Are the Brexit party far right?

[oowee]

Just now, grrclark said:

I don't believe another Scottish referendum is inevitable.  There is huge agitation for one by a very vocal minority, but that's all.

The language of Sturgeon "...if the SNP win this election..." then it mandates another referendum.  How do the SNP win?  The most returned MPs, even if that was with 30% of the vote share?  Her language is divisive and disingenuous.

The reason the SNP are trying to use a GE to agitate for another ref' is because they are highly unlikely to return a majority in the next Scottish elections in 2021, they are already a minority party with less than half the voter share.  That is why Sturgeon is pushing for 2020, besides that she is also losing popularity amongst the faithful and is trying to feed them some raw meat.

On top of that why should the SNP have a disproportionate say around the Brexit debate just because that voter franchise was remain?  The SNP stoke the grievance that Scotland's views are an inconvenience, that is not the general belief.

I see exactly what you are saying. I was thinking much longer term when the ref question might be asked and Brexit providing the excuse to stoke the fire now rather than later.

Do you think the Tories are likely to gain or loose from their current position in Scotland given the weight of the remain vote? 

[grrclark]

15 minutes ago, oowee said:

I see exactly what you are saying. I was thinking much longer term when the ref question might be asked and Brexit providing the excuse to stoke the fire now rather than later.

Do you think the Tories are likely to gain or loose from their current position in Scotland given the weight of the remain vote? 

They will lose seats in this election for sure which is a combination of Brexit policy, BoJo and Ruth departing.  One of the reasons that the SNP are likely to improve is because Scottish Labour are so utterly abysmal and last time round the Tories took a lot of the ex Labour vote share as folk were voting against the SNP.

I suspect this GE will not prove to be any less divisive on a host of issues and we wont move forward a great deal.

[oowee]

My thoughts exactly. 

[Retsdon]

The 'Brexit Party' isn't a political party. It's a private company https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11694875 . You can call a dog a frog, but that doesn't mean it is one.

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, Retsdon said:

The 'Brexit Party' isn't a political party. It's a private company https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11694875 . You can call a dog a frog, but that doesn't mean it is one.

All political parties are a 'business' run as a company. 

Don't try and portray the BP as being different to any other mainstream political party. 

[Raja Clavata]

28 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Don't try and portray the BP as being different to any other mainstream political party. 

Where do we start with that?

Which other mainstream political party leader isn't standing in the GE?

[Rewulf]

38 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Where do we start with that?

Which other mainstream political party leader isn't standing in the GE?

Is it relevant that he's not? 

You can put such anomalies to other parties/leaders. 

Who has a leader who supports terrorists, and has an ex lover home secretary who cannot do basic arithmetic? 

Who heads up a party that has democratic in its title, but promises to overturn the largest democratic vote this country has ever had, without any further recourse? 

All these things are beside the point, as Retsdons statement insinuates that the BP finances are somehow dodgy, or they are hiding something, with NO  evidence whatsoever. 

[Raja Clavata]

1 minute ago, Rewulf said:

Is it relevant that he's not? 

You can put such anomalies to other parties/leaders. 

Who has a leader who supports terrorists, and has an ex lover home secretary who cannot do basic arithmetic? 

Who heads up a party that has democratic in its title, but promises to overturn the largest democratic vote this country has ever had, without any further recourse? 

All these things are beside the point, as Retsdons statement insinuates that the BP finances are somehow dodgy, or they are hiding something, with NO  evidence whatsoever. 

In other words, and in answer to my question, you confirm no other party - correct?

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, Raja Clavata said:

In other words, and in answer to my question, you confirm no other party - correct?

I can definitely confirm no other party has a leader who counts as his 'friends' the IRA, hezbolla, hamas and various despots and murderers, past and present. 

[Raja Clavata]

2 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

I can definitely confirm no other party has a leader who counts as his 'friends' the IRA, hezbolla, hamas and various despots and murderers, past and present. 

So we went round and round in circles based on polarised views and opinions, agendas aided by slanted statistics, biased reporting and such like. My first latest attempt at a fact and evidence based debate and you choose to avoid engaging. You've been rumbled mate 😛 

[grrclark]

55 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Where do we start with that?

Which other mainstream political party leader isn't standing in the GE?

Nicola Sturgeon (SNP), Arlene Foster (DUP) and Sian Berry (Co-Leader Green Party).

[Rewulf]

45 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

So we went round and round in circles based on polarised views and opinions, agendas aided by slanted statistics, biased reporting and such like. My first latest attempt at a fact and evidence based debate and you choose to avoid engaging. You've been rumbled mate 😛 

Really? 😂

 

38 minutes ago, grrclark said:

Nicola Sturgeon (SNP), Arlene Foster (DUP) and Sian Berry (Co-Leader Green Party).

Thank you 👍

[TIGHTCHOKE]

How to brighten up a slow day at work!

[Raja Clavata]

1 hour ago, grrclark said:

Nicola Sturgeon (SNP), Arlene Foster (DUP) and Sian Berry (Co-Leader Green Party).

Thanks for the above. I doff my cap in a salutary gesture as I acknowledge that if we include co-leaders then we also have Cummings for the Cons and Milne for Labour 😉

[grrclark]

2 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Thanks for the above. I doff my cap in a salutary gesture as I acknowledge that if we include co-leaders then we also have Cummings for the Cons and Milne for Labour 😉

Hahaha yep that is the alarming reality.

I appreciate that both the SNP and DUP are not national in the UK sense of the word so could be discounted from being mainstream, however one is the 3rd largest party in Westminster and could very reasonably hold the balance of power in a hung parliament and the other did exactly that with a confidence and supply agreement.

The greens do field candidates in almost every seat and Sian Berry is a London Mayoral candidate whilst her co-leader is standing somewhere in London I think.

What the above does demonstrate is that even in our flawed (in my opinion) first past the post system that in our current political landscape a vote for even a non mainstream party, (i.e. not contending nationally in every seat), can still have a profound effect on the outcome.

[Newbie to this]

7 hours ago, Rewulf said:

I can definitely confirm no other party has a leader who counts as his 'friends' the IRA, hezbolla, hamas and various despots and murderers, past and present. 

I've just heard an interview with him asking whether Al-baghdadi should have been killed or along those lines basically the same as when Bin Laden was killed.

He said it would be better to have arrested him and brought him to trial. Shows how stupid this man is. Does he think that these terrorist would just go "it's a fair cop gov", and come quietly. The man committed suicide via a bomb taking half his family with him. If he thought the goal was to arrest him, he would have surrendered and took as many soldiers with him as he could.

These soldiers have a hard enough job as it is, without adding more risk to their lives by asking them to take these scum alive.

Edited November 13, 2019 by Newbie to this

[oowee]

24 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

I've just heard an interview with him asking whether Al-baghdadi should have been killed or along those lines basically the same as when Bin Laden was killed.

He said it would be better to have arrested him and brought him to trial. Shows how stupid this man is. Does he think that these terrorist would just go "it's a fair cop gov", and come quietly. The man committed suicide via a bomb taking half his family with him. If he thought the goal was to arrest him, he would have surrendered and took as many soldiers with him as he could.

These soldiers have a hard enough job as it is, without adding more risk to their live by asking them to take these scum alive.

You may be right but what is certain is he can't help the process dead. 

[Rewulf]

17 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

These soldiers have a hard enough job as it is, without adding more risk to their live by asking them to take these scum alive

Indeed, but this beggars the question. 

Are corbyn and his ilk capable of rational thought? , abbotcus jokes aside, in what way shape or form can he deduce that, a leader of an organisation who has sent more suicide attacks than can quantified, would allow himself to be arrested, and would you allow or trust him to do so if he offered? 

As much as he should understand the terrorist psyche, having so many close friends being acquainted with the doctrine, he seems to think human rights and all things fair and fluffy, come into the equation! 

Barbarity doesn't want or require fair or humane treatment, and we are wasting our time trying to do so. 

I would say corbyn wants a reality check, but I believe him to be long past bothering with. 

[Raja Clavata]

3 hours ago, grrclark said:

Hahaha yep that is the alarming reality.

I appreciate that both the SNP and DUP are not national in the UK sense of the word so could be discounted from being mainstream, however one is the 3rd largest party in Westminster and could very reasonably hold the balance of power in a hung parliament and the other did exactly that with a confidence and supply agreement.

The greens do field candidates in almost every seat and Sian Berry is a London Mayoral candidate whilst her co-leader is standing somewhere in London I think.

What the above does demonstrate is that even in our flawed (in my opinion) first past the post system that in our current political landscape a vote for even a non mainstream party, (i.e. not contending nationally in every seat), can still have a profound effect on the outcome.

Indeed. I'm not sure of the structure in NI but understand that Sturgeon is involved based on the way the Scottish Parliament is setup as some kind of PR where there are constituent MPs and others, such as her added as additional members, or something like that.

[Retsdon]

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

Barbarity doesn't want or require fair or humane treatment, and we are wasting our time trying to do so. 

You're missing the point. You're not giving him a trial for his sake. You're giving him a trial so that the whole damned world can see for itself  the difference in moral standards between the likes of Baghdadi and civilized society. Killing him is just fighting in the gutter with the pig.

 

 

[Newbie to this]

21 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Killing him is just fighting in the gutter with the pig.

He killed himself. I'd hazard a guess in the hope that he took some infidels with him.

Why should we ask these soldiers (who are already taking the mission with great risk to their lives), to add more risk to their lives, by ordering them to capture not kill?

[grrclark]

38 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Indeed. I'm not sure of the structure in NI but understand that Sturgeon is involved based on the way the Scottish Parliament is setup as some kind of PR where there are constituent MPs and others, such as her added as additional members, or something like that.

Yep, Scotland has a version of PR where MSPs can be directly elected in the constituency and then there is a regional list based on voter share in the electoral ward.

In many ways it is great, but the problem with PR is that if you get an individual favoured by the party, but disliked by the public, that the public have no way of getting rid, or of course in the case of Labour and Momentum you could have a situation where the list is skewed in favour of a particular agenda.

[Retsdon]

7 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

He killed himself.

Why? Do you think it was a capture mission?

7 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

Why should we ask these soldiers (who are already taking the mission with great risk to their lives), to add more risk to their lives, by ordering them to capture not kill?

Because if that's what's needed, that's their job. 

Edited November 13, 2019 by Retsdon

[Newbie to this]

22 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Why? Do you think it was a capture mission?

Because if that's what's needed, that's their job. 

That is not their job, they are NOT police.

Do you think he would have come quietly if it was a capture mission?

No one should be ordering them to add risk to their lives in order to capture these scum.

There is enough risk already no politician should be adding to it for the sake of a trial.

It beggars belief that anyone thinks this added risk is acceptable.

[Rewulf]

52 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

You're missing the point. You're not giving him a trial for his sake. You're giving him a trial so that the whole damned world can see for itself  the difference in moral standards between the likes of Baghdadi and civilized society. Killing him is just fighting in the gutter with the pig.

 

 

I'm missing the point ?

Tell me , do the whole damned world want to see him trialled , then put in prison, respecting his rights etc? 

No , I would say , most people would prefer him dead.

24 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Why? Do you think it was a capture mission

Why would it not be ? If the mission was just to kill, why not just put a bunker buster down?

I would imagine strapping a suicide vest on means you have made the decision for them though ?

26 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Because if that's what's needed, that's their job.

Their job is to carry out the mission, with minimum collateral casualties  , and maximum team survival.

Just because the target is suicidal , doesn't mean the team have to be !

Or do you know a tactic to disarm a vest full of plastic explosive without killing the wearer?