FrancieBrady wrote: » I genuinely think the UUP would make big gains if it ever came to a head count. The predominance of the DUP is only a fairly recent thing. Of course that would require a leader emerging in the UUP that can lead on the Remain issue. With business and farming interests literally crapping themselves about the ****storm ahead it isn't hard to see tbh.
J Mysterio wrote: » Sky reporting the following from a poll of 'grassroots Tories': 57% No Deal 23 % May Deal 15% Remain 5% No Preference Idiot Andrew Bridgen going on about Project Fear still. Bottomly supporting May Deal.
J Mysterio wrote: » Sky reporting the following from a poll of 'grassroots Tories':57% No Deal 23 % May Deal 15% Remain 5% No Preference Idiot Andrew Bridgen going on about Project Fear still. Bottomly supporting May Deal.
bilston wrote: » No, the BBC do this on lots of their online content. I think it's so you can watch the content without turning the volume up, so for example you're on a train or bus and you haven't any headphones, but you want to watch a news report then hey presto, you can and not annoy anyone else at the same time.
prawnsambo wrote: » Just for clarity, it was a poll of Tory party members and there are only 125k of them anyway. A subset of a subset of a subset of a subset of voters. And a very particular subset at that.
road_high wrote: » Sure if they want “No deal” let them at it. A sizeable majority want just that, very little us looking in can do to change that. They’re so rabid in their hatred of Europe and the EU they’ll cut off economic limbs just for the sake of it at this stage. Course the %s amongst all other parties are likely very different but they’re not the ones in power over there
10000maniacs wrote: » If that's the case, why didn't they have subtitles for Nancy Pelosi today.https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46754048
Strazdas wrote: » There was a guy from The Times on Newstalk this evening and he says the No Deal fans simply don't believe any of the warnings about it. They prefer to believe what Boris Johnson and Rees-Mogg are telling them.
Charles Babbage wrote: If the UU does not get a distinct take on Brexit then a lot of their more realistic voters will drift off to Alliance, who have been clearly pro EU all along. There is a bloc of people represented by Sylvia Hermon who don't have a good outlet in other constituencies.
igCorcaigh wrote: » I'd have more respect for the hard Brexit fans if they could argue that in the long term historical perspective, it would be the right thing to do, despite the initial disastrous effects in the short to medium term. I don't think Irish republicans in 1916 were arguing for independence in economic terms.
bilston wrote: » It's practically fanatical at this stage. The more you tell them that a No Deal will be a disaster the more they think it's great. I had lunch with a mate yesterday who actively wants No Deal, he literally couldn't answer any of the points I threw at him, he just kept saying it would be great for the economy and that Britain would be an independent nation again. Given he is a mate I didn't push it too far as I didn't want to fall out with him, I'm actually starting to think he was trolling me. Maybe all Hard Brexiteers are trolls and don't really believe anything they say...
igCorcaigh wrote: I don't think Irish republicans in 1916 were arguing for independence in economic terms.
Fann Linn wrote: » I think James Connolly actually was.
First Up wrote: » No, but it was a very different world - a time of political and economic nationalism.
igCorcaigh wrote: I think some of the Brexit argument is in those terms.
mrbrianj wrote: » a simplified example is their car industry, the 10% tariffs for future exports to the EU will be more than covered out by reduction in the pound and labour costs, whilst they may also get a sales bounce from how european made cars are now going to be more expensive to the UK market. Great news if you own the company and whip profits out of the UK. Not so cool if you work on the factory floor and you are now eating chlorinated chicken or hormone beef for lunch and can no longer afford your 2 weeks in Benidorm as the euro is too expensive. Not cool at all if you work in one of the other industries or services that wont survive Brexit. When you hear mention of taking back control, you have to think taking back control of who?
Strazdas wrote: » It has long being suggested that the main reason they can't stand the EU is because they see it as a "foreign" organisation with its HQ in a foreign country. If the EU was based in London, it would be the best thing ever.
But any lorries arriving from a non-EU country, such as Switzerland, are subject to longer delays. "If customs don't want to check anything, that would [still] delay the vehicle by about an hour or an hour and a half [while the driver waits for a decision]," Andrew Baxter, the managing director of the freight logistics company Europa Worldwide, told a House of Commons Committee last year. "If customs wanted to do a documentary check, that could delay it by up to three hours, and if there was an inspection of the goods, that could delay it by up to five hours," he added.
"The distance between the freight check-in desk at Portsmouth International Port and the beginning of the motorway is just 13 lorry lengths," said a statement issued on Thursday by council leaders in Hampshire, "so a queue of 14 lorries or more would mean queuing traffic on the motorway."
cryptocurrency wrote: » I am a libertarian and love freedom. It is what pulled me into the Crypto in 2012 as most libertarians were looking for money that could not be debased by the state. My love of freedom means the vote in my eyes must be respected and should also explain why I don't like the EU. Libertarians all hate the EU, it's against everything they hold dear. The EU is doomed to fail and is holding back many nations. The real future is the developing world and Ireland should join the UK in taking it to them. I understand it would not be wise for Ireland to leave the EU right now but its collapse would mean we can remain friends with our neighbours and say at least we tried and hung in there with them...but now we need to head off and make some real cash.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » Seems to me, in my totally dilletante view in comparison to many other contributors, that the UK is just on a path and will not admit they may have issues with anything. Where are the intelligent voices in all this. I don't seem to hear them. But hopefully they are keeping their powder dry and will reject this ridiculous nonsense. But then again many think it is very real and not ridiculous at all. Getting back control. OK. Of what?
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » Didn't the Belgian PM point this out, and isn't this why any EU agreement means the UK can't have full market access if they try to undercut EU costs by cutting standards ? Meanwhile, the reality of the situation is that Sterling has already devalued and there hasn't been any corresponding growth in exports. Even amongst Commonwealth countries. Not cool at all.
ThePanjandrum wrote: » Sure about that?
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » JRM is still making noises about six seconds to clear customs. (provided you apply 2 days in advance and remember the six seconds only applies to the declaration not the actual clearing.- ie. complete BS to think six seconds refers to any physical process )Right now a truck from Switzerland can take hours to get through UK customs.https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-46739895 Portsmouth will also be used to take pressure off Dover - my highlighting
