TMays interview on sky today.

WE ARE LEAVING THE BUILDING

According to the PJ/BFBanned thread on utube so will Breedingmad shortly.

Doubt it very much

It;s an idle threat from someone who has been banned

"Spoke of new trade deals worldwide and getting control of immigration"
Those things can be achieved within the Single Market. Mrs May has revealed nothing here I'm afraid.

the cutoms union means the EUSSR negotiates as a single entity so no individual member can negotiate its own deal with another country. freedom of movement comes hand in hand with the market and they have already said they will not move on that.

TMay spoke of us negotiating our own trade deals and getting control of immigration, she also stressed that we are leaving. the only logical conclusion is that we are leaving the lot. no customs union, no single market, no ECHR and supremacy residing back in the UK. all the news bulletins are leading with this referring to it as 'her strongest indication yet' and 'she pretty much confirmed we are leaving the single market'.

its great news.

and its duly noted that the madbreeder has legged it from the raised issues.

again

She's holding a 2 of spades and a 7 of hearts.

the flop is 777

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-government-ignoring-experts-trade-deal-canada-ceta-jason-langrish-sir-ivan-rogers-theresa-may-a7515596.html
What do experts know...

Very little, they all thought we'd vote remain.

how on earth could this canadian guy know what is and what isn't in place?

The IMF said last month that Brexit could spark a stock market crash and a steep fall in house prices. In Saturday’s report to conclude its annual assessment of Britain’s economy.

Leaving the EU would hit British living standards, stoke inflation and wipe up to 5.5% off GDP, the International Monetary Fund has warned with less than a week to go until the referendum.

The IMF used its annual report on the British economy to say Brexit would plunge the UK into recession next year and that it could see no economic advantage in leaving the EU.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/18/imf-says-brexit-would-trigger-uk-recession-eu-referendum

those experts at the guardian and the IMF said the stock market would crash if we voted out yet it closed last year at it's highest ever.

so i agree with you, what do experst know

Maybe because he spent 10 years negotiating a trade deal with the E.U...
Maybe you know a bloke down the pub who could do a better job ...

The stock market is only up because the pound crashed do your research before spouting nonsense

We will also be well placed when the Brussels dictatorship collapses, which it will within the next 5-10 years.
In the future it will be seen in the same light as the fall of the Berlin Wall, with Britain as the Gorbachev figure.

pound has not crashed, simply readjusted to its true level following some over valuation

and the guardian and the IMF along with all the project fear gang predicted BOTH

the FACT is they were very wrong on the stock market and very wrong on a recession. as well as the punishment budget been abandoned along with all the other lies and nonsense. lies and nonsense that you continue to repeat. like a drone.

run forest run

It's not a dictatorship by any sense of the word.

Don't worry it won't be long before it's worth nowt..

You're in for the ride, like it or not bm, strap up and make the best of it.

we havnt left eu yet

we wont get a dry run at it, its straight in to negotiations , get  it right first time, please.

of course may could play a blinder but is there anything that suggests
she will get best of deal ?

british houses cheaper for those paid in euros, dollars and just about anything
except turkish lira

what is may going to do to pick up hole in economy, and to retain buisness in uk
intead of them upping sticks so they can trade free in eu


trump wants industry to remain in usa, and tafiffs are a threat


we are going to stick 10% on all our european exports, good job the pound has fallen,
oh hang on .....

Yes, You're right if the Country voted for poverty that's what the 52% deserve..

I must say I have never seen a worse loser, are you the bloke who hurls pens at the bookies screens at every finish?

nobody has lost yet, nor are there any winners( except those that backed we would leave)

that is in the pot

its funny the way people see this

remainers and brexiters will get exactly the same deal !

breeding, do you have long term history in the uk ?

Yes I was Born in Leeds.

How many generations ?

He lost the vote donny, but refuses to accept the result, that's what I meant. The more realistic remainers will hopefully-if grudgingly- support the Gov in negotiations and beyond.

There was a Lord with my surname so it goes back a long way

why grudgingly ?


i lost the vote, i see the pitfalls, i would vote to stay if given a second chance


i have no confidence in may who i reckon has the leadership on sufference and
only if she does as they tell her


having said all that theres nothing to stop us making it work



60% of voters lost the last election, .....funny old world innit, nobody
says they cant have another bash next time

too many folk have a reality show mentality where eviction means eviction( usually )

Earliest is 1379 a  Yorkshire Village

Is your name Sutch?

No

What about your tree Saddo..

I'm more of a bush man. I am thinking of backing a Scottish Lord tomorrow.

so to cut a long story short breedingmad has no answers and has scarpered.


the costs of EUSSR.  he's got nada

greece fooked. he's got nada

50% youth unemployment. he's got nada

rampant corruption. he's got nada

unelected drunk presidents.  he's got nada

ignoring democratic votes across the EUSSR. he's got nada


poor little remainiac

There is no organization called the E.U.S.S.R so I will not answer any of your questions till you
retract your  stupid use of language.

Burt06    08 Jan 17 19:29 
the UK is a parliamentary democracy - we do not vote a specific individual, the party that has a majority forms the government and the leader of that party is the PM.



When there is a GE, the electorate vote for a Party they want to be in power. When they place their vote, it is with the understanding that the Party they are voting has a Leader at the time, who over the preceding months /years has persuaded them he ( and his party ) could be the next PM and his Party the government in power.
When the unsuspecting people voted for the Tories they did it on the basis that Cameron would be the PM.
If Mayhem had been the leader ,do you think the Tories would have still won.
Cameron threw  his toys out of his pram, and walked away from the biggest **** up ( I.e losing referendum) )!and also walked away as being one of the worst PM this country has ever had.
Mayhem is worse than Thatcher - so although unelected - could still leave with a prize when she's booted out.

Well I prefer Theresa May to Cameron....which taking into account my misogyny shows how bad Cameron was.

She has said she will not just govern for people who vote for the Tory Party, but everybody.

She got the job because it was thought she would take us safely out the EU, in front of other candidates.

We shall see.

My opinion was people voted for the Tory party at the last election, not necessarily Cameron.

I expect that post 15.28  will be deleted soon !

I was hoping she was telling the truth...oh well

If Mayhem had been the leader ,do you think the Tories would have still won.

against red ed? you betcha.

and with corbyn as leader i think katie hopkins could win if she were tory leader

btw facts, could you pop over to politics and help out biscuitbrain and the mad breeder on the couple of EUSSR threads. they have tokk 1 hell of a beating, downed tools and ran off.

nobody likes a walkover

Sorry, I pledged some time ago to never post on the Politics Forum again.
I may have posted once since, but I think I got away with it

Katie Hopkins dear me scraping the barrel there aren't we , Burt I think you have been reading the Daily Fail and the Murdoch drivel to much

i don't read newspapers.

but i know she is unpopular and seen as really far right and a bit nasty. the point i was making is that corbyn is so bad even she would win against him.

maybe you could help the plonkers on politics over this EUSSR - they are struggling worse than jeremy

that would be some delight for farron

Burt some of the things Jeremy has said about sky high pay and greed many people will agree with his general sentiments

Jan 10, 2017 -- 3:16PM, Facts wrote:

Burt06    08 Jan 17 19:29  the UK is a parliamentary democracy - we do not vote a specific individual, the party that has a majority forms the government and the leader of that party is the PM.When there is a GE, the electorate vote for a Party they want to be in power. When they place their vote, it is with the understanding that the Party they are voting has a Leader at the time, who over the preceding months /years has persuaded them he ( and his party ) could be the next PM and his Party the government in power.When the unsuspecting people voted for the Tories they did it on the basis that Cameron would be the PM.If Mayhem had been the leader ,do you think the Tories would have still won.Cameron threw  his toys out of his pram, and walked away from the biggest **** up ( I.e losing referendum) )!and also walked away as being one of the worst PM this country has ever had.Mayhem is worse than Thatcher - so although unelected - could still leave with a prize when she's booted out.

This is completely wrong.


When there is a GE, the electorate vote for a Party they want to be in power. When they place their vote, it is with the understanding that the Party they are voting has a Leader at the time, who over the preceding months /years has persuaded them he ( and his party ) could be the next PM and his Party the government in power.

When there is a General Election the electorate vote for an individual to represent their constituency at Parliament. Whether that person is party affiliated or not. You are essentially voting for the best candidate to represent your interests and those of your neighbours.

When the unsuspecting people voted for the Tories they did it on the basis that Cameron would be the PM.

This is false. AT the GE it was well known that we'd have a new PM in this Parliament.

If Mayhem had been the leader ,do you think the Tories would have still won.

Mayhem? Did you make that up all by yourself?

Cameron threw  his toys out of his pram, and walked away from the biggest **** up ( I.e losing referendum) )!and also walked away as being one of the worst PM this country has ever had.

Your lack of knowledge on this subject is quite low. The other parties used Cameron not serving a full term as a stick to beat the Conservative's with during the campaign. It was well known to anyone with an interest that Cameron would not see out this Parliament as PM.

Mayhem is worse than Thatcher - so although unelected - could still leave with a prize when she's booted out.

On what basis do you consider her to be elected?

Jan 10, 2017 -- 5:25PM, anxious wrote:

Burt some of the things Jeremy has said about sky high pay and greed many people will agree with his general sentiments

I doubt it. He's already changed his mind.

people dont all vote for candidate by name !

thats why the party name is also on ballot paper



people did know cameron would not serve full term, ....nobody
thought he would be gone as soon as he was

Jan 10, 2017 -- 5:58PM, donny osmond wrote:

people dont all vote for candidate by name !thats why the party name is also on ballot paper people did know cameron would not serve full term, ....nobodythought he would be gone as soon as he was

You are correct, there are a number of people who will vote for a certain party no matter who the candidate is. Those people are generally ignorant of politics and there's not much you can do to engage them. Luckily 'My grandfather voted X so I'll vote X types' seem to be on the wane.

I think 2016 was the third favourite in the betting after 2018 and 2017. I don't have the figures at hand so if someone wants to correct me on that feel free.

i think libs were third favourites at last election too

"the customs union means the EUSSR negotiates as a single entity so no individual member can negotiate its own deal with another country. freedom of movement comes hand in hand with the market and they have already said they will not move on that."

Territories that are out of the Customs Union but in the Single Market can negotiate their own trade deals e.g. Norway, Iceland

Countries that are in the Single Market but not in the EU can make policies that help manage/reduce incentives for immigration e.g. the 2 child rule on new child tax credit claims from April 2017, not bunging £12bn a year in Aid to foreign countries that results in worse government there and thus people wanting to leave those places , and not bunging the £5bn a year in farm/convergence subsidies which serve as job-shedding programmes in poorer EU countries. For a remaining net contribution the UK could say no immigration for convicted criminals in the last 5 years, or left a custodial in the last 2 years, thus mirroring the policy for non-EU criminals. We could even spend more on deportations.

All of those won't happen but there's a whole range of policies to reduce immigration while staying in the Single Market, from within the EU and from without.

ebulGery    10 Jan 17 15:27
My opinion was people voted for the Tory party at the last election, not necessarily Cameron.


Facts    10 Jan 17 15:29 

I expect that post 15.28  will be deleted soon !



1.01 !!!! Unbelievable - and pathetic.

Jan 10, 2017 -- 6:59PM, donny osmond wrote:

i think libs were third favourites at last election too

Conservatives were actually third favourites last election!

E.U.S.S.R doesn't exist

doubt there were many people who voted tory with much enthusiasm for cameron at the last election. it was mainly an anti miliband vote and even worse the prospect of him being propped up by the SNP

cameron was lucky to come up against 2 such hapless labour leaders

Totally agree

tories third favourites to win most seats , lol

keep making it up

Jan 11, 2017 -- 3:43PM, donny osmond wrote:

tories third favourites to win most seats , lolkeep making it up

Well clearly the Conservatives weren't third favourites to win most seats.. They were however third favourites for the last election as I said.

ah ok

carry on making up stuff you can agree with

Jan 11, 2017 -- 3:56PM, donny osmond wrote:

ah okcarry on making up stuff you can agree with

I'm not sure you can make up facts.

That's equally true if you capitalize it.

great stuff, but you still cant hide that your first post was carp

keep twisting, changing, whatever, it wont change

Jan 11, 2017 -- 4:37PM, donny osmond wrote:

great stuff, but you still cant hide that your first post was carpkeep twisting, changing, whatever, it wont change

By carp? You mean completely correct?

I really don't understand what your gripe is here. Are you saying the Conservative party were not third favourites to win the last election?

no, i dont

i mean carp, which it is


my gripe, that you think you are correct, whilst being wrong

Jan 11, 2017 -- 4:42PM, donny osmond wrote:

no, i donti mean carp, which it ismy gripe, that you think you are correct, whilst being wrong

Well I know I'm correct as it's a market I was paying heavy attention to.

I'm not sure if you are just confused here or if there's some other issue?

If you could enlighten me as to why you are throwing fish about I'd be most appreciative.

no you have already stated i was correct

i just find you odd trying to crawl out of being wrong

Jan 11, 2017 -- 4:50PM, donny osmond wrote:

no you have already stated i was correcti just find you odd trying to crawl out of being wrong

I've done nothing of the sort, quite bizarre behaviour.

Anyway as you just seem to be flailing like a carp for no apparent reason.

https://postimg.org/image/70bl3xqdr/

Here's the graph from Betfair showing Con as third favourites until quite late on with NOM almost certainly the favourite.

donny osmond
donny osmond 10 Jan 17 17:58 Joined: 02 Mar 08 | Topic/replies: 67,447 | Blogger: donny osmond's blog
people dont all vote for candidate by name !

thats why the party name is also on ballot paper



people did know cameron would not serve full term, ....nobody
thought he would be gone as soon as he was
Rate reply:
| report block user
CJ70
CJ70 10 Jan 17 18:08 Joined: 26 Nov 11 | Topic/replies: 29,763 | Blogger: CJ70's blog
Jan 10, 2017 -- 5:58PM, donny osmond wrote:

people dont all vote for candidate by name !thats why the party name is also on ballot paper people did know cameron would not serve full term, ....nobodythought he would be gone as soon as he was

You are correct, there are a number of people who will vote for a certain party no matter who the candidate is. Those people are generally ignorant of politics and there's not much you can do to engage them. Luckily 'My grandfather voted X so I'll vote X types' seem to be on the wane.

I think 2016 was the third favourite in the betting after 2018 and 2017. I don't have the figures at hand so if someone wants to correct me on that feel free.
Rate reply:
| report block user

My word.. There'll be some marks on that barrel by the time you've finished.

In that instance, you are correct only in the sense that some people will blindly vote for an individual of a party. They are still voting for an individual. The statement you were responding to of

When there is a General Election the electorate vote for an individual to represent their constituency at Parliament. Whether that person is party affiliated or not. You are essentially voting for the best candidate to represent your interests and those of your neighbours.

is correct.

All clear?

keep on twisting


you ve done nothing of the sort, its only in that sense

whatever next, lack of punctuation ?

Jan 11, 2017 -- 5:11PM, donny osmond wrote:

keep on twistingyou ve done nothing of the sort, its only in that sensewhatever next, lack of punctuation ?

Very hard to twist on something that is demonstrably correct.

Somewhere Martin Bell is watching.

you seem to manage easily enough when you are wrong ,and have already admitted it ....except,
then seemed to forget that you had

martin bell , colin bell, dinga bell,

more like colin ball

Jan 11, 2017 -- 5:31PM, donny osmond wrote:

you seem to manage easily enough when you are wrong ,and have already admitted it ....except, then seemed to forget that you hadmartin bell , colin bell, dinga bell, more like colin ball

I admitted nothing of the sort. I suggest re-reading.

I honestly didn't think anyone would be trying to back up Facts mistaken thinking.

Just in case you are unclear, I'll repeat my original quote that you seem to have taken issue with..

When there is a General Election the electorate vote for an individual to represent their constituency at Parliament. Whether that person is party affiliated or not. You are essentially voting for the best candidate to represent your interests and those of your neighbours.

That is demonstrably correct whether you want it to be so or not.

lol

just keep twisting

it must be wonderful to be wrong

Jan 11, 2017 -- 7:31PM, donny osmond wrote:

loljust keep twistingit must be wonderful to be wrong

As previously said how can I be wrong and twisting on something that is demonstrably true.

Although I'm not sure why you are wilfully misreading my comment. Do you actually believe that in UK GE's that the votes are for party and not individuals?

I suspect you are just on a wind up to try and save Facts.

im not

you are twisting all over the place as you are wrong

Jan 12, 2017 -- 1:17PM, donny osmond wrote:

im notyou are twisting all over the place as you are wrong

You aren't on a wind up?

So you do believe that votes in UK elections* are for a party? I suggest you've been watching to much US election coverage my friend.

another odd statement to try to hide you being wrong

but you are still wrong

Jan 12, 2017 -- 2:07PM, donny osmond wrote:

another odd statement to try to hide you being wrongbut you are still wrong

I asked you a question. I understand answering it will mean either you are looking very silly or proving that you are on a wind up.

Still have a go.

hiding a question in with another silly personal attack is unlikely to
obtain an answer, oh but you know that

thats why you add these silly little insults

but you are still wrong

Conservatives were actually third favourites last election!


This statement is correct donny.
What seems to be the problem with it?

not really the point though zen

Labour majoity (fav)
No overall majority (second fav)
Con majority ( third favourites )

still not the point, even if it is correct

it was thrown in as an aside

the original point before that was thrown in remains wrong

Ok, well i have no idea what price Cameron was to vacate in 2016, also not sure how many would vote any other way if they could hold a crystal ball view on it.

Voters should be voting on their constituency rep but a large percentage won't know the name of that rep unless they walk past a poster on a telegraph pole.

yeah

next election i will look more closely at all these 999/1 shots in safe
seats as people will be voting for best candidate not the party

Very droll donny.

You are voting to put your local rep in the HoC to raise issues for your constituency.

Even Farage voted Green once, because he thought his Green rep was the best person to represent his constituency.

i cant tell folk how to vote

i do take notice though

it would be great if we all elected on merit of candidate

I don't like the idea of voting for a certain candidate because of anything and certainly not talent.
you have to beware of the great talent, great talents can become like monsters and you should never help their advancement.

history shows us this

a great talent is liable to say, as you know I am a great talent and as such I am perfectly entitled to more of your money

that's how these great talents operate

the politicians and the bankers and economists were all great talents and deserved to be paid accordingly

who should you vote for then ?
I don't know.

now if a politician was to say " I am not a great talent but I would hold a referendum and if the British people vote to leave the eu that is what we will do"
then that's who I would vote for, even if he is not a great talent

I don't much care about his not being a great talent, great talents seem to think they have to make these things difficult

Jan 12, 2017 -- 2:13PM, donny osmond wrote:

hiding a question in with another silly personal attack is unlikely to obtain an answer, oh but you know thatthats why you add these silly little insultsbut you are still wrong

I'm unlikely to get an answer because it is physically impossible for you to answer without looking a plum.

It's the equivalent of me stating tomorrow is the 13th of January and you shouting your wrong, you are twisting.

You are either on a wind up or you simply are unaware of the electoral system in this country. Going by what you've posted in response to ZenMaster it seems to be the latter.

lol

we can agree tomorrows date


but you are still wrong


you can keep aying you are right but hey ho....