He has proven in the past that he was the best prime minister Britain ever had, so why do we not in this festive time just watch love actually once again and vote Hugh into power for real, he would be utterly brilliant, he is already used to tell the American president where to go, surely he could tell the EU dictators to fck off too?
My god, you're right for once, it wouldn't be the same. The 52% would have swelled dramatically, god knows what excuse you'd come up with to square this away with yourself if this hypothetical 2nd referendum ever came about. I am 100% sure you'd find a few gems though.
The Mogg would wipe the floor with the scruffy bearded one. Like I said before, he got the skeletons on same sex marriage out of the way early, it's old news now and consistent with his Christian beliefs. Similarly his views on abortion. He bats any attempt to smear him away effortlessly, is assured, strong willed and consistent (everything May is not). I fear we'd and up with a Hammond, which would be a disaster, but if the Conservatives want to win another election and have the nerve to select him, Jacob's your man.
Could you give me any facts on this please? Seriously - if you can demonstrate racism from him I'd like to see it for myself, thank you.
I wonder if at some point whether internet forums leave themselves wide open for libel by allowing themselves to have members continually label others racist when 1, they clearly do not know the definition of one is and 2, do so in a libellous manner? It would be interesting to find out at some point? Anyway As to Mogg, even on the same sex marriage, unlike Farron, Mogg has been very clear in that his faith and beliefs do not favour same sex marriage but he was also very clear that were he invited to one he would happily attend. Mogg is succinct, steadfast and very composed but also fair enough to value parliamentary rules whatever the outcome. Brexit is moving very fast so today suits extreme remainers because they are unable to think beyond the next 5 minutes. Last week it looked like may had sold everyone out and should be gone, then she appeared to shake the eu team by it genuinely looking like she might be out and a brexiteer might take over so they backed down a bit. Then Davies went vocal, it's one thing to beat the eu but it's another to publicly rub their faces in it, so understandably they are a bit pissed but the situation remains the same. If the eu push too hard a brexiteer will replace her. Things change very quickly in brexit but again, extreme remainers struggle with long term but brexiteers rarely do so we will see what the talks at the end of the week bring
Yep, so keep going then....why not the same with indi ref too? And of we say IN next time, or the time after, or the time after, I assume you would support a ref 2 years later too, then every 2 years? Yep, that would work
I wonder if at some point whether internet forums leave themselves wide open for libel by allowing themselves to have members continually label others racist when 1, they clearly do not know the definition of one is and 2, do so in a libellous manner? It would be interesting to find out at some point? Anyway. got yerself a lawyer yet?
We are governed by idiots This evening MPs voted 309 to 305 in favour of an amendment to the EU Withdrawal Bill. This has dashed Mrs May’s plans for a take-it-or-leave-it final Brexit vote, with MPs now able to suggest new terms of Britain’s EU exit. Even Jacob Rees-Mogg had expressed concern at the inclusion of Clause 9 on the withdrawal bill. The Tory MP said “even eurosceptics” are worried about the so-called Henry VIII powers granted by the clause, which would be used to implement the bill. The amendment, designed to ensure parliament would get a meaningful vote on the agreement, was abled by former attorney general Dominic Grieve and backed by a number of rebel Tory MPs as well as the opposition parties. But Downing Street defended the bill, saying it is "essential" for a smooth and succesful Brexit as Theresa May sacked tory vice-chairman Stephen Hammond for siding with the rebels as she dashed from the Commons to an event to honour Britain's armed forces. The amendment says this power could only be exercised if they were “subject to the prior enactment of a statute by parliament approving the final terms of withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union.” Parliament now has to approve the government’s final Brexit deal by passing a separate written law once the terms of the withdrawal agreement are known. This could, in theory, allow MPs to send May back to the negotiating table if they do not like the deal.
coolio, not that i would ask duncan durbin or eddi thornton to get involved over a forum spat with a kipper. i sued for deformation before, hard work with no guarantee of success. v.stressful to. i was merely highlighting mare o yer hypocrisy. oh, and i won with a lil help fay eddi brw 5k +costs thank you v.much.
I believe there is a member on this forum who can personally vouch for him singing anti Semitic songs.
like i said forum spat with a kipper. i dont need the money or that level of stress again. its yer hypocrisy that devalues you. shines a wee light on yer troop also.
troop what troop? it just becomes boring when certain members throw the racist accusations multiple times per day even more so when the definition of it isn't what they hope it means. As a non racist it gets boring and to be honest would wish it was seen as not acceptable to falsely accuse a person of racism.
I have highlighted just how often those who have not voted remain are constantly accused of and having thrown at them that they are racist, misognynistic xenophobe, islamaphobic, homophobic and of low intelligence. if that is the card you mean then probably more than those numbers.
