shurlock

Meanwhile you have kippers from the Home Counties crying foul on the pages of the Mail, bemoaning why workhouses can't be opened in towns like Boston and Grimbsy for the feckless and idle to do these jobs instead. So much for solidarity among Brexiters. On the plus side, Les can keep his polish carer, Natalia, to wipe his bottom and administer his meds.

So now it's years and years...wonder if that's the kippers on here quite envisaged. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-davis-migrants-brexit-workers-eu-uk-stay-open-immigration-years-latest-a7592616.html

Keep up Trident - Les already helpfully linked the article.

Thought I was on ignore Trident? Guess it was a one-off, seemingly like these figures. Indeed the surplus is less than analysts had predicted.

More s**ts and giggles -can we just tax the Brexit jihadis instead? https://www.ft.com/content/6c786540-f844-11e6-bd4e-68d53499ed71

What? For a MOBO Awards ceremony?

Who's standing up for Fox News? Try and read what was said.

Where have I endorsed polls wholesale? Your poor comprehension is making you look silly again. I made a discrete point about willingness to pay surveys (the yougov one is a stripped down variant). They are fundamentally different in design and purpose from election polls where respondents have all kinds of incentives to conceal their voting intentions, not to mention the time pressures involved in assembling a representative sample. And they have noting to do with forecasting which I haven't endorsed here at all Let's also be clear the majority of online polls were well within the margin of error in predicting Brexit, so it was not quite the mare you claim.

Perhaps I was bit unfair on Wallace -or perhaps as Trident would narcissistically say, he's been reading the forum. [video=youtube_share;L5RRUZynq80]http://youtu.be/L5RRUZynq80

It's not a nothing poll. It is quite normal in the social sciences to frame and elicit people's willingness to pay for something as a hypothetical. I assume you don't know anything about contingent valuation and choice experiments As usual Les, you're answering a question that nobody else has asked. What a couple of Brexiter campaigners who you've happened to misrepresent is irrelevant. What matters is whether the 52% who voted leave would be happy with such a scenario -you know the ones who were told they could be outside the single market and still enjoy the same trade and trade benefits as they do at present. This was the context in which Mandy made his intervention and motivated the discussion before you had a senior's moment and went off track. Let's see how tight-knit the motley crew of contradictory hopes, objectives and frustrations that defined vote leave is at the end of negotiations. Not everyone who voted leave is like you Les and believes in the Brexiter equivalent of 72 virgins as the reward for sacrificing pragmatism for dogmatism and ideology.

Two people Les -one a fellow Jihadi. Your stupidity never ceases to amaze. Just as moronically they don't even support what you're trying to claim. Farage's statement is too vague to infer anything from while BoJo only talks about the EU and single market and not the prospect of also leaving the customs union, so it's not quite a case of no deal is better than a bad deal. Your reading and comprehension skills need some work. While you're at it, Les, please define 'bad' - surely you don't just mean compromise, you know the thing that happens in any negotiation? I respectfully suggest you've fallen for May's asinine bluster A recent ICM survey found that only 35% would back leaving the EU without an agreement. Of course, all these polls don't show what price people would be willing to pay. This provides clues, however. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/10/poll-public-will-not-accept-brexit-worse-off-tim-farron-ukip-lib-dem-yougov

Les you have a bad enough grasp of developments close to home for you wade out and comment on a country you don't have a clue about. Parallels between the media's treatment of Trump and Brexit are as illusory as they are plain dim.

Where is the evidence for this? Your feverish little mind doesn't count, Les.

And what does an interview with a Trump spokesman about coverage of the US president have to do with the BBC's coverage of Brexit? You posted the link, you failed to adjust for the source and made a complete tit of yourself. While it's funny watching you helplessly gasp for breath, accept it and move on

No knots Les - it's very simple, even for you. The Brexiters sold a false prospectus -that doesn't mean people who voted leave are necessarily thick. The thing with promises is that they can't be disproven at the time as judgment day is always in the future. No it says more about the opportunism and hazily sketched vision of a campaign that knowing swivel-eyed fundamentalists like you were in a minority had to be all things to all people to scrape together a majority. Hard to admit I know little kipper.

From the person who references a Trump spokesman as evidence that the BBC is biased. What a howler

Where did Mandy say the electorate was too thick to understand the implications of leaving? And no Les, it's not after the event. You make it sound like getting to Article 50 was the hard bit and the talks will be a doddle, you silly old f**t. The event hasn't even started yet - watching Brexiters pay the price for failing to temper expectations when the miracle deal they've promised fails to materialise will be most delicious indeed, little kipper.

Mandy certainly exposed your little hobby horse as fatuous tosh – that people knew exactly what they were voting for. Brexiters might claim caveat emptor - that a vote to leave meant leaving single market (though few references were made about possibly leaving the custom union). Of course as Mandy points out, it was also claimed that in doing so the UK would enjoy the same trade and trade benefits as it does now. Touchy stuff being told by Mandy in all his queeny pomp that your position is fundamentally based on an impossibility, if not a pack of lies and the vote to leave is far more brittle than you desperately pretend.

Now watched it. My hunch was confirmed to be correct. He is a bit touchy -and so are you it seems

Not seen it yet. But is that codeword for someone telling a few home truths and running rings around the kipper case and you getting a bit touchy

Spurs - Millwall = standout tie.

Stop being a weasel Les - you endorsed the video. Should have added your disclaimers before posting it and aligning it with your sweeping final sentence. Try to be more careful next time Re. BBC and Brexit, both sides have claimed that it is biased. Depends what you mean by bias and what part of the BBC you're talking about.

Not so sure about that. Shepard Smith, featured in the video, has form. He is known to depart from the Fox line (as does Geraldo Riveira), so this incident is nothing new. If you can't do it over Russia -given all the historical and ideological buttons it pushes- when can you? By and large, most of their anchors/hosts are exactly the same as they were before the election. Indeed its disappointing that their proper journos, notably Chris Wallace have not been more questioning in their coverage. As far as their big hitters -O'Reilly and Hannity- are concerned, it's all been water off a ducks back. O'Reilly has kept his mouth shut since Trump's interview revelation to him that US governing class is to some extent morally equivalent to Putin; while Hannity is still the love-struck sycophant, not least as it is getting him unrivalled access. If he criticises anyone, it's Paul Ryan and the GOP. As long as Trump rails against the media, Fox will always side with Trump as its feud with the mainstream press is existential. The same is true with any number of agendas -from terrorism and immigration to Obamacare and political correctness. A polarised atmosphere forces outlets to pick sides. Qualifying your position will only get you called a turncoat. Trump has brilliantly exploited this polarisation and the mainstream press has taken the bait and amplified it.