Brexit Wars 3



It is if you don’t trust your candidate or his message.

Cowardly, might be another word.

Gambling is another … relying on polls trying to model a scenario they have never previously dealt with.


Eadwig - hi
quote=“Eadwig, post:25444, topic:1145436”]
relying on polls
Plus, hopefully, the Tories putting more focus on Comrade Corbyn’s other vote-losing attributes. His Brexit ‘policy’ (sic) and his terrorist mates


…and minimising the focus on Johnson because of his vote losing tendency to put his foot in his mouth.



FIAT - hi

Perhaps my old mate W C Fields had Comrade Corbyn in mind when he said:
‘never give a sucker an even break’


Boris doesn’t have to be bullied into doing anything; he should duck Neil and take the one day of grief he’ll get. He’s got two debates to do plus the Today interview, and a ten point lead to protect.
The BBC have f**ked up. And if it’s true they lied to Labour that Boris was nailed down for Neil, then they are rightly going to get pilloried


Hi Old_Eyes,

Indeed, but that’s not where I’m coming from as regards my main point. True that there are many things that weak-minded, lying politicians can avoid to reduce closer objective scrutiny of their claims & pledges. In the USA, there’s a POTUS who constantly lies & when confronted about his lying too closely for comfort, he either claims “fake news” or pillories journalists for being “rude”.

You could argue that’s what all political leaders should do as long as it’s in their self-interests & they can get away with it. If that’s enough self-justification for you, fair enough.

Some might even say, so what if we end up with a rambling, lying pillock for a PM who does just enough to fool a broadly dim electorate into given him 5 years in power thanks to avoiding greater scrutiny. All’s we want is to “get Brexit done” & certainly without a 2nd Vote, which they know they’d lose.

Some democracy this UK has become. As for the BBC, hopefully more people will avoid paying TV licence fees until they become neutral again, as I’ll be doing. Hit them where it’ll hurt: financially. - Regards.


I’ve already done it. Very cheeky set of questions they asked as to why and what i will be using to watch TV in future. Who do they think they are? HMRC?


Unfortunately @HuwJarse for once I have to agree with you. Their stance on Brexit is crazy. Corbyn is the officially the least popular major party leader since polling began. I live in a Tory held constituency where Labour are in 2nd place usually - I am normally a Labour voter but will go for LibDem or Green this time. It’s a wasted vote as neither will win but I don’t want my support going to Johnson or Corbyn - two of the worst leaders in history. Labour could have romped this GE if they had chosen a decent leader like Keir Starmer but they will get trashed. In the forthcoming months, Brexit will happen, Corbyn will fall and we’ll have 5 years of Boris buffoonery and misery to endure.


To be fair, Andrew Neil would have demolished BoJo so he’s quite sensible to avoid the interview, much as I’d have enjoyed watching it. He might get some limited flack for denying the interview but not anywhere as much as if he’d done it and failed hopelessly.


since Maypolling began! (and I don’t mean Theresa!)


Corbyn is toast anyways.
The point is… no votes have been cast yet… this Election is different to most others in that if the Tories fail to get a majority then the chances of #BrexitRef2 are massively increased.

Brexit can still be stopped. All it takes to give it that chance is stopping the Tories taking seats… and more often than not it means voting for Labour this time around.


Social Care under the Tory Government… but at least this Care Home has now been downgraded from its “good” rating to “requires improvement”… so all’s OK then.


I agree, I feel the same about Corbyn as @Uncle_Doug and in almost any other election I would have voted against Corbyn by voting LibDem but in my constituency Labour need to defend their seat against a Tory challenger and a LibDem who is nowhere. Labour it is then. As you say JW, Corbyn will be sorted out another day.

Frog in a tree


If people stop paying their TV licence one day there will be no BBC at all and, hey presto, you will have contributed to the destruction of another public service which will be replaced by privately owned broadcasters with their own political agenda. Is that what you relly want?

Frog in a tree


FIAT - hi

Yes … unless it becomes an unbiased public service broadcaster - rather than a ratings-chasing one-sided dumbed-down expensive entertainment (sic,) channel


Yes, JAR, I expect no different from you.

Sometimes the BBC seems to give the Tories an easy ride (cue editing of laughter and a clip of last years’ remembrance day ceremony) and sometimes I guess you reckon that they give Labour an easy ride (as in the Andrew Neil interview???) but in between it all, I reckon if they are upsetting viewers on the right and the left then they are most likely striking a balance. Long live the BBC!

Frog in a tree


If Johnson won’t present himself at a Leaders’ debate, he can hardly complain about being represented by a melting ice block. He is going to lose credibility.

Frog in a tree


Maybe they could get the Chief Rabbi to take his place?


They need to find an alternative to the license fee, the business model is ridiculous and to give free licenses to over 75s and not raise that age when the pension ages went up, is a piss take.

The real reason I don’t pay a license fee though, is I don’t watch TV anymore.

I can live without the parliament channel for a few hours every crisis - and that should be provided free anyway - BBC TV News is pathetic, and the rest of the BBC is filled with drag acts and camp dancers. I have nothing against them per se, but when foreign visitors ask you why every time they turn the TV on there is a bloke dressed up in women’s clothing on the screen, it does get you thinking. They also have an unhealthy obsession with the weather.

It is also stuffed full of nepotism (even more than you think when you look beyond people’s stage names to who their parents are) and pays obscene salaries to many men and after coming under criticism it is now paying obscene salaries to lots of women too … somewhat missing the point.

I’d happily pay a license fee, or the whole license fee just to listen to the Today programme every day and Test Match Special and a dozen episodes of Just A Minute a year. However, for years I haven’t been able to listen to TMS when I’m abroad (with or without a paid up license fee) and the rest of the radio I don’t need a license fee for and I’m also disgusted that the Today programme can’t hold more than one or two successful interviews over the telephone before they have a complete breakdown in communications. A news organisation that can’t keep telephones connected, and not just international calls either.

Now we have this unhealthy journalism where journalists attack their victims from start to finish, which is fine, except LET THEM ANSWER THE QUESTION. They are more concerned with their own image as a tough interviewee. There also seems to be an unhealthy bias when it comes to BREXIT…

… we hear this from both sides of the debate, the BBC is biased. Well, I’ve detected why, I believe. It seems to be editorial policy not just to play devil’s advocate during interviews, but actually to allow journalists to push their own agenda on this one subject. I think editorial policy has been thrown out on this one … or they have all become so jaded by it they have lost perspective, in which case heads should be rolling.

There are also some very, very serious questions that need to be asked around the things we’ve seen discussed here about Question Time audiences and editing of news footage to make Johnson look better. Dimbleby (which generation are we on now?) should have boycotted it years ago and spoken out. This is political interference on some scale or other … and here is some more of it. This is a party that is used to bullying media organisations …

I paid a license fee for years when I really didn’t need to legally speaking because it helped support the organisation. They’re going to have to smarten up a bit to get my donation back, I’m afraid, and helping the people who are picking my pocket for tens of thousands a year via Brexit is not a good start.

Finally, if you gave me the BBC’s archives for sale around the world, I’d provide every UK household with excellent quality, free TV on the back of that content which they have all paid for for years. The BBC are useless at selling their content though because they think commercialism sullies them in some way. Well, it shouldn’t be their decision to make and someone should be using that resource for the people who paid for it, not the people who already got paid for it.


FIAT -good morning,
I expect no better from you