|
Post by Tim on Jun 7, 2019 14:58:18 GMT
They came 2nd in the Peterborough by-election. Nigel Farage was on the radio this morning talking about how they've come from nowhere in the space of 2 months (and I actually agree with him on that) and that it's a sign of the end of the old fashioned 2 party system we have.
Does anyone actually believe that?
I mean, lets suppose the Tories sort themselves out in the next couple of months, manage to unite behind their new leader AND deliver Brexit surely that means the sole purpose of Farage's party is over, similar to what happened to UKIP after the referendum.
In those circumstances I assume the Brexit leaning Tory voters who've been put off recently will return to the fold and the Brexit party vote will collapse.
I also think in those circumstances no established party will want Farage on its books so he'll disappear again as he did after 2016.
Whaddya think?
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jun 7, 2019 15:33:08 GMT
I think it's time for a drink.
Nigel would surely approve.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2019 16:06:35 GMT
I think there is a large amount of disgust with the status quo and it has resulted in protest voting. Labour were carping on about local issues but considering where the brexit party have come from, were lucky to win Peterborough.
Whether this is continued is doubtful as this kind of protest vote is hardly unknown but imho, the tories and labour are busy imploding, the limp damp wets are less use than a toilet roll to a porpoise. There really is no play list that works in the current political situation and Gerry Anderson was right, Anything CAN happen but probably not in the next half hour.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jun 7, 2019 16:10:57 GMT
I agree but I think the protest vote thing is the Brexit Party's problem - that's all they appear to have been. Once Brexit is delivered (which looks to be an inevitability) the reason for the protest will have gone and nobody will vote for them.
Once we're out of Europe Farage will have to go on the 'celebrity' TV programmes to get his fix of time in the limelight!
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jun 7, 2019 20:36:24 GMT
..... less use than a toilet roll to a porpoise. That is a great quote ! Yours ??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2019 21:00:33 GMT
Afraid so.
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Jun 8, 2019 0:08:26 GMT
Story is that Farridge turned up at Peterborough to give it the big "I am" all over TV and media then hid in a toilet and sneaked out of a side door when it was clear there was no valedictory speech to be made.
The man is a CUNT and needs to be starved of airtime.
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Jun 8, 2019 8:54:09 GMT
Story is that Farridge turned up at Peterborough to give it the big "I am" all over TV and media then hid in a toilet and sneaked out of a side door when it was clear there was no valedictory speech to be made. The man is a CUNT and needs to be starved of airtime. I can’t think of any man who better fits the description of the word.
|
|
|
Post by cbeaks1 on Jun 8, 2019 10:07:30 GMT
Tommy Robinson?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2019 10:50:09 GMT
Islamophobe and extreme nationalist.
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Jun 10, 2019 8:55:13 GMT
You've got to respect how he goes about his business however.
The Brexit party is there to deliver Brexit, that's it and its a strong play. I was hopeful for a second referendum where remain would come out victorious and we can wash this shambles away.
Nigel has now made a win for remain a near impossibility. If we have a second vote and revoke article 50, the backlash will be so strong for all leavers that they will probably vote for the Brexit Party at the next GE. We then have a country that has revoked article 50 but has a Brexit party in power where their whole purpose is to leave. The guys a great chess player and has now put us into Check mate.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jun 10, 2019 9:34:18 GMT
A second referendum would be lost until the underlying reasons people voted leave are addressed. Nobody campaigning for a second referendum has made any attempts to do this.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jun 10, 2019 9:44:08 GMT
However, in my view, many of the underlying reasons people voted to leave are also not going to be addressed by leaving. That seems to me the overwhelming con underpinning Brexit.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jun 10, 2019 9:50:47 GMT
So your plan is if there's a second vote nothing will need to change except the result?
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jun 10, 2019 10:16:38 GMT
So your plan is if there's a second vote nothing will need to change except the result? With that ability to infer everything from nothing, you've missed a calling as a lawyer...
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jun 10, 2019 10:19:52 GMT
I simply don't know why you think the result might change when nothing else has.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jun 10, 2019 12:35:34 GMT
I simply don't know why you think the result might change when nothing else has. I don't particularly think it will change.
But it has the great merit of settling at least one key point in my view - ie whether the country really wants to leave and whether it wants to leave at all costs.
If the country still wants to leave, then a majority will vote to leave again, and no-one will really be able to argue that the ins and outs of the topic haven't been exhaustively aired and discussed (unlike in 2016). Those like me who think it a grave mistake will simply have to live with that.
Alternatively, if the country has had a change of heart and there is a majority for remain, then we will have to see what we do with that result. Particularly if it is only a narrow win (say...oh I don't know...52/48...).
I don't for a minute think we can go back to the situation pre-2016 at this point, but we badly need time to step back and take a breather if we've any chance of salvaging ourselves from the wreckage.
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Jun 10, 2019 13:35:39 GMT
Its called a punt but its the Remainers best hope at the moment and we'll take it.
I have spoken to a number of people and it certainly isn't true that nothings changed over the last couple of years, many will feel lied to about Brexit and many will be remainers who feel that we've been bullied by the EU and would happily change their vote to leave. Whatever, you still couldn't call the result
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jun 10, 2019 13:50:49 GMT
Its called a punt but its the Remainers best hope at the moment and we'll take it. I have spoken to a number of people and it certainly isn't true that nothings changed over the last couple of years, many will feel lied to about Brexit and many will be remainers who feel that we've been bullied by the EU and would happily change their vote to leave. Whatever, you still couldn't call the result I've got friends and colleagues in both camps who would vote the opposite way in any second referendum so I agree it would still be a very close call. For any future referendum (not Brexit ones) they should embed it in law that it needs at least a 60% majority to be carry any change otherwise the status quo remains.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jun 10, 2019 13:53:17 GMT
I've spoken to a lot of people about this and I don't think remain can win a yes/no referendum with no change in circumstances. But talk of a second referendum remains irrelevant as nobody is offering one.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jun 10, 2019 14:42:11 GMT
If we were to have a 2nd referendum I think a bit more clarification about the type of Brexit being asked for is needed. The politicians (of all relevent colours) now appear to be pushing that delivering Brexit will solely be done by No Deal but I'm certain that a majority of those who voted to leave in 2016 assumed we would leave on reasonable terms that will protect as much of their income/lifestyle as possible.
While nobody can be certain what a no deal would result in the consensus is certainly around it being quite a hard hit, at least in the short term. I doubt many people wanted that 3 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jun 10, 2019 15:00:53 GMT
I've spoken to a lot of people about this and I don't think remain can win a yes/no referendum with no change in circumstances. But talk of a second referendum remains irrelevant as nobody is offering one. I didn't raise the second referendum. You did!
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jun 10, 2019 15:03:32 GMT
My reply was to Ed. I do think that the only way out of delivering Brexit is to have a second referendum but until things materially change it's never going to happen so we've got to get on with it.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jun 10, 2019 15:19:48 GMT
So your plan is if there's a second vote nothing will need to change except the result? ^^
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Jun 10, 2019 18:21:53 GMT
There seems to be a lot of talk from politicians vying for the Tory leadership that they will make sure brexit happens even if it’s a ‘no deal’ brexit without explaining just how they will achieve this given that parliament voted to take ‘no deal’. I really don’t see how we can actually get a brexit at all given that all the options on th3 table were voted down by parliament and the EU has no intention of going back to the negotiating table with us. Why do any of the current Tory leadership candidates think they can somehow change this and do a better job than Theresa May. She didn’t actually mess up brexit, she just came up against the reality of the situation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2019 18:31:59 GMT
I believe a no deal brexit is still the default in the event no deal is done. Parliament can talk all they want but if no deal is done and article 50 is not revoked, we leave with no deal.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jun 11, 2019 9:50:27 GMT
Why do any of the current Tory leadership candidates think they can somehow change this and do a better job than Theresa May. She didn’t actually mess up brexit, she just came up against the reality of the situation. To me they keep giving the impression that in their mind they're saying to Europe 'Don't you know who we are?'. Those days, of Empire and world dominance, have gone but some of the candidates appear not to have noticed. One of the Tory MPs supporting Jeremy Hunt was talking on R4 last night and made the point that it's quite telling that most of the Tory membership is at least in their 40s. They know that they have very little coverage in the mid-30s and under category. Perhaps that's partly wage related since as you get older and further up the greasy pole of promotion you're more likely to be into the higher tax bracket which is where I'd say the Tories have traditionally pitched their ideas. Hence Boris' proposal to increase the point at which the high rate tax band starts. He's understandably appealing directly to the Tory membership rather than the wider voting public. Mind you, R4 had one of his supporting MPs on yesterday morning and they were waffling on about Boris overturning Gordon Brown's 'stealth tax' which seemed ridiculous given that would've been imposed prior to GB becoming PM 12 years ago and the Tories surely having had loads of time to remove it if they really had the will.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jun 11, 2019 11:43:15 GMT
Mind you, R4 had one of his supporting MPs on yesterday morning and they were waffling on about Boris overturning Gordon Brown's 'stealth tax' which seemed ridiculous given that would've been imposed prior to GB becoming PM 12 years ago and the Tories surely having had loads of time to remove it if they really had the will. ....and the current financial state of the country with ever increasing NHS costs, an ageing population, real Brexit uncertainty and a feeling of insecurity/instability is not the best foundation on which to build massive fiscal promises. But then Boris was never too bothered about facts when he was promising utopia.
|
|
|
Post by PG on Jun 11, 2019 14:28:43 GMT
Mind you, R4 had one of his supporting MPs on yesterday morning and they were waffling on about Boris overturning Gordon Brown's 'stealth tax' which seemed ridiculous given that would've been imposed prior to GB becoming PM 12 years ago and the Tories surely having had loads of time to remove it if they really had the will. ....and the current financial state of the country with ever increasing NHS costs, an ageing population, real Brexit uncertainty and a feeling of insecurity/instability is not the best foundation on which to build massive fiscal promises. But then Boris was never too bothered about facts when he was promising utopia. This is an interesting picture that shows the total number of people paying higher rate taxes from when the 40% rate was introduced by Lawson in 1988/89 to now. This graph is just tax. If you add NI to the measures, then people have been well and truly fiscally fucked over by the GB as Chancellor and then PM and Osborne as Chancellor. According to the FT, NI has been the other huge stealth tax - "So an annual salary of £50,000 in 1990-91 would have incurred NICs of £1,863, taking into account allowances. The total payable this year would be £4,232 — equivalent to an additional five percentage points of tax." So if any of the leadership candidates want to reverse some of that - tax or NI - good on them. free img
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jun 11, 2019 15:02:20 GMT
If the higher rate tax threshold had kept pace with inflation it would be well over £70K by now so Boris' promises would just put us back to where we should be. However somewhere in the fiscal equation all that extra money they are collecting (and I have a real issue with the increases in NI and the additional complications that has brought) is disappearing. It therefore follows that if Boris is going to take a big slice less from taxpayers that some expense is going to take an equally big hit. I'd start with Govt index linked pensions.
|
|