The Politics Thread 2019

[ronnieronalde]

Again, too many bolded points to focus on Igor, sorry pal but you're losing me here. Your arguments don't make sense.

You say we haven't suffered since voting leave?

Value of the pound against major currencies is here - https://www.finder.com/uk/brexit-pound 

Growth and Productivity rate is here - https://ukandeu.ac.uk/uk-economy-since-the-brexit-vote-slower-gdp-growth-lower-productivity-and-a-weaker-pound/

In fact the FT has an easy to read set of charts all on one page, it's here - https://www.ft.com/content/cf51e840-7147-11e7-93ff-99f383b09ff9 - apart from Employment which has somehow remained strong, in every other area we've suffered.

Here;s a nice little graph showing "real growth in the UK and Euro Zone, you might notice since March 2011 our growth levels were ALWAYS HIGHER than the rest of the EuroZone. Then came the Brexit vote.

Chart 1. Real growth in the UK and the euro-area. Q1 2011 – Q1 2018

 

 

You're either badly mis-informed or you're not doing as much research as you should be and you're being quite dismissive of others, telling them to do their research and take in the information once they've read it.

Have a look at those links and have a re-think of some of your points.

 

**** I've added the TUC 35 page report, it's long but it's in depth and interesting.*******

 

https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/how-are-we-doing.pdf 

 

 

[Igorlegend11]

21 hours ago, HantsRam said:

There is currently no land border in the world between nations NOT in a Customs union, where electronic checks are the sole checks. 

Does that count as an "indisputable fact"? Or are you thinking that the UK and ROI will be pioneers in this area?

?

You can laugh and imagine I assume that there will be a border on the roads between Ireland and Northern Ireland.  Maybe you want the EU to build and man the borders.  Noone from the UK will build not patrol a border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.   To do so carried far too many serious consequences.   This is not a theoretical point scoring debate.  You and others have been sucked into thinking their will be a border built if we don't accept the WA.   The WA is dead.  We leave on 31st October.   UK and ROI need to be as you put it pioneers.  And to check 10 out of 200 roads even you know will be statistically stupid.   Exaclty how many of the 200 roads would need a border checkpoint in your view ?  What about the roads that weave in and out of the Republic if Ireland? A bit harsh to stop someone driving in a road from Northern Ireland to a destination in northern Ireland that passes for a few miles into the Republic.   BUT if you don't check those roads ..,you will not be having anywhere near a satisfactory border 

[Igorlegend11]

12 minutes ago, ronnieronalde said:

Again, too many bolded points to focus on Igor, sorry pal but you're losing me here. Your arguments don't make sense.

You say we haven't suffered since voting leave?

Value of the pound against major currencies is here - https://www.finder.com/uk/brexit-pound 

Growth and Productivity rate is here - https://ukandeu.ac.uk/uk-economy-since-the-brexit-vote-slower-gdp-growth-lower-productivity-and-a-weaker-pound/

In fact the FT has an easy to read set of charts all on one page, it's here - https://www.ft.com/content/cf51e840-7147-11e7-93ff-99f383b09ff9 - apart from Employment which has somehow remained strong, in every other area we've suffered.

Here;s a nice little graph showing "real growth in the UK and Euro Zone, you might notice since March 2011 our growth levels were ALWAYS HIGHER than the rest of the EuroZone. Then came the Brexit vote.

Chart 1. Real growth in the UK and the euro-area. Q1 2011 – Q1 2018

 

 

You're either badly mis-informed or you're not doing as much research as you should be and you're being quite dismissive of others, telling them to do their research and take in the information once they've read it.

Have a look at those links and have a re-think of some of your points.

If you think some economic stats prove that we are not performing successfully that's your opinion.   It does not change my mind that we should honour democracy and leave the EU.   GDP and our growth has been perfectly adequate.  We were told we would go into recession. We didn't.   

I don't need to research economic performance to then think we should remain and over rule a democratic vote.  I'm glad these posts will allow people in 50years time to see the lengths remainers go to to try and argue we should stay.  Those charts show no recession occuring .....which the remain campaign said would happen 

Imho we have not suffered from leaving 

And I won't get into a needless seperate debate over whether our economy is worse off.  For the simple reason we are nowhere near outbid the EU yet and we are unable to provide clarity to business.  The econony just need clarity and certainty.  Then investment etc will take place and we will be able to grow as a free nation and trade with whom we wish.     Any nation facing fundamental change will slightly underperform. We have not suffered since leaving.    And we are missing the massive point.   We had a referendum to leave.  We voted to leave.    Therefore we have to leave or democracy dies.    That will happen one Day.  I just don't want the state and some noisy moaners to over rule a democratic vote in one of the oldest democracies in the world, that was built on trade .   

You clearly do find my posts for whatever reason hard to understand because they go totally against what you want to happen.  You don't want brexit.   But it was voted for.   By 17m people.   Some like me never voted to leave as I did not want a recession so for selfish personal reasons I never voted leave.    I absolutely could not vote to stay in an undemocratic EU state.

Discussing brexit with intelligent people does not work.  You've shown that.   It has split our nation as the losing side can't accept a fair democratic defeat.   That's extremely bad in itself.   And a function of snowflake generation wanting fairness and thinking of how unfair it is on EU migrants who may want to work here .   If you want open borders for workers that's fine.  It will merely drop wages even lower.   Would you accept Russian workers or just east EU workers ?  Would you accept then and pay benefits to new arrivals from all over the world ?    I suspect you would wish to see that happen. 

[ronnieronalde]

12 minutes ago, Igorlegend11 said:

If you think some economic stats prove that we are not performing successfully that's your opinion.   It does not change my mind that we should honour democracy and leave the EU.   GDP and our growth has been perfectly adequate.  We were told we would go into recession. We didn't.   

I don't need to research economic performance to then think we should remain and over rule a democratic vote.  I'm glad these posts will allow people in 50years time to see the lengths remainers go to to try and argue we should stay.  Those charts show no recession occuring .....which the remain campaign said would happen 

Imho we have not suffered from leaving 

And I won't get into a needless seperate debate over whether our economy is worse off.  For the simple reason we are nowhere near outbid the EU yet and we are unable to provide clarity to business.  The econony just need clarity and certainty.  Then investment etc will take place and we will be able to grow as a free nation and trade with whom we wish.     Any nation facing fundamental change will slightly underperform. We have not suffered since leaving.    And we are missing the massive point.   We had a referendum to leave.  We voted to leave.    Therefore we have to leave or democracy dies.    That will happen one Day.  I just don't want the state and some noisy moaners to over rule a democratic vote in one of the oldest democracies in the world, that was built on trade .   

You clearly do find my posts for whatever reason hard to understand because they go totally against what you want to happen.  You don't want brexit.   But it was voted for.   By 17m people.   Some like me never voted to leave as I did not want a recession so for selfish personal reasons I never voted leave.    I absolutely could not vote to stay in an undemocratic EU state.

Discussing brexit with intelligent people does not work.  You've shown that.   It has split our nation as the losing side can't accept a fair democratic defeat.   That's extremely bad in itself.   And a function of snowflake generation wanting fairness and thinking of how unfair it is on EU migrants who may want to work here .   If you want open borders for workers that's fine.  It will merely drop wages even lower.   Would you accept Russian workers or just east EU workers ?  Would you accept then and pay benefits to new arrivals from all over the world ?    I suspect you would wish to see that happen. 

Economic stats are not MY opinion, they are economic stats for goodness sakes. 

I promise you in 50 years time no-one will read these posts and say look at the lengths the remainers went to try to prevent democracy. I'm posting on a football forum, it's not like I'm guy fawkes threatening to blow up Parliament.

I find your posts difficult to understand, not because they go totally against what I want to happen, I don't understand them 'cos they make no sense and go against facts. You make stuff up. No border check between Poland and Russia until 3 years ago? wtf?

I don't want to "open borders for workers" I just don't want to close them.

Who's talking about paying benefits and please don't suspect what you think I wish.

There is none so blind as those who won't see. You won't see. You're putting false arguments out as fact, it really is pointless.

I won't waste any more time replying to you on this thread. 

All the best.

 

[Igorlegend11]

28 minutes ago, ronnieronalde said:

Economic stats are not MY opinion, they are economic stats for goodness sakes. 

I promise you in 50 years time no-one will read these posts and say look at the lengths the remainers went to try to prevent democracy. I'm posting on a football forum, it's not like I'm guy fawkes threatening to blow up Parliament.

I find your posts difficult to understand, not because they go totally against what I want to happen, I don't understand them 'cos they make no sense and go against facts. You make stuff up. No border check between Poland and Russia until 3 years ago? wtf?

I don't want to "open borders for workers" I just don't want to close them.

Who's talking about paying benefits and please don't suspect what you think I wish.

There is none so blind as those who won't see. You won't see. You're putting false arguments out as fact, it really is pointless.

I won't waste any more time replying to you on this thread. 

All the best.

 

Until three years ago you could just walk across from Poland into russia.  It's in the same article you showed me, which I had read.   The EU told Poland it had to increase its border points from 3 to 7.  And it has put more 

Thats because there were roads from Poland to Russia with no border checks at all.  There was no fence at all until three years ago. None. Nada.  That's what a hard border is.  And an awful lot of remainers argue to respect the EU's protectionism and borders. Hantsram said "what about EU wishes and rules that they must protect their borders" in his post that got removed 

Your economic statistics do not show we have suffered. We've had no recession that we were told would happen.   My English words were we have not suffered. We haven't.

Even you know we are leaving, yet many many remainers and about 30% of the electorate want another referendum.  I would rather we didn't have a new referendum. 

Equally having one would bring chaos to the streets, end democracy and mead to rioting and mass democratic protests.  

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 hour ago, Igorlegend11 said:

You can laugh and imagine I assume that there will be a border on the roads between Ireland and Northern Ireland.  Maybe you want the EU to build and man the borders.  Noone from the UK will build not patrol a border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.   To do so carried far too many serious consequences.   This is not a theoretical point scoring debate.  You and others have been sucked into thinking their will be a border built if we don't accept the WA.   The WA is dead.  We leave on 31st October.   UK and ROI need to be as you put it pioneers.  And to check 10 out of 200 roads even you know will be statistically stupid.   Exaclty how many of the 200 roads would need a border checkpoint in your view ?  What about the roads that weave in and out of the Republic if Ireland? A bit harsh to stop someone driving in a road from Northern Ireland to a destination in northern Ireland that passes for a few miles into the Republic.   BUT if you don't check those roads ..,you will not be having anywhere near a satisfactory border 

To echo @ronnieronalde I am not equating "border" with a trump style physical infrastructure. 

The use of the term is in this sense an abstract and a negative. It will be the absence of the current arrangement of frictionless movement in people and goods across the island of Ireland. 

As you have asked, yes I do think there will be new border checks. Whether these will take place at the actual border I don't know. There has been a suggestion of completing checks on goods vehicles well away from the border area to enable the outward appearance of nothing changing. So there will be something that acts as a "border".

Any critical analysis would arrive at this conclusion. For it to be otherwise represents an existential threat to the EU single market. It does not follow that there has to be a wall, watchtowers etc

do I think there will be subsequent criminality?  I think that the answer is not necessarily.....it will depend on the extent to which the UK and EU diverge post exit (what's the size of the prize) But in the event of a no deal exit and the move to WTO 10% tariffs the risk is increased all other things being equal. 

The EU of course do not want this. But their actions to date have been rational and defensive when confronted by a situation they did not create. We therefore need to take these concerns seriously rather than assume that they (the EU) wouldn't dare, because they cannot do nothing.

I arrive at this conclusion through my own process of analysis. And neither do I state that these are reasons for not leaving so you are drawing inferences that are not there. But I do believe that this is a serious matter that requires greater thought and consideration than seems to have been applied thus far.

My smile was in playing back to you your use of "indisputable truth". This seems to me to be your conclusion to your own process of consideration, with which I disagree. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SSD]

I've got an idea for the new PM. Can he stop the police wasting money, time and resource on really silly crimes? 

Read the other day a young lad, famous on YouTube for pranks, got done for "stealing" a teabag from a company's premises 18 months ago. Was arrested at an airport for burglary, the police deployed a dozen armed police officers for a previous "crime" and thought the chap was trying to escape the country. Talk about frightening the other passengers, you'd think he was on the run for murder or organised criminal activity.  I understand this chap has been caught by police numerous times and cautioned for arsing around being a little git. Taken to court a couple of times for trespassing. So to me it's clear the police had a vendetta against this person, they were sick of him causing a nuisance and wanted to find a way to lock him up. 

I can't support the action of a YouTube prankster, so why can't police stop this guy's commercial revenue off the site, that way he won't be making money and he's more likely to get a job which doesn't resort to breaking the law? Why are they having to resort to messing around, spending thousands with someone who seems harmless and is just messing around to make money? Just seems ridiculous.   

[Igorlegend11]

4 minutes ago, HantsRam said:

 

The use of the term is in this sense an abstract and a negative. It will be the absence of the current arrangement of frictionless movement in people and goods across the island of Ireland. 

As you have asked, yes I do think there will be new border checks. Whether these will take place at the actual border I don't know. There has been a suggestion of completing checks on goods vehicles well away from the border area to enable the outward appearance of nothing changing. So there will be something that acts as a "border".

Any critical analysis would arrive at this conclusion. For it to be otherwise represents an existential threat to the EU single market. It does not follow that there has to be a wall, watchtowers etc

 

 

 

 

 

If the checks are to take place at the border then they have 200 roads to check.  Farmers fields won't be checked as lorries can drive through farm tracks into Ireland too.   It becomes pointless to only do certain checks.   The UK have repeatedly been told no technology solution currently is agreeable to the EU. Because the EU wanted to lock us in to a customs union indefinitely. That plan has failed now.  Maybe they will be responsible and use technology (non border physical checks)   which is what they do on the polish / Russia border ....they spent £2.5m on video cameras at border road crossings.   That's all.  A video camera.

Across the Irish border, policed by the army, guns and weapons were smuggled.  It is an easy border to cross unobserved. Hence it's a trump wall if they really want to protect the EU single market.

Anyway, now the EU have allowed large quantities of Argentinian beef into the EU it would appear the EU's need to keep Ireland onside has ceased and points to the EU accepting an open border with checks done away from the border and intelligence.   As detailed in the Irish Times piece referred and link provided to earlier by another poster 

[ronnieronalde]

31 minutes ago, HantsRam said:

To echo @ronnieronalde I am not equating "border" with a trump style physical infrastructure. 

The use of the term is in this sense an abstract and a negative. It will be the absence of the current arrangement of frictionless movement in people and goods across the island of Ireland. 

As you have asked, yes I do think there will be new border checks. Whether these will take place at the actual border I don't know. There has been a suggestion of completing checks on goods vehicles well away from the border area to enable the outward appearance of nothing changing. So there will be something that acts as a "border".

Any critical analysis would arrive at this conclusion. For it to be otherwise represents an existential threat to the EU single market. It does not follow that there has to be a wall, watchtowers etc

do I think there will be subsequent criminality?  I think that the answer is not necessarily.....it will depend on the extent to which the UK and EU diverge post exit (what's the size of the prize) But in the event of a no deal exit and the move to WTO 10% tariffs the risk is increased all other things being equal. 

The EU of course do not want this. But their actions to date have been rational and defensive when confronted by a situation they did not create. We therefore need to take these concerns seriously rather than assume that they (the EU) wouldn't dare, because they cannot do nothing.

I arrive at this conclusion through my own process of analysis. And neither do I state that these are reasons for not leaving so you are drawing inferences that are not there. But I do believe that this is a serious matter that requires greater thought and consideration than seems to have been applied thus far.

My smile was in playing back to you your use of "indisputable truth". This seems to me to be your conclusion to your own process of consideration, with which I disagree. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's why I can't and won't carry on talking to him about the subject.

He's basically accusing people of basing their entire "argument" on this one single issue, not content with making it sound like it's me who "wants the EU to build and man a solid fence that stretches across Ireland" and to pay the benefits of anyone and everyone.

Neither of those points of view have a) entered my head or b) left my mouth or keyboard.

My own view is the Irish border is one of a number of issues but again he tries to paint it that I and others are determined to undermine democracy.

No, if we can get out with a deal that includes no Irish border and protects the livelihood of our citizens, LETS GET OUT.

I'll accept it.

Will he accept staying if they insist on a border and a shitty no deal that throws our entire economy into jeopardy?

I doubt he will.

The fact he won't accept economic stats because they prove nothing makes it impossible to have a reasonable discussion with him.

So like us and Europe, in terms of chatting with him. I'm OUT.

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 minute ago, ronnieronalde said:

That's why I can't and won't carry on talking to him about the subject.

He's basically accusing people of basing their entire "argument" on this one single issue, not content with making it sound like it's me who "wants the EU to build and man a solid fence that stretches across Ireland" and to pay the benefits of anyone and everyone.

Neither of those points of view have a) entered my head or b) left my mouth or keyboard.

My own view is the Irish border is one of a number of issues but again he tries to paint it that I and others are determined to undermine democracy.

No, if we can get out with a deal that includes no Irish border and protects the livelihood of our citizens, LETS GET OUT.

I'll accept it.

Will he accept staying if they insist on a border and a shitty no deal that throws our entire economy into jeopardy?

I doubt he will.

The fact he won't accept economic stats because they prove nothing makes it impossible to have a reasonable discussion with him.

So like us and Europe, in terms of chatting with him. I'm OUT.

Agree. Think you've been more than reasonable tbf.

When I read some of my stuff back I was perhaps not as careful with my choice of words on occasion. 

I do not think that trump-style negotiating techniques will work in this situation which is entirely unprecedented. It's not about we must win at  the expense of all others - we should listen to legitimate concerns.

Ah well, let's sit back and see what sort of a fist boris makes of it.??

I doubt Eddie would cut Igor much slack!

[GboroRam]

13 minutes ago, HantsRam said:

Ah well, let's sit back and see what sort of a fist boris makes of it.

Not much choice really. It's in Bojo's hands what happens. I'm interested to see if the Brexit supporters saw something I missed. I don't believe they did but I'm happy to accept if I am proved wrong. But somehow I don't think they will be quite so magnanimous if proved wrong. It will be the EU's fault of course. 

Let's see what the situation is 6 months after, and again 2 years after. 

[Van der MoodHoover]

19 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Not much choice really. It's in Bojo's hands what happens. I'm interested to see if the Brexit supporters saw something I missed. I don't believe they did but I'm happy to accept if I am proved wrong. But somehow I don't think they will be quite so magnanimous if proved wrong. It will be the EU's fault of course. 

Let's see what the situation is 6 months after, and again 2 years after. 

Unless he fails a no confidence vote....

[ronnieronalde]

To take the thread away from Brexit ?

We were chatting a couple of months ago or so about the defence budget - And I don't mean Richard Keogh and Tomori's wages!!!

We've now got more than enough Nuclear weapons to destroy the entire planet for centuries and I'm struggling to see who gave our leaders permission to create such powerful weapons in the name of defending us. Defending us against what? Other maniacs who built nuclear weapons.

Let's be very clear here, if one country launches a nuclear weapon there is a very great chance we're all ducked 5 minutes later as ally after ally reacts.

I was surprised (but nor that surprised) to see Saudi Arabia is now in the top 6 spending countries in the world, even though they're no where near the 6th biggest country population wise -36 millionish. How on earth can they justify their spending is beyond me.

I asked what would happen if the UK cut it's budget by a couple of billion a year.

I wasted my time today looking at the profits of the top 20 companies who supply the military.

Just the profits, I had to guesstimate 2 of them as no figures were available, so I deliberately underestimated and put them down at 3% of sales.

I worked out that if just the top 20 gave back just 1% of  just their profit it would generate an immediate £350 million pounds ($438 million) per annum.

We would take turns in giving that money to the top 20 spending countries on arms, so the ones who contribute to the spending. duck it, I'd even be happy if the USA was the first company to benefit from the "rebate"

As long as they committed to put that money either into education or into healthcare.

If I ever got into politics and I ever made it anywhere near the top table. I'd be gone the same way as Kennedy within 2 years of making my views known.

I'd tax the defence manufacturers, I'd tax the plastic producers and I'd tax the sttupid ducking fashion industry until they stopped producing things that have the ability to destroy our planet.

I'd also probably close any company that convinces us mugs to buy bottled ducking tap water for 4500x the cost.

Again @McRainy and even more @86 Schmokes & a Pancake, thanks for introducing me to Chomsky, his views on how we're happily risking future "organised human life" have been eye opening to say the least.

[Igorlegend11]

1 hour ago, ronnieronalde said:

That's why I can't and won't carry on talking to him about the subject.

He's basically accusing people of basing their entire "argument" on this one single issue, not content with making it sound like it's me who "wants the EU to build and man a solid fence that stretches across Ireland" and to pay the benefits of anyone and everyone.   If you can now see along with Hantsram that there will be no border in Ireland then this topic has helped .  It's a small issue and easily solved.  By maintaining the status quo and having an open border in Ireland. The EU and remainers used Ireland cleverly as if it's unsolvable.  The EU even got a deal that favoured the EU chucked out because the EU wanted to use the Irish border to lock the UK into the EU custom union until the EU had approved a technology based solution at an unspecified future date.

Neither of those points of view have a) entered my head or b) left my mouth or keyboard.  You said it's a sad world where we will not allow migration of anyone into the UK. Such a policy would have the above consequences 

My own view is the Irish border is one of a number of issues but again he tries to paint it that I and others are determined to undermine democracy.  Many remainers want a new referendum. It's great news you don't want to undermine democracy.   Once remainers accept democracy they will start to see why the EU made the negotiations so awkward and a waste of time.  The EU hoped remainers could force another referendum and we'd miraculously stay in the EU.

No, if we can get out with a deal that includes no Irish border and protects the livelihood of our citizens, LETS GET OUT.

I'll accept it.

Will he accept staying if they insist on a border and a shitty no deal that throws our entire economy into jeopardy?

I doubt he will.  Of course not.

If the EU know the UK will remain just because the EU pretend they are going to build a border then of course the UK would end up remaining on your basis above.   We won't know what trade deal they will offer us as the EU still refuse to talk about a trade deal with us    strange but true.  

A hard border won't be built. 200 roads won't have checkpoints on them. 

after a no deal exit..,.what then happens is sensible talks to do a trade deal.  A lot of people don't realise the EU refused to talk trade deal until we leave.   Ideally a leave agreement and a trade deal would all happen together. EU insisted we don't talk trade deal until we leave.    So there will be a delay in agreeing a trade deal. UK announced in March in would impose no tariffs on EU goods.    All it needs is EU to reciprocate whilst trade talks are started and agreed.

The fact he won't accept economic stats because they prove nothing makes it impossible to have a reasonable discussion with him.  The stats are interesting. They do not show the UK is suffering.  So as long as the UK economy is not suffering I'm not interested in whether we could have grown more.   Because I know we would do better without the uncertainty.  Uncertainty and worry was always going to exist.  Remainers have lead some to believe brexit won't even happen and we won't be able to do our own trade deals.      Uncertainty will hold back investment and affect growth. But you refuse to accept my point. The UK economy is not suffering. The project fear claims were wrong that the UK would go into recession soon after a vote to leave. 

So like us and Europe, in terms of chatting with him. I'm OUT.    But not before you've realsied there won't ever be a hard border in Ireland.  That's a big step and once more people realise that then a deal can be reached with the EU should Boris even wish to do a deal BEFORE we leave.    People forget that after we leave, then we can talk to the EU.   Our offer of 39bn was based on reaching an agreement  to leave.  

 

[1of4]

To continue the moving away from brexit theme.

With all the uproar around our ambassador to the US and a leaked memo. When will we see the appointment of a new ambassador. Could it be a man who is on good terms our potentiall future Prime Minister, a man who would make an excellent ambassador, according to the President of the US of A. Yes that cigarette smoking, pint drinking man of the people Mr Nigel Farage.

Nigel Farage a man bankrolled by Arron Banks. Who is alleged to be backed by a rich Russian oligarch. So Farage and Trump may have a lot in common.

Makes you wonder who the perpetrator of the leaked memo was.

Well thats my little conspiracy theory for the day. Just to give us a break away from brexit.

Ho If the Russians are backing Trump and Farage.  Who's backing Johnson? Being called Boris might give a clue.

[Igorlegend11]

1 hour ago, HantsRam said:

Unless he fails a no confidence vote....

That's a quite likely. These are unprecedneted times.

  It won't stop brexit incidentally.  The fixed term parliament act would need parliament to agree to change election dates again.  And then parliament would need to be dissolved .....and we'd still exit on 31st October 

Most likely is that 30 Tory MPs will help pass a motion of no confidence.  But they can't support a labour/Snp coalition formally in the Parliament.   So there would be no change in the Queens Government, just it would have been given a bloody nose.  

It's fine by me whatever happens in parliament as brexit will now happen. 

A lot of remain MP's need to ideally face the electorate asap in my opinion 

 

 

[Igorlegend11]

9 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

To continue the moving away from brexit theme.

With all the uproar around our ambassador to the US and a leaked memo. When will we see the appointment of a new ambassador. Could it be a man who is on good terms our potentiall future Prime Minister, a man who would make an excellent ambassador, according to the President of the US of A. Yes that cigarette smoking, pint drinking man of the people Mr Nigel Farage.

Nigel Farage a man bankrolled by Arron Banks. Who is alleged to be backed by a rich Russian oligarch. So Farage and Trump may have a lot in common.

Makes you wonder who the perpetrator of the leaked memo was.

Well thats my little conspiracy theory for the day. Just to give us a break away from brexit.

 

It's an outrageous leak.  Could have been very damaging for the UK.  Although he was merely performing his job, I'd expect the Ambassador to resign ( to allow US/UK relations and discussions to continue )

The leak does need ascertaining and prosecuting as it's a risk to the while UK 

The Ambassador will certainly get replaced by the new PM.  ( I reiterate the ambassador did nothing wrong. He needs to provide honest feedback to the UK ) 

I can't see the job being given to Farage for one minute.  He's more likely to be in the UK/EU trade talks 

[ronnieronalde]

31 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

To continue the moving away from brexit theme.

With all the uproar around our ambassador to the US and a leaked memo. When will we see the appointment of a new ambassador. Could it be a man who is on good terms our potentiall future Prime Minister, a man who would make an excellent ambassador, according to the President of the US of A. Yes that cigarette smoking, pint drinking man of the people Mr Nigel Farage.

Nigel Farage a man bankrolled by Arron Banks. Who is alleged to be backed by a rich Russian oligarch. So Farage and Trump may have a lot in common.

Makes you wonder who the perpetrator of the leaked memo was.

Well thats my little conspiracy theory for the day. Just to give us a break away from brexit.

Ho If the Russians are backing Trump and Farage.  Who's backing Johnson? Being called Boris might give a clue.

Ahhh Trump. The President of the United States of America. The leader of the country that tops both lists when it comes to the worlds largest AND most successful economy,

I watch quite a bit of the Daily Show (with Trevor Noah who is incredibly funny)

They showed a clip of Trump at the Plaza Hotel in New York, a 14 year old girl was asking for directions and having pointed her in the right direction as she was going up the escalator, he then said.

"I'll be dating her in 10 years, can you imagine that".

She was 14.

[1of4]

16 minutes ago, Igorlegend11 said:

It's an outrageous leak.  Could have been very damaging for the UK.  Although he was merely performing his job, I'd expect the Ambassador to resign ( to allow US/UK relations and discussions to continue )

The leak does need ascertaining and prosecuting as it's a risk to the while UK 

The Ambassador will certainly get replaced by the new PM.  ( I reiterate the ambassador did nothing wrong. He needs to provide honest feedback to the UK ) 

I can't see the job being given to Farage for one minute.  He's more likely to be in the UK/EU trade talks 

Glad to see that you think our ambassador was merely doing his job of telling our government, something most of the world already know, that Trump is an inept, insecure and incompetent buffoon.

If he was merely doing his job and had done nothing wrong. Why does he need to resign?

[Igorlegend11]

14 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

Glad to see that you think our ambassador was merely doing his job of telling our government, something most of the world already know, that Trump is an inept, insecure and incompetent buffoon.

If he was merely doing his job and had done nothing wrong. Why does he need to resign?

Because if the USA government are not going to speak to him it's pretty pointless having an Ambassador in the USA.   

The most powerful country are refusing to talk to him, and it's his job to liaise with the USA government.  He really will be struggling to fulfill his role. And it's such an important role.

Hence how important it is to find out how his emails got leaked and by whom.