we? On a personal note, I do side with being accountable, and for reform, and transparency - regretably the EU, the UK and probably many other governments don't embrace openness. 

15 hours ago, CNXexpat said:

You were never asked? You also were members of the EU parliament. Nothing came surprisingly over you.

Do you really think that a Brexit will lower your personal payments? So many companies leave GB, sometimes with the good paid staff. If these companies and their staff don´t pay taxes anymore, what do you think where the money for the schools, military and whatever will come from? Sure, you have more fishing rights. Fish your UK zone empty and start then to import your fish for the fish & chips. Change your immigration laws (by the way, you are not in the Schengen group, so all the immigration from Africa to Europe never effected you) and send all the people from By example Poland at home. But don´t wonder if your health system breakes down - and it is compared with other western European countries really bad).
UK as a small country wants to make deals with India, USA, China, etc. Alone. Good luck. They know you are under pressure and they will let you know that they know. You need new contracts more than they need. So you´ll make a bad deal.  GB will win a little bit of freedom but will loose so much more. They´ll find out during the next years. 

What a mixed bag of bull.

1 hour ago, petemoss said:

Mostly based on facts. The next general election is scheduled for May 2022. Which October 31st are we talking about? We are very unlikely to even be out of the EU by this October 31st, despite Boris's qualified claim.

You didn't provide any facts. We are talking about October 31st this year and if we are not out by then there will be a GE shortly thereafter. 

1 hour ago, stephenterry said:

The UK government has published a statement that the UK would be better off remaining in the EU, because it's better than any deal or no deal. 

 

Where I'm coming from is it's better to campaign for change within the EU, where we have a seat at the table, a veto vote, and enough influence to make a difference to the workings of the EU going forward. Outside the EU, we have no cards to play. 

 

Our vetoes and influence within the EU are now so limited to be effectively worthless.

 

Going forward? Please! 

2 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Our vetoes and influence within the EU are now so limited to be effectively worthless.

 

Going forward? Please! 

And who’s fault is that?

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And who’s fault is that?

Successive EU treaties with associated changes in voting methods and rules, plus the crap UK governments headed by Major, Blair & Brown. 

16 minutes ago, nauseus said:

You didn't provide any facts. We are talking about October 31st this year and if we are not out by then there will be a GE shortly thereafter. 

I provided facts as to the result of the Peterborough by-election. What facts did you provide?

 

"We are talking about October 31st this year and if we are not out by then there will be a GE shortly thereafter." And that's a fact is it? Or another Brexiteer pink unicorn? 

Just now, nauseus said:

Successive EU treaties with associated changes in voting methods and rules, plus the crap UK governments headed by Major, Blair & Brown. 

Kind of clashes with the idea Eire can block any EU/UK deal.

 

 

45 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

On a personal note, I do side with being accountable, and for reform, and transparency

As do several heads of state within the EU. We would have plenty of support for reform of the EU, if we remain.

22 minutes ago, nauseus said:

You didn't provide any facts. We are talking about October 31st this year and if we are not out by then there will be a GE shortly thereafter. 

The GE might come sooner.