Brexit - Post Match Reaction

[Wes Tender]

Where did I say it was Les. I said it’s effectively the same deal that the EU had agreed to offer May in December 2017 before she and her party rejected it and proposed the UK-wide backstop instead. The EU and Varadkar couldn’t believe their lucky stars when Johnson folded quicker than a cheap suit and reverted to their preferred solution. They are delighted that there’s now a healthy majority to pass it. No wonder your Nigel is nervous.

 

You seem to have air-brushed over the word "original". You didn't say that it was effectively the same deal, you said it was the original deal. You have had your pants pulled down and are trying to bluster your way out of it as usual

[CB Fry]

You seem to have air-brushed over the word "original". You didn't say that it was effectively the same deal, you said it was the original deal. You have had your pants pulled down and are trying to bluster your way out of it as usual [emoji38]

You seem to have air brushed over the word "proposal".

[aintforever]

Interesting that despite it being a Tory landslide in terms of seats, more people voted for parties favouring a people’s vote than Brexit. FPTP system at its finest.

[trousers]

Interesting that despite it being a Tory landslide in terms of seats, more people voted for parties favouring a people’s vote than Brexit. FPTP system at its finest.

Didn't said parties have an opportunity in the previous parliament session to vote for a people's vote...?

[aintforever]

Didn't said parties have an opportunity in the previous parliament session to vote for a people's vote...?

 

Probably, though I’m not sure they have since it became Labour policy.

 

I just thought it was interesting that if it was a “Brexit election” most people want a people’s vote yet we have a government free to press ahead with a no deal Brexit.

[CB Fry]

Didn't said parties have an opportunity in the previous parliament session to vote for a people's vote...?

It wasn't Labour policy until the election.

[trousers]

Probably, though I’m not sure they have since it became Labour policy.

 

I just thought it was interesting that if it was a “Brexit election” most people want a people’s vote yet we have a government free to press ahead with a no deal Brexit.

Fair observation, but the election only got the green light because parties that advocated another referendum voted it through parliament rather than clubbing together to legislate for a people's vote. The words hoist, own and petard spring to mind. Edited 14 December, 2019 by trousers

[badgerx16]

Interesting that despite it being a Tory landslide in terms of seats, more people voted for parties favouring a people’s vote than Brexit. FPTP system at its finest.

Over 3 million fewer people voted Tory in the GE than voted for Brexit in the referendum.

[badgerx16]

Why would it be only on their terms? Wouldn't it be mutually beneficial, therefore on terms beneficial to both parties? Explain and justify your opinion.

Trump has always insisted that he wants to reverse the current trade deficit that the US has with the UK.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Jesus wept. Mercantilism for dummies meets the Apprentice. There’s thick and then there’s thick

 

I see the charm that keeps you on the losing side is still intact and maybe I did have to google mercantilism but can you explain why a US trade deal would not potentially make US cars cheaper and EU cars more expensive?

[Lord Duckhunter]

Well, like LD, I must have missed it. I'm sure that you will be happy to bring us both up to speed. Or perhaps you mistakenly think that Boris's oven ready deal was exactly the same as the original May surrender treaty?

 

If people bothered to read what I originally wrote, I clearly stated the WA was awful. It was awful because parliament blocked no deal for Boris, and May didn’t ever want that outcome. Boris’ WA is awful. What the “it’s the same deal” merchants don’t seem to grasp is that without the backstop we can **** off after the transition. Admittedly, we leave the Mick’s behind, but Boris put that to the people and they wholeheartedly backed him.

 

The point is that now he has a massive parliamentary majority he can threaten to withdraw from trade negotiations and have no deal after any transition, something May’s deal didn’t allow.

 

Now, our side of the argument claimed that a credible threat to walk away gets you a better outcome. The remoaners claimed otherwise. As we now have a credible walk away option (Parliament won’t block it), let’s see who was right. Personally, I think Boris will get a better trade deal now, than he would of with a single figure majority. But we will now get to see.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Weston Super Saint]

Over 3 million fewer people voted Tory in the GE than voted for Brexit in the referendum.

 

Jesus wept! Are you really comparing a binary referendum with a GE with numerous options to vote for?

[badgerx16]

Jesus wept! Are you really comparing a binary referendum with a GE with numerous options to vote for?

No, just pointing out a statistical curiosity. And please don't blaspheme.

[Nolan]

Over 3 million fewer people voted Tory in the GE than voted for Brexit in the referendum.

Theres nearly two million people in Northern Ireland and Gibralter.

 

One doesn't have conservative candidates, the other doesn't vote in general elections.

[badgerx16]

Theres nearly two million people in Northern Ireland and Gibralter.

 

One doesn't have conservative candidates, the other doesn't vote in general elections.

 

340,000 leave votes in NI, population of Gib approx 35,000. Still leaves over two and a half million.

[Guided Missile]

Morning, campers. The good news keeps coming. I hope Gavyn Davies is following my insightful analysis of the macroeconomic prospects for the UK, post Brexit. His former employer, Goldman apparently agrees with me, while his funds continue to underwhelm:

 

 

General election result could see pound rally to pre-referendum level of $1.45

Sterling is positioned to surge in the coming months to levels not seen since before the Brexit referendum, according to City forecasters, as the British economy sheds the burden of uncertainty.

Wall Street titan Goldman Sachs predicted Britain will benefit from an array of stimuli under Mr Johnson. Its economist Adrian Paul said that as well as renewed business investment, “a pick-up in global growth” and increased public spending should means GDP growth in the second half of 2020 to hit an annualised 2.4pc.

 

 

[Wes Tender]

If people bothered to read what I originally wrote, I clearly stated the WA was awful. It was awful because parliament blocked no deal for Boris, and May didn’t ever want that outcome. Boris’ WA is awful. What the “it’s the same deal” merchants don’t seem to grasp is that without the backstop we can **** off after the transition. Admittedly, we leave the Mick’s behind, but Boris put that to the people and they wholeheartedly backed him.

 

The point is that now he has a massive parliamentary majority he can threaten to withdraw from trade negotiations and have no deal after any transition, something May’s deal didn’t allow.

 

Now, our side of the argument claimed that a credible threat to walk away gets you a better outcome. The remoaners claimed otherwise. As we now have a credible walk away option (Parliament won’t block it), let’s see who was right. Personally, I think Boris will get a better trade deal now, than he would of with a single figure majority. But we will now get to see.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Exactly. It's unusual for Gavyn not to comprehend something like this.

[shurlock]

Exactly. It's unusual for Gavyn not to comprehend something like this.

 

What you miss is that Johnson didn’t even put up a fight pal. He had plenty of leeway to fight for his preferred option -alternative arrangements and a technological solution on the island of Ireland. Yet a ninety minute meeting with Varadkar in the Wirral was enough for him to fold quicker than a cheap suit. It was the most stunning and radical of compromises -and even now doesn’t provide the type of closure Johnson claims. It doesn’t surprise me that you and LD don’t know what it means to have a backbone

 

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2019/1213/1099064-tory-landslide-irish-sea/

Edited 16 December, 2019 by shurlock

[Wes Tender]

What you miss is that Johnson didn’t even put up a fight pal. He had plenty of leeway to fight for his preferred option -alternative arrangements and a technological solution on the island of Ireland. Yet a ninety minute meeting with Varadkar in the Wirral was enough for him to fold quicker than a cheap suit. It was the most stunning and radical of compromises -and even now doesn’t provide the type of closure Johnson claims. It doesn’t surprise me that you and LD don’t know what it means to have a backbone

 

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2019/1213/1099064-tory-landslide-irish-sea/

 

Believe what you like, Gavyn if it makes you feel falsely ambivalent about the scale of defeat of you remoaners. The fact remains that Boris got shot of the surrender treaty backstop that the EU insisted could not be renegotiated and that he has quite a different and much stronger negotiating hand than he had before last Thursday. It surprised both LD and me that you don't appear to recognise that and the fact that now no deal is back on the table means that the EU will have to do better if they want to maintain a good relationship with their soon to be biggest and most important third party trading neighbour.

[Wes Tender]

Calling Bucktootim to the thread. It is pertinent now to ask when you will concede defeat on our £50 bet, the proceeds to go to charity, on whether the UK would end up with a Norway style Brexit or not. You can wait until the end of January when we will have left the EU, if you like, or you might insist on fudging it until the end of next year when we will have left deal or no deal, but the chances of us agreeing a Norway style deal have vanished. If you can't accept that, please do argue why I am wrong in my assertion.

[buctootim]

Calling Bucktootim to the thread. It is pertinent now to ask when you will concede defeat on our £50 bet, the proceeds to go to charity, on whether the UK would end up with a Norway style Brexit or not. You can wait until the end of January when we will have left the EU, if you like, or you might insist on fudging it until the end of next year when we will have left deal or no deal, but the chances of us agreeing a Norway style deal have vanished. If you can't accept that, please do argue why I am wrong in my assertion.

 

News flash Wes. We're still in the single market and customs union and Johnson is already gearing up for an extension. Out on WTO terms is what you bet on. Time to stump up.

[shurlock]

Believe what you like, Gavyn if it makes you feel falsely ambivalent about the scale of defeat of you remoaners. The fact remains that Boris got shot of the surrender treaty backstop that the EU insisted could not be renegotiated and that he has quite a different and much stronger negotiating hand than he had before last Thursday. It surprised both LD and me that you don't appear to recognise that and the fact that now no deal is back on the table means that the EU will have to do better if they want to maintain a good relationship with their soon to be biggest and most important third party trading neighbour.

 

Spectacularly wrong Les. The EU was more than happy to reopen the withdrawal agreement since Johnson caved and accepted the EU’s original -and preferred- proposal for a border in the Irish Sea. You forget that UK-wide backstop was the UK’s idea - it certainly wasn’t the EU’s preference for economic and political reasons and only grudgingly went along with it because the UK would not accept a division between GB and NI. One of those supposedly inviolable red lines you and your fellow swivels have conveniently forgotten about.

 

Let’s put it in simple, dumbed down terms you can understand pal. Let’s say I offer to sell my donkey to you for £100. You argue that it’s too expensive and after much haggling I say fine I’ll give to you for £80 but that’s my final offer and won’t be reopening things. Then unexpectedly the next day you come back to me and offer me £100 - what would you do if you were in my shoes pal. Tell you to f**k off, insisting that £80 was my final offer?

 

Take a break and recharge pal - you’re going to need to do plenty more mental gymnastics in the coming year

Edited 16 December, 2019 by shurlock

[Wes Tender]

News flash Wes. We're still in the single market and customs union and Johnson is already gearing up for an extension. Out on WTO terms is what you bet on. Time to stump up.

 

Timmy asserted that we would leave with a Norway style deal, I bet him £50 that we would not. HTH

[Wes Tender]

Spectacularly wrong Les. The EU was more than happy to reopen the withdrawal agreement since Johnson caved and accepted the EU’s original -and preferred- proposal for a border in the Irish Sea. You forget that UK-wide backstop was the UK’s proposal - it certainly wasn’t the EU’s preference for economic and political reasons and only grudgingly went along with it because the UK would not accept a division between GB and NI. One of those supposedly inviolable red lines you and your fellow swivels have conveniently forgotten about.

 

Let’s put it in simple, dumbed down terms you can understand pal. Let’s say I offer to sell my donkey to you for £100. You argue that it’s too expensive and after much haggling I say fine I’ll give to you for £80 but that’s my final offer and won’t be reopening things. Then unexpectedly the next day you come back to me and offer me £100 - what would you do if you were in my shoes pal. Tell you to f**k off, insisting that £80 was my final offer?

 

Take a break and recharge pal - you’re going to need to do plenty more mental gymnastics in the coming year

 

On top insult form this morning, Gavin. Well done. As the days pass and the remoaner defeat sinks in more deeply, the dialogue includes ever more bitter recriminations and self introspection. But there will always be those remoaners epitomised by the likes of you who don't realise that it is precisely this arrogance and the belief that the leavers were too thick to realise what they wanted that was the reason that they lost the referendum vote, and have now been thrashed in the General Election.

 

I don't forget that the backstop was agreed by the hapless and serially useless May and her puppet-master Ollie Robins as part of her Chequers surrender treaty, and was always of the opinion that it represented precisely the bad deal that no deal was better than it. I am quite content with Boris' WA, as are all of the ERG spartans. Perhaps you ought to tw*tter them all and relate your little playground analogy of how to negotiate the best price for donkeys.

 

I can see how upset you are that Boris' WA will achieve the majority in the House that means us leaving by the end of January and there is nothing anybody can do to prevent it now.

 

I look forward to the coming year's event with some considerable optimism, whereas I can see you becoming more down in the mouth and even more insulting to those on the right side of recent events.

[aintforever]

and have now been thrashed in the General Election.

 

To be fair, more people voted for parties that wanted a second refurendum or Brexit cancelled than pro Brexit. And that's with the main party having an unelectable leader with a marxist manifesto.

[Wes Tender]

To be fair, more people voted for parties that wanted a second refurendum or Brexit cancelled than pro Brexit. And that's with the main party having an unelectable leader with a marxist manifesto.

 

You make the same basic error of reasoning that Soggy did earlier. You conflate the share of the vote for parties that wanted a second referendum with the number of voters who wanted to either leave or remain in the EU within those parties. Yes we know how many people voted for each party, but there was no way of knowing whether those voters were remainers or leavers. But it is indicative that those Labour and Lib Dumb seats were lost because the party ignored their leave majorities, or because of Corbyn, or indeed both.

[shurlock]

You make the same basic error of reasoning that Soggy did earlier. You conflate the share of the vote for parties that wanted a second referendum with the number of voters who wanted to either leave or remain in the EU within those parties. Yes we know how many people voted for each party, but there was no way of knowing whether those voters were remainers or leavers. But it is indicative that those Labour and Lib Dumb seats were lost because the party ignored their leave majorities, or because of Corbyn, or indeed both.

 

What like you consistently and unswervingly did with the 2017 GE results, claiming that 80% of the electorate voted for parties that would uphold the referendum result and go WTO if so required (never mind many remainers voted Labour and Conservative and you never read the Labour Manifesto that explicitly ruled out no deal). I lost count of the number of times you repeated that little soundbite.

 

So it’s rather sweet and endearing to see you change your tune when the shoe is apparently on the other foot. Then again you’re not the sharpest or most logical fella.

Edited 16 December, 2019 by shurlock

[aintforever]

You make the same basic error of reasoning that Soggy did earlier. You conflate the share of the vote for parties that wanted a second referendum with the number of voters who wanted to either leave or remain in the EU within those parties. Yes we know how many people voted for each party, but there was no way of knowing whether those voters were remainers or leavers. But it is indicative that those Labour and Lib Dumb seats were lost because the party ignored their leave majorities, or because of Corbyn, or indeed both.

 

I didn't make an error I just stated a fact.

[aintforever]

there was no way of knowing whether those voters were remainers or leavers.

 

Then how come the remainers were "thrashed in the General Election"?

[Wes Tender]

What like you consistently and unswervingly did with the 2017 GE results, claiming that 80% of the electorate voted for parties that would uphold the referendum result and go WTO if so required (never mind many remainers voted Labour and you never read the Labour Manifesto that explicitly ruled out no deal). I lost count of the number of times you repeated that little soundbite.

 

So it’s rather sweet and endearing to see you change your tune when the shoe is apparently on the other foot. Then again you’re not the sharpest most logical fella.

 

If you're going to go off on one, do try and get your facts right. Yes, 80% of the electorate voted for parties in the 2017 GE who had promised to honour the referendum vote. I never claimed that a set percentage of voters in those parties were either leave or remain voters. You failing to understand the difference makes you look a bit stupid, Gavyn. That is why around two thirds of the constituencies had leave voting majorities, whereas Parliament consisted of two thirds of remoaner MPs. Your point that many remoaners voted Labour supports my point, because as surely was the case, around 20% of Tories were remoaners and all of the main parties had a mix between the two positions.

 

Would you like me to create an analogy involving donkeys to simply it for you?

[shurlock]

If you're going to go off on one, do try and get your facts right. Yes, 80% of the electorate voted for parties in the 2017 GE who had promised to honour the referendum vote. I never claimed that a set percentage of voters in those parties were either leave or remain voters. You failing to understand the difference makes you look a bit stupid, Gavyn. That is why around two thirds of the constituencies had leave voting majorities, whereas Parliament consisted of two thirds of remoaner MPs. Your point that many remoaners voted Labour supports my point, because as surely was the case, around 20% of Tories were remoaners and all of the main parties had a mix between the two positions.

 

Would you like me to create an analogy involving donkeys to simply it for you?

 

So a majority of the electorate voted for parties that either wanted to revoke Article 50 or hold a second referendum. Aintforever clearly said voted for parties too.

 

To be clear, in my original post, I deliberately copied aintforever’s syntax word for word just to be sure (and ensure you walked into the trap). The same syntax that you got into a tizzy in one context (i.e. the 2019 GE results) even though you completely endorse it another (i.e. the 2017 GE results). There is no semantic or conceptual difference - other than the fact that you’re a hypocrite and what’s good for the goose isn’t good for the gander

 

Oh dear Les - caught with your pants down again.

Edited 16 December, 2019 by shurlock

[OldNick]

So a majority of the electorate voted for parties that either wanted to revoke Article 50 or hold a second referendum. Aintforever clearly said parties.

 

To be clear, in my original post, I deliberately copied aintforever’s syntax word for word just to be sure (and ensure you walked into the trap). The same syntax that you got into a tizzy in this context even though you completely endorse it in the context of the 2017 GE results. There is no semantic or conceptual difference - other than the fact that you’re a hypocrite.

 

Oh dear Les - caught with your pants down again.

Sky called this the Brexit election, but I thought it was a GE with Brexit being one of the main issues. Personally as a remainer the main issues to me was not Brexit per say as I took it that if the Tories won with a decent majority, yes Brexit would be done. My major concern was the election of a party with far left policies that if implemented would cripple much of our country and you are old enough to recall the 70's and the madness of too much union power and the taxing of the people who create. Add to that the man who IMO is unpatriotic and not likely to defend us when confronted.

[Batman]

Sky called this the Brexit election, but I thought it was a GE with Brexit being one of the main issues. Personally as a remainer the main issues to me was not Brexit per say as I took it that if the Tories won with a decent majority, yes Brexit would be done. My major concern was the election of a party with far left policies that if implemented would cripple much of our country and you are old enough to recall the 70's and the madness of too much union power and the taxing of the people who create. Add to that the man who IMO is unpatriotic and not likely to defend us when confronted.

 

If momentum has its way, Labour will be completely shot.

 

[shurlock]

Sky called this the Brexit election, but I thought it was a GE with Brexit being one of the main issues. Personally as a remainer the main issues to me was not Brexit per say as I took it that if the Tories won with a decent majority, yes Brexit would be done. My major concern was the election of a party with far left policies that if implemented would cripple much of our country and you are old enough to recall the 70's and the madness of too much union power and the taxing of the people who create. Add to that the man who IMO is unpatriotic and not likely to defend us when confronted.

 

I agree with a lot of this and many remainers voted for the conservatives for this reason. Many former Labour leavers too.

[OldNick]

I agree with a lot of this and many remainers voted for the conservatives for this reason. Many former Labour leavers too.

What a good run up to Christmas, we can agree in the main on something.

[saint1977]

If momentum has its way, Labour will be completely shot.

 

 

Good grief, what Mason is proposing sounds like something from the Stalin era. Important for the future of democracy to stop Momentum. The state of denial since they were hammered has been astonishing, even though most people knew moving to the hard Trotskyite left would end in tears. When I heard McDonnell talking about enabling secondary picketing/action again I shuddered.

[shurlock]

Boris Johnson to shut door on extending Brexit transition

 

https://www.ft.com/content/739a46f6-202b-11ea-b8a1-584213ee7b2b

 

He’s learned absolutely nothing - 2020 should be full of excellent trading opportunities. Certainty my ar$e.

[Tamesaint]

https://www.ft.com/content/739a46f6-202b-11ea-b8a1-584213ee7b2b

 

He’s learned absolutely nothing - 2020 should be full of excellent trading opportunities. Certainty my ar$e.

 

Hopefully he will do his usual. Say one thing, keep the swivels on board , and then towards the last minute do the opposite. The DUP can tell anybody how it works.

[Nolan]

Well. It makes sense.

 

To stop Lawyers taking you to court, make it law.

 

And it does provide certainty.

 

I've already had all my industry no deal training pre October 31st, implementing it is not an issue.

[Guided Missile]

Game, Set & Match to Boris

He played a blinder...

[shurlock]

Well. It makes sense.

 

To stop Lawyers taking you to court, make it law.

 

And it does provide certainty.

I've already had all my industry no deal training pre October 31st, implementing it is not an issue.

 

As usual, Nolan, you make little sense. No deal training - you’re having a laugh pal.

[Wes Tender]

Game, Set & Match to Boris

He played a blinder...

 

Great news this morning that Boris is going to put into law the prevention of any extension to the WA beyond this time next year, therefore also at a stroke ruling out the Benn surrender act that stipulated that we could not leave without a deal. Pre-election, Barnier had stuck his oar in stating that there probably would not be enough time to arrange a trade deal within that schedule and no doubt the strategy was to drag out the negotiations until that became impossible and then to delay it as long as possible to strengthen the EU's position. The massive majority has strengthened our hand considerably and within days of the election, we have laid out our stall that we have had enough dithering this last three and a half years, lost patience, and are prepared to play hard ball, deal or no deal within a year.

 

Shortly after the election result, the establishment media optimistically predicted that with the thumping majority Boris now had, he could afford to extend the withdrawal period, ignoring any dissent from the ERG and the DUP. This announcement buries that assumption and signals Boris' determination that there will be no fudging the issue. As you say, GM, Boris is indeed playing a blinder.

[shurlock]

Hopefully he will do his usual. Say one thing, keep the swivels on board , and then towards the last minute do the opposite. The DUP can tell anybody how it works.

 

Selling out the DUP and the Micks as LD dismissingly calls them is one thing. It requires minimal courage or statesmanship. Taking on the English Nationalists is quite another. While Johnson has the raw numbers to do what he likes in Parliament, the howls of betrayal outside it if he changed course would be deafening. You just need to look at the fanatics and freaks on these threads. As I’ve said before, the populist tail is wagging the dog, not the other way around.

[Nolan]

As usual, Nolan, you make little sense. No deal training - you’re having a laugh pal.

Training and preparation for customs clearances and the like in no deal, what will be restricted for export from the UK etc. Learning what the EU are being petty about.

 

Is your industry not ready for no deal? You've had 3 ½ years to prepare.

[Wes Tender]

Selling out the DUP and the Micks as LD dismissingly calls them is one thing. It requires minimal courage or statesmanship. Taking on the English Nationalists is quite another. While Johnson has the raw numbers to do what he likes in Parliament, the howls of betrayal outside it if he changed course would be deafening. You just need to look at the fanatics and freaks on these threads. As I’ve said before, the populist tail is wagging the dog, not the other way around.

 

Yes, it's great, isn't it, our country going its own way into the future as an independent trading nation, taking back control of our laws, borders and money. I think you have things the wrong way around, the UK populists are the dog, the tail wagging the dog was the EU. Noted that anybody who holds a different opinion to you on the EU is a freak or a fanatic, but a pity for you remoaners that are so many of us, isn't it? That's democracy for you.

[shurlock]

Training and preparation for customs clearances and the like in no deal, what will be restricted for export from the UK etc. Learning what the EU are being petty about.

 

Is your industry not ready for no deal? You've had 3 ½ years to prepare.

 

Very cute pal. A bit of advice on form filling. Let’s just say those things would be the least of your worries in the event of a crash out no deal.

[Wes Tender]

Training and preparation for customs clearances and the like in no deal, what will be restricted for export from the UK etc. Learning what the EU are being petty about.

 

Is your industry not ready for no deal? You've had 3 ½ years to prepare.

 

Gavyn is some sort of consultant, Nolan. He says he will continue with his feather-bedded existence regardless of Brexit, deal or no deal. He is probably in his very own personal ivory tower, totally oblivious to the feelings and desires of the thicko Brexiteer plebs who exist outside of the metropolitan remoaner bubble.

[shurlock]

Gavyn is some sort of consultant, Nolan. He says he will continue with his feather-bedded existence regardless of Brexit, deal or no deal. He is probably in his very own personal ivory tower, totally oblivious to the feelings and desires of the thicko Brexiteer plebs who exist outside of the metropolitan remoaner bubble.

 

What’s a metropolitan remainer bubble? And just because you’re thick doesn’t mean every leaver is Les.

[Guided Missile]

Gavyn is some sort of consultant, Nolan. He says he will continue with his feather-bedded existence regardless of Brexit, deal or no deal. He is probably in his very own personal ivory tower, totally oblivious to the feelings and desires of the thicko Brexiteer plebs who exist outside of the metropolitan remoaner bubble.

Actually, Gavyn Davies is some sort of fund manager, whose funds fail to keep pace with inflation or even the types of return you'd get from holding premium bonds. He is not British and has a dislike for "Tories" and privately educated "toffs". This is reflected in the fact that he is arrogant and rude to people he doesn't know, on a football forum. It was imbibed in him from an early age as he was bullied at the first school he attended, a third rate grammar school in Southampton whose most famous alumni was Benny Hill. Still our Gavyn worked his African socks off, despite being bullied by most of his classmates and gained good grades at "A" level which allowed him entry into Oxbridge. Unfortunately for him, the bullying didn't stop, as most Oxbridge undergraduates were public school and he was grammar school. He thought that he didn't have many friends apart from other misfits, because of this fact, but it is apparent that he hasn't got many friends because he is arrogant and rude. The class struggle didn't stop there for our Rhodesian immigrant, because his job at Goldman Sachs exposed him to traders who were either toffs or barrow boys. Neither of these types particularly like to be lectured by an arrogant grammar school lad on macroeconomics, when they were making the bulk of the profits and despite calling him pal, he really wasn't. Still after years of brown-nosing he made partner and that was when he hit the jackpot. The "big-bang" deregulation introduced by the Thatcher government meant that partners at Goldman Sachs, like our mate Gavyn, made out like bandits when Goldman joined the Stock Market. Made out like a £150 million pound bandit. Still, I say good luck to him, but you'd expect an immigrant grammar school boy like him to show a sliver of gratitude to Thatcherism and her commitment to deregulation. Not a bit of it. Our hero advised the Treasury to join the ERM. We all know how that ended up.

However, armed with a shed load of moolah and the chance to gain his revenge on those privately educated toffs who called him "pal", but secretly hated him, he continued his brown nosing with, er, Brown. We all remember Brown. He was the socialist genius who sold all our gold at a discount and hated working class "bigots", like Gillian Duffy. Our hero was quickly employed as an adviser to Brown. He was rewarded by being made chairman of the BBC, a stint which was quickly ended when David Kelly slashed his wrist, although there was far more bloodshed in Blair's misguided support for the invasion of Iraq. I must admit, you'd think that with his track record, shurlock/Gavyn would be a bit more humble, but not a bit of it. The arrogance and rudeness goes to the bone and there is no wonder he comes on here for his social interaction. If he was in a pub 99% of people would either walk away, bored to tears, or give him a slapping...

[Wes Tender]

What’s a metropolitan remainer bubble? And just because you’re thick doesn’t mean every leaver is Les.

 

Haven't you heard of the metropolitan remainer bubble? As I said, you're well out of touch with the average voter.

 

As for your arrogant opinion on the plebs, there isn't a single pro-Brexit poster on this forum who you don't insult as being thick, racist little Englanders. It really amuses me and satisfies the hell out of me that you so-called intellectual remoaners have been soundly thrashed electorally by those whom you despise. Karma.