Wes Tender

I see that Yasmin Alibhai-Brown was on Sky News yesterday discussing Farage's Brexit Party dropping out of contesting Tory held seats. I thought that she had promised to leave the Country if Boris became Prime Minister. Is she a liar, or was she speaking from outside of the country?

...a blow to Labour and therefore to the country? Labour have done plenty enough off their own bat to destroy their party's electability. It can be argued that a weak opposition is bad for democracy in the UK, but their weakness was caused by themselves and their lurch to the extreme left, not because of Farage's stance in the election.

Here's the Shadow Foreign Secretary having another absolute car crash interview on GMB. When are we going to next see the shadow Home Secretary in action? I can't wait. I do hope that her interview will require her to have a mastery of her brief on something that involves recalling statistics.

Gavin in his usual hubristic, insult throwing mode. This overestimation of the power of the EU presumably doesn't include their insistence that an independent Scotland wishing to join as a new member would have to join the Eurozone and Schengen, does it?

You lot are a bit confused by current events. You mistakenly believe for some reason that a politician's position on whether to accept the democratic vote in a referendum determines whether they are moderates or some sort of right wing extremist. It doesn't. It makes them either more or less of a democrat. Have you lot worked out which position honours the democratic vote? No, I thought not. Furthermore, just because the Conservatives and The Brexit Party mostly share a position whereby they both wish to leave the EU, they are apparently morphing together, whereas there is no suggestion as far as I can see that Labour, the Lib Dumbs, the SNP, Greens, Plaid Cymru who all support remaining in the EU are morphing together. How strange. Also deeply ironic is the position of the SNP, who want independence from one Union, in order to remain in another where they would be less independent than they currently would be if they stuck with us. I don't see any labels applied to them as being right wing extremists, little Scotlanders, old or thick, or any other derogatory terms. And as for you Soggy, the nastiest or the truly nasty parties would be Corbyn's Marxist Labour Party, which I'm sure you would love to be in power. Thank God that the events of today have made that a more distant possibility.

Great news this morning! This makes both the Conservatives more assured of the election victory and able to push Brexit over the line, and the possibility of Corbyn in No.10 less likely. In return, in order to maximise the number of pro-Brexit MPs, the Conservatives should allow The Brexit Party a clean run at Labour's seats in their traditional industrial heartlands. Also as an added bonus, we will hopefully now see the likes of Grieve, Soubry and other ex-Tory mavericks in the dole queue just before Christmas, as the Lib Dumbs not contesting their seats will be countered by TBP not splitting the true Tory vote.

I have been searching for the terms of the bet, as I'm pretty sure that it was based on you saying that we would leave on the Norway option and I just said we wouldn't. No doubt you will be able to provide the exact wording. You really are naive to believe that if the Tories get re-elected that they will be bound by the Benn Surrender Act ruling out no deal. Didn't you realise that no Government can bind the hands of their successors, that all they would have to do is repeal it? You also can't be up to date with current affairs, because Boris has promised that he will not extend the Implementation Period beyond December 2020, so the implication of that is that if a free trade deal is not completed by then, we leave on WTO terms. You really must be barking to believe that it would be extended indefinitely. As for you expecting that I might be dead by then, what a nasty piece of work you are.

How's the Norway option going, Timmy?

Something wrong with your powers of comprehension today? I enquired whether you took an interest in current affairs, not the Supreme Court. As I said, there had been numerous articles in legal circles even, expressing concern that the Supreme Court would be meddling in political affairs by ruling on the prorogation issue. But of course, all those who expressed that opinion were biased and twisted, just as everybody was who voted to leave the EU, eh? It is up to the political parties as to how they lay out the thrust of their campaigns, so of course you remoaners who aren't capable of accepting that Parliament has been hugely at odds with their electorate will resent that emphasis of the campaign. Clearly, they aren't after gaining the votes of the terminally blinkered anti-democrats, like you, who are idiotic enough to think that the referendum was some giant opinion poll to be ignored if it didn't return the result you wanted. And you have the brass neck to talk about democracy. As for your belief that the establishment is not pro-remain, I am amazed at your naivety, which would be more credible in some spotty fourth former, not an aged grandad. As for your last sentence, expressing the opinion that some establishment bodies or organisations require reform is hardly a step on the road to dictatorship. It is a bad case of hyperbole on your part. Calm down dear, you're sounding far too shrill to be taken seriously.

No it isn't, so don't try an put words into my mouth. As you well know if you take any sort of interest in current affairs, the Supreme Court meddling in political matters has been frowned on in judicial circles as setting a dangerous precedent. As for your nonsensical opinion that this Parliament in any way reflects the political will of the people, why then do you think that this election will be framed as Parliament against the people? I have to point out once again that two thirds of Constituencies voted to leave the EU and that two thirds of MPs have done their level best to thwart it. Is that really your idea of democracy? I'm all for rule setting bodies, provided that they are seen to be impartial. In the case of Brexit, hardly any of them are, because they represent the pro-Remain establishment. The Supreme Court, the Speaker, the Electoral Commission, Parliament, much of the Civil Service, have all shown bias or vested interest in adopting a pro-remain position. One can only hope that if the Conservatives achieve a strong majority that they will bring about reform of some of these organisations.

You don't seem to realise that it was you that introduced the expression "acted as a political tool" into the conversation. So I ask you, what did you mean by the expression?

Quite. So they acted as a political tool when they shouldn't have. It's what I said.

Ah, you're back Gavin. I'm afraid that I'm not particularly bothered that the remoaner laden Supreme Court intervened in political matters where they should not have.

https://order-order.com/2019/11/08/labour-candidate-poor-less-educated-easier-control/ This is what Labour think about people like you, soggy

You seem to be either very ill-informed or just ignorant when it comes to what constitutes Parliamentary procedure. Boris tried to exercise powers that were available historically to the executive, i.e. the government, to get Brexit over the line, and Bercow pulled all sorts of strokes to deny him that opportunity. It is a reasonable assertion to make that had Bercow not intervened in such an underhand way, we might already have left the EU on 31st October. Thank God his successor Sir Lindsey Hoyle has promised not to indulge in that sort of chicanery. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50336267

So they can't fight for the country if they're not on the front line then? Unless of course with modern electronic warfare they are in their bedrooms using their X Box controller skills to guide bomb laden drones onto enemy military targets

Who can believe anything Bercow says? He is a liar himself. When accused of partiality towards the remoaners because there was a sticker on his car saying "B0llocks to Brexit", he implied that as it was his wife's car, the accusation couldn't be levelled at him. Now five minutes after his role as Speaker was terminated, he comes clean and reveals himself as a passionate remoaner. I do hope sincerely that the egotistical midget doesn't get a peerage. It might be a tradition that retiring Speakers are enobled, but Bercow doesn't respect precedent, does he, only when it suits him to bend some rule to thwart Brexit.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/11/diane-abbotts-fake-news/ Diane Abbott getting it all wrong as usual. This time probably deliberately rather than through incompetence. But Soggy would be happy with her as Home Secretary, a Marxist PM and Chancellor, both terrorist apologists, and the Duchess Thornberry as Foreign Secretary.

Look, how long do you think it is viable to go round and round the houses, day after day, week, month and year after year b*tching about a democratically taken decision? I don't care a jot whether I could gain respect for continuing to rake over old coals. But I certainly have no respect at all for those who aren't capable of shrugging their shoulders and admitting that although it wasn't the decision they wanted, they would nevertheless accept it, because that is what democracy is all about.

I'm not asking anybody for their reasons for voting remain three and a half years after the event. I'd consider that to be a complete waste of time and insulting, as it implies that I don't respect their reasons. What a pity that the likes of Soggy aren't big enough to accept the democratic referendum vote and move on, as everybody did for over 40 years after the last one. Remoaners like him bleated about how unfair it all was, starting from 24th June 2016 and haven't stopped since. They're like little babies throwing their rattles out of the pram.

Suck it up, loser

That isn't a serious question at all. Over half of the electorate voting in the referendum wanted to leave the EU. Are you going to ask them all their reasons? Every one of them had their own personal reasons for that decision. Just have the decency to accept that whatever those reasons were, they were entitled to hold them and the likes of you should respect them, instead of questioning them three and a half years later. Next you'll be wanting to know everybody's reasons for their vote in the General Election.

Mims was a very good Constituency MP.

I'm a pragmatist. I'll vote for the best way to leave the EU that is feasible, and then campaign to get the best free trade deal afterwards. There is scope to make improvements to the deal, which we haven't yet signed. A strong pro-Brexit Conservative government could achieve that. Which way are you going to vote? For the party that is too confused to know what they want for Brexit, or the other lot the Un-liberal Anti-democrats who wish to ignore the electorate's wishes in the referendum?

Wrong. If Eastleigh appointed a remoaner candidate at the selection meeting I'm attending on Thursday evening, then yes, I would vote Brexit. But there is no way that they will, so I will be voting Conservative.