Brexit, for once some facts.

[oyster]

Perhaps, I am being over sensitive, but on BBC News this minute is a report of a horrific event, where 39 people were found dead in a lorry in Essex a few hours ago. The initial assumption, without evidence, was that it came from Holyhead and hence Ireland was responsible. The speaker ,a Baroness Butler? Chair of a HoL anti slavery committee spent a period of time suggesting that Ireland was at fault. However the evidence was released during the interview that the lorry had actually come from Holland to Turrock . Now it would have been appropriate for her to have acknowledged the error and acknowledge Ireland's innocence, but of course this was not acknowledged.
This of course pales into insignificance compared to the deaths of 39 Bulgarians.

Now the story separates tractor and trailer.

Initially police said the lorry had entered the UK via Holyhead in north Wales. But amid a swirl of information, they later said the trailer – the rear section of the vehicle, containing the bodies – travelled from Zeebrugge into Purfleet, Essex, and docked in the Thurrock area shortly after 12.30am.

The tractor unit – the cab section at the front in which the driver sits – travelled separately from Northern Ireland. Robinson is believed to have picked up the trailer minutes before the ambulance service was alerted.

 

[oldgroaner]

Lie of the Day in the Telegraph
"
Mr Corbyn, the only way to safeguard worker rights in Britain is total escape from EU law

• AMBROSE EVANS-PRITCHARD

So why haven't they done so already? is there supposed to be some EU law "we" don't agree with stopping them?

Surely no one on Earth is stupid enough to believe this?

 

[oldgroaner]

Brilliant.
Dont forget they gave us decimation, crucifiction, flogged Boudica and raped her daughters. They killed quite a few Christians aswell. But its a good point.

In other words set us an example for violence we felt bound to follow?
Good point

 

[oldgroaner]

From the Independent
"
Boris Johnson accused of 'refusing to be held to account' after pulling out of select committee appearance for third time

Labour Party chair brands prime minister a 'coward' while Lib Dem MP condemns 'unacceptable' refusal

And this man is supposed to be the Prime Minister?
And his excuse?
"The prime minister had been due to appear in front of the Commons liaison committee, which is made up of the chairs of the other select committees, on Thursday but sent a scrawled note at the last minute asking to delay for "five or six months" so that he could "focus on Brexit".

Better cancel the Halloween Brexit Party

 

[Woosh]

"The prime minister had been due to appear in front of the Commons liaison committee, which is made up of the chairs of the other select committees, on Thursday but sent a scrawled note at the last minute asking to delay for "five or six months" so that he could "focus on Brexit".

His tactics is still sell, sell, sell and avoid all scrutiny.
how somebody can believe a word he says is beyond my comprehension.

 

[oldgroaner]

Another bump in the road for Boris

Oh Dear!

 

[oyster]

Another bump in the road for Boris

Oh Dear!

Hopefully, Mark Drakeford of the Welsh Assembly will write a similar letter.

 

[50Hertz]

Why are Labour saying they will back a GE if the EU grant an extension? If we have an election, Labour will suffer a heavy defeat, Johnson is likely to get a majority, and we will end up with a harder Brexit.

 

[Fingers]

Why are Labour saying they will back a GE if the EU grant an extension? If we have an election, Labour will suffer a heavy defeat, Johnson is likely to get a majority, and we will end up with a harder Brexit.

They are banking on the Brexit party to create a hung parliament.

It’s quite possibly the most absurd political strategy ever. Until you remember one thing.

Corbyn.

 

[oldgroaner]

Why are Labour saying they will back a GE if the EU grant an extension? If we have an election, Labour will suffer a heavy defeat, Johnson is likely to get a majority, and we will end up with a harder Brexit.

I can't make any sense of it either.

 

[oldgroaner]

They are banking on the Brexit party to create a hung parliament.

It’s quite possibly the most absurd political strategy ever. Until you remember one thing.

Corbyn.

You definitely have a point there!

 

[flecc]

Why are Labour saying they will back a GE if the EU grant an extension? If we have an election, Labour will suffer a heavy defeat, Johnson is likely to get a majority, and we will end up with a harder Brexit.

Don't be so sure. Exactly the same was said when Theresa May called a GE with a majority in the house, but instead Corbyn wiped out her majority, leaving the DUP as the only way for her to hang on in power.

Labour has much more ammunition than most realise and with Momentum using it the result may shock again.
.

 

[daveboy]

If the polls show a hung parliament, Boris will do a deal with Farage.

 

[Woosh]

They are banking on the Brexit party to create a hung parliament.

It’s quite possibly the most absurd political strategy ever. Until you remember one thing.

Corbyn.

Corbyn can be flexible. He will count on Bojo starting the GE campaign with a high lead over him, he then will hit the road doubling any spending promises that Bojo may make to reduce the deficit and build momentum.
As for supporting brexit, Labour's official policy is that they accept the result of the 2016 referendum in their last manifesto and therefore can only soften brexit, not oppose it by principle like the LibDems. However, JC does intervene in favour of remainers at crucial stages in previous A50 extensions, without them, brexit would have happened back in March.
The real problem for remainers is that the LibDems don't seem to make any further progress.

 

[Zlatan]

Why are Labour saying they will back a GE if the EU grant an extension? If we have an election, Labour will suffer a heavy defeat, Johnson is likely to get a majority, and we will end up with a harder Brexit.

Perhaps if we had an opposition it might be a different story. Been saying it for months but one of major causes of current fiasco is the sheer unelectability of Labour under Corbyn. As bad as tories are they are simply lightyears more attractive to voting public than Corbyn, Abott, McDonell.

 

[Zlatan]

Corbyn can be flexible. He will count on Bojo starting the GE campaign with a high lead over him, he then will hit the road doubling any spending promises that Bojo may make to reduce the deficit and build momentum.
As for supporting brexit, Labour's official policy is that they accept the result of the 2016 referendum in their last manifesto and therefore can only soften brexit, not oppose it by principle like the LibDems. However, JC does intervene in favour of remainers at crucial stages in previous A50 extensions, without them, brexit would have happened back in March.
The real problem for remainers is that the LibDems don't seem to make any further progress.

And they never will under current leadership. She's useless.

 

[oldgroaner]

On the news just now the Parliamentary business for next week has no mention of "The Brexit Bill"
I wonder what Cummings is up to?
Hoping for us to simply fall out of the EU by default?
Or is he going to incite Boris to go over the Brussels to mess on the carpet and infuriate the EU into cancelling an extension?

Here is a sitrep image

Taking back control the Cummings way.

 

[flecc]

Perhaps if we had an opposition it might be a different story. Been saying it for months but one of major causes of current fiasco is the sheer unelectability of Labour under Corbyn. As bad as tories are they are simply lightyears more attractive to voting public than Corbyn, Abott, McDonell.

I don't know why I bother really, but I live in hope that one day you may look at facts rather than soaking up the propaganda of the Tory press and the Tory party itself.

However, try these facts:

Against all the predictions, under Corbyn's Labour wiped out Theresa May's majority in the 2017 General Election.

My constituency was newly formed in 1974 and in the ensuing nine General Elections to 2017 was Tory for 7 out of the 9. In 2017 with Labour under Corbyn and our having a new untried Labour candidate, Labour was given no chance of winning. In fact that new candidate Sarah Brown won against Tory blue-eyed boy Gavin Barwell with a record near 6000 majority, far higher than in their only two wins under Blair. So much for them being unelectable under Corbyn.

You particularly target Diane Abbott, but here is her GE record against your "more electable" Tories in rounded majorities:

1987 GE: 8,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
1992 GE: 11,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
1997 GE: 16,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
2001GE: 14,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
2005GE: 10,000 majority over the Tory candidate. (Lib 2nd)
2010GE: 19,000 majority over the Tory candidate. (Lib 2nd)
2015GE: 24,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
2017GE: 35,000 majority over the Tory candidate.

Over her 32 years in office she's increased that majority by 4.5 times! So much for her "unelectability". The Tories could only dream of a candidate with such a record.

Also so much for your Labour being "unelectable under Corbyn". Under him she's vastly increased her majority twice, not far short of doubling it.
.

 

[oldgroaner]

I don't know why I bother really, but I live in hope that one day you may look at facts rather than soaking up the propaganda of the Tory press and the Tory party itself.

However, try these facts:

Against all the predictions, under Corbyn Labour wiped out Theresa May's majority in the 2017 General Election.

My constituency was newly formed in 1974 and in the ensuing nine General Elections to 2017 was Tory for 7 out of the 9. In 2017 with Labour under Corbyn and our having a new untried Labour candidate, Labour was given no chance of winning. In fact that new candidate Sarah Brown won against Tory blue-eyed boy Gavin Barwell with a record near 6000 majority, far higher than in their only two wins under Blair. So much for them being unelectable under Corbyn.

You particularly target Diane Abbott, but here is her GE record against your "more electable" Tories in rounded majorities:

1987 GE: 8,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
1992 GE: 11,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
1997 GE: 16,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
2001GE: 14,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
2005GE: 10,000 majority over the Tory candidate. (Lib 2nd)
2010GE: 19,000 majority over the Tory candidate. (Lib 2nd)
2015GE: 24,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
2017GE: 35,000 majority over the Tory candidate.

Over her 32 years in office she's increased that majority by 4.5 times! So much for her "unelectability". The Tories could only dream of a candidate with such a record.

Also so much for your Labour being "unelectable under Corbyn". Under him she's vastly increased her majority twice, not far short of doubling it.
.

Naughty Flecc, confronting a Brexiteer with facts? what have facts to do with Brexit anyway?
Who needs 'em?
If facts mattered at all we would never have been in this Brexit situation anyway.
(But thanks for trying)

 

[Zlatan]

I don't know why I bother really, but I live in hope that one day you may look at facts rather than soaking up the propaganda of the Tory press and the Tory party itself.

However, try these facts:

Against all the predictions, under Corbyn Labour wiped out Theresa May's majority in the 2017 General Election.

My constituency was newly formed in 1974 and in the ensuing nine General Elections to 2017 was Tory for 7 out of the 9. In 2017 with Labour under Corbyn and our having a new untried Labour candidate, Labour was given no chance of winning. In fact that new candidate Sarah Brown won against Tory blue-eyed boy Gavin Barwell with a record near 6000 majority, far higher than in their only two wins under Blair. So much for them being unelectable under Corbyn.

You particularly target Diane Abbott, but here is her GE record against your "more electable" Tories in rounded majorities:

1987 GE: 8,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
1992 GE: 11,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
1997 GE: 16,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
2001GE: 14,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
2005GE: 10,000 majority over the Tory candidate. (Lib 2nd)
2010GE: 19,000 majority over the Tory candidate. (Lib 2nd)
2015GE: 24,000 majority over the Tory candidate.
2017GE: 35,000 majority over the Tory candidate.

Over her 32 years in office she's increased that majority by 4.5 times! So much for her "unelectability". The Tories could only dream of a candidate with such a record.

Also so much for your Labour being "unelectable under Corbyn". Under him she's vastly increased her majority twice, not far short of doubling it.
.

Why did they lose last GE then Flecc. Tories are at lowest ebb for 50 years with two unelected PMs, made a pig's ear of everything including Brexit, yet they won last GE and will win next.
Same old labour BS, we did better than last time... But still lost and will continue to do so with Corbyn and Abott.
I dont know why I bother either. You are obsessed with Corbyn and will not accept he is root problem for labour and has played a massive part in getting us where we are today. He is totally out of his depth now, let alone heaven forbid if he were PM, which according to you he was going to be by now.
Your statistics are totally irrelevant, Abott as deputy PM is utterly a joke. Unbelievable anybody could think she is remotely capable of being our deputy PM. You must be joking.