revolution saint

I'm probably being dense about this but we've got more excess deaths for the size of our population than virtually all other developed nations - is that not the fault of the government or were we just unlucky? It seems particularly unlucky given we were supposed to be behind Italy, Spain and most of the other European countries and had more notice and time to prepare than they had. Obviously there are structural issues that may make comparison between countries difficult and you can chuck in long standing funding issues not necessarily entirely the fault of this government but surely they must be to blame for an awful lot of our "bad luck". There were times during this crisis where they looked in complete chaos and not a clue amongst them. I'll give the Chancellor some credit though - he at least seemed to have an idea.

Ringo Starr innit? Easy mistake to make when you don't have your mind cast firmly back in the good old days though

Strange Lord D, thought you'd have been full of praise for Starmer's stand against anti-semitism. You were pretty outraged at Corbyn and his lack of it - or is your support only conditional when it suits you?

His motivation or instincts are entirely irrelevant. When lockdown was announced we weren't told to use our common sense - we were issued a directive that we were to adhere to and failure would result in criminal charges or a fine. He broke his (or at least the govt) rules. Failure to sack him undermines the government position and any further directives they might issue.

I live in Dibden and can confirm there's been literally hundreds of Amazon delivery vans in the area. I suspect they're scouting the area out. I've spoken to a few of them recently as coincidentally I've also had some deliveries. Although none of them could officially confirm these rumours, crucially none of them denied them either. The only thing that concerns me slightly is the Amazon smile logo looks like a circumcised ****.

I'm working more from home than I ever did at work - it's a sodding nightmare!

Thanks for the reply. Your argument now is very different to the one employed during the referendum though (and still be used by Boris and Nige). Brexit wasn't just going to give us our country back - we would be better off and whether you like it or not it's success will be measured in economic terms. If your argument was being used during the referendum then the result would have been easier to accept but it wasn't. Any attempt to show this has real risks and is more than likely to make us poorer was "project fear" - now you seem to be saying that we probably won't notice a difference but if we do then it's a price worth paying. That's a huge backtrack. I do accept that for you it probably is a price worth paying - you'd be happy for an economic sacrifice in exchange for an airy fairy concept of freedom and sovereignty but those were not the terms presented to people when they voted. By the way, I think the average Joe is already noticing a difference financially (for example if they like to go abroad for holidays) and I think they'll notice more of a difference in the coming years but that'll be dismissed as "project fear" again. What I do take issue with is this idea that sovereignty matters that much more to your "average Joe" than the pound in his pocket. Frankly I think that idea is pony (to coin a phrase). I can't imagine many people besides you cheering a vague concept of sovereignty that makes no difference to their daily lives whatsoever whilst at the same time they face increasing job insecurity (extreme example) or just being worse off financially. I hope that explains why I really don't like this idea that suddenly it's a price worth paying - that wasn't what we were sold.

Care to come up with some kind of answer - IE you do believe we'll be better off - or that you now think that sovereignty is more important than wealth? Or perhaps you'll bottle it and fail to answer as per usual.

Hold on, hold on. The Brexit argument was that we would also be better off. No money being paid to the EU, better trade deals etc etc etc - anyone who said otherwise was all part of "Project Fear". You don't get to start some things are more important than money - if we're not better off after leaving the EU then we were sold a slogan on the back of lies.

I watched 100 days yesterday evening and they did a piece on this. What surprised me was the only angle they were interested in was whether football clubs can afford to p*ss off China - no mention on whether the allegations were true or not. In fairness Newsnight did a piece not that long ago but it's disappointing they weren't prepared to look at the substance behind the story. That'll be modern journalism for you.

Well, personally I don't think we need anything other than a prime minister but if we decided we did need a head of state then I'd expect that to be a democratic vote. As for the names you've suggested - they probably wouldn't win a democratic vote. If they did then they'd have a mandate, would be accountable and could also be removed. The money, as I've said before, is a side issue and not something I'm that bothered about but surely it would be cheaper to hold a vote every four or five years than keeping a monarchy. It wouldn't matter to me even if it wasn't though.

Well, the thing is that as long as you had a mechanism in place to remove them then you could do something about it. I dunno we could call it "taking back control " or something equally catchy. I'm not entirely sure we need a head of state anyway. I'm not a constitutional expert but on the face of it surely we could cope with just having a prime minister to represent us?

Well, it's pretty obvious from my username where my sympathies lie. Money is a secondary issue for me because then you get into a debate about whether they're "worth it". Only thing I'm concerned about is whether you can justify having a head of state who has got the job by birth right alone. I don't think you can - it's undemocratic and frankly offensive but I recognise I'm in the minority on this one.

If I recall the relaxation of banking regulations occurred under Thatcher (and Reagan in the US). Blair gave the BoE the ability to set interest rates independently but not sure he deregulated any more than Thatcher did - could be wrong though.

Only my opinion but you better prepare to be disappointed if you think Brexit talk will disappear once we're out. It'll be centre stage and we'll all become experts on the various aspects of trade deals.

That's not the way the government treats not voting when it comes to strike ballots.

Apologies if already posted but you can vote for Moussa's goal in the BBC goal of the month competition here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/football/49937967

Funnily enough about 20 odd years ago I sat in the home stands up at Stamford Bridge when we beat them up there (was a midweek game and Tiss and Shipperley scored for us) anyway they were quiet as church mice until half time when they started booing and calling for Hoddle to go (which I happily joined in with). So, they're no different to us or any football fanbase. Agree with everything else you said as well. Don't really care what division we're in as long as we're winning more than we're losing.

Hell, I'll say it for you - all racists voted leave. Why on earth wouldn't they? Did any of the KKK vote for Obama? Course they bloody didn't and it's the same for the leave vote - you're pursuing the same agenda (take back control of our borders, immigration etc etc). It's the same thing the BNP, EDL and other far right groups want and, yes, they want to go further than that but they're not going to vote remain cause your lot don't go far enough are they? Not all leavers are racists but all racists are leave voters. It's common sense and you're deluded if you think otherwise.

Haven't read the actual article (and not really that interested in doing so either) but I did read the response Stokes put out. Very damning and I'd imagine the Sun will be on the wrong side of public opinion on the matter - they probably don't care much but make them think twice before doing another story like this.

Well, this seems to suggest that Boris and a large part of the tory party is islamophobic: https://www.businessinsider.com/poll-muslim-islamophobia-among-conservative-party-members-boris-johnson-leadership-2019-6?r=US&IR=T Now that probably isn't the case - a lot of this type of stuff takes things out of context or deliberately poses things in a way that proves what it wants to (in this case Islamophobia) but you seem perfectly willing to believe the stuff against the people you disagree with and to try and use that as a stick to beat them with. Least have the guts to admit that (although it seems pretty self evident). Finally I'm sure you'll join me in condemning the great lady herself for being close personal friends with General Pinochet? I mean, you wouldn't idolise someone who called a dictator and terrorist a true friend would you?

Jeez, you're a right little snowflake aren't you? The perfect epitome of a whinging right winger perfectly happy to dish it out and then moan about hypocrisy when it's not going their way. Boris is a proven liar and Boris is a racist yet you support him as long as he gets your precious little no deal brexit. Islamophobia is rife within the Tory party and you still support that and no doubt you were still perfectly happy with UKIP despite that being very obviously racist. I'm to going to defend any racist behaviour by anyone but lets not pretend hypocrisy is exclusive to "pinkos".

Wouldn't surprise me to see someone come up with a website that tells people exactly what party to get behind in each constituency if they want to see either a second referendum or article 50 revoked. If remainers can club together and treat it as a single issue election then that scuppers Boris to an extent (if he's still having problems with Brexit party anyway). Wouldn't even need the explicit support of the individual party leaders to work either.

Mate, you should absolutely post more often. I know it's not intentional but it's really very funny. Do you get very very angry at only specific things or do you do requests?

I guess if you were going to buy a pint and a programme each game anyway then that's a tenner a game? So £10 x 19 games = £190 so that's only an extra tenner for the season and you presumably get much more chance of getting at drink at HT and an opportunity for a smoke if that floats your boat. It's not the kind of thing I'd pay for but maybe not so bad if you were definitely going to get a programme each game.