/ Nigel Farage

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
Trevers - on 11 May 2019

https://metro.co.uk/2019/05/11/nigel-farage-fled-after-chauffeur-driven-4x4-crashed-into-car-carrying-toddler-9497845/

Apparently he walked away from a car crash caused by his chauffeur without stopping to check if the occupants (including a screaming child) were alright. This was hours before his QT appearance on Thursday. He's offered some fairly evasive excuses since.

It seems Nigel Farage is a coward who refuses to take any personal responsibility and appears to see himself as better than others. Who could possibly have guessed?

Report
peppermill on 11 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

Who knows. People do all sorts of weird and wonderful things after a car accident, even minor ones. Or he could just be a c*ck. As I said. Who knows.

Report
arch - on 11 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> Apparently he walked away from a car crash caused by his chauffeur without stopping to check if the occupants (including a screaming child) were alright. This was hours before his QT appearance on Thursday. He's offered some fairly evasive excuses since.

From the Metro.

He added: ‘Once I had ascertained that everyone was OK I made discreet withdrawal from the situation. ‘I didn’t think that me, with a rather a well-known face, going into that situation would have helped anything or anybody.’

Always two sides to every story.............

Report
earlsdonwhu - on 11 May 2019

> He added: ‘Once I had ascertained that everyone was OK I made discreet withdrawal from the situation. ‘I didn’t think that me, with a rather a well-known face, going into that situation would have helped anything or anybody"

I think he should have just said, " I didn't think that me, with a rather well- known face, is helping anything or anybody....ever".

Report
pasbury on 11 May 2019
In reply to arch:

He probably meant ‘a rather well known face that lot of people would like to kick’.

Imagine any non-political figure doing the same thing.

Report
pasbury on 11 May 2019
In reply to peppermill:

> Or he could just be a c*ck. As I said. Who knows.

Well I know, he’s a cock.

Report
Jim Fraser - on 11 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

Who?

Report
The Lemming - on 11 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

I'm guessing that the chaffeur was the driver and Farage was a passenger?

If so, then what is Farage supposed to do once he has enquired if everybody is safe or in need of medical attention?

Stand around for smartphones to record his every move or inability to help beyond his capabilities?

You may not like the man but have you considered that Farage may have found the whole episode exceptionally stressful and brought back memories of his plane crash?

I'm not making excuses but if somebody is unable to help out at a crash, then why can't they descretely 'do one'?

Post edited at 22:18
Report
The New NickB - on 11 May 2019
In reply to peppermill:

I know, he is definitely a cock. Evidenced by a lifetime of him behaving like a cock!

Report
Trevers - on 11 May 2019
In reply to The Lemming:

> I'm guessing that the chaffeur was the driver and Farage was a passenger?

> If so, then what is Farage supposed to do once he has enquired if everybody is safe or in need of medical attention?

> Stand around for smartphones to record his every move or inability to help beyond his capabilities?

> You may not like the man but have you considered that Farage may have found the whole episode exceptionally stressful and brought back memories of his plane crash?

> I'm not making excuses but if somebody is unable to help out at a crash, then why can't they descretely 'do one'?

He clearly didn't try very hard to see if he was able to help out or not, given that he was unaware of a distressed child in the car.

If a car crash is sufficient to trigger a negative response to old memories, then he's perhaps not the great heroic leader ready to pick up a rifle and fight for our freedom that he likes to claim to be.

Report
FactorXXX - on 11 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> He clearly didn't try very hard to see if he was able to help out or not, given that he was unaware of a distressed child in the car.

I'm a Remainer and therefore no fan of Farage, but why do I get the feeling that the story has been embellished somewhat so as to discredit him. 

Report
Bulls Crack - on 11 May 2019
In reply to arch:

Or: I thought that my well known face would cause me a lot of grief. F*ck the toddler; probably would vote Remain anyway'

Report
The Lemming - on 12 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> If a car crash is sufficient to trigger a negative response to old memories, then he's perhaps not the great heroic leader ready to pick up a rifle and fight for our freedom that he likes to claim to be.

I don't quite know how to respond to this.

And, we are not At War with Europe

Report
stevieb - on 12 May 2019
In reply to The Lemming:

If, as he claims, farage checked that everyone was ok before leaving, then there is no issue here. 

If, as the landlord claims, farage did a runner  without checking to try to avoid being recognised, then this is pretty shitty behaviour, and far worse in my eyes than drinking a gin and tonic on a train. 

Report
Trevers - on 12 May 2019
In reply to FactorXXX:

> I'm a Remainer and therefore no fan of Farage, but why do I get the feeling that the story has been embellished somewhat so as to discredit him. 

I'll be honest, a part of me saw this with relish, hoping it could be used to good effect to smear a man who seems remarkably resistant to criticism of his politics and tactics.

Normally I don't agree with smear campaigns but Farage has done more to poison discourse and hurt democracy in this country than anyone else. If a nasty smear campaign could see him off, I think the ends would justify the means.

Report
bouldery bits - on 12 May 2019
In reply to arch:

> From the Metro.

> He added: ‘Once I had ascertained that everyone was OK I made discreet withdrawal from the situation. ‘I didn’t think that me, with a rather a well-known face, going into that situation would have helped anything or anybody.’

> Always two sides to every story.............

I'm too famous to help common people I am.

I'm well important me.

Twxt.

Report
FactorXXX - on 13 May 2019
In reply to bouldery bits:

> I'm too famous to help common people I am.

What should he have done?

Report
dh73 - on 13 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

to be fair, as he wasn't the driver, there is no legal obligation on him to do anything.

Report
john arran - on 13 May 2019
In reply to dh73:

Not sure how true it is, but I just read that there was a woman in the car with Farage, who apparently left with him when he walked off, a French mistress by the name of Laure Ferrari.

I'll await confirmation before jumping to conclusions!

Report
BFG on 13 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

If smear campaigns are wrong, then they're not justified just because you don't like the guy. From a moral point of view it's fundamentally unjustified, from an expediency point of view, if you start smearing him to a supporter on dodgy grounds then you're making him a martyr.

There are enough legitimate avenues for criticising Farage that you don't need to invent reasons on the back of him doing nothing wrong, nor stoop to the level of name calling.

If you've ever bemoaned the dumbing down or nastier elements of politics, this kind of bullshit is part of the problem.

Post edited at 11:02
Report
summo on 13 May 2019
In reply to bouldery bits:

> I'm too famous to help common people I am.

He's clearly never graduated from mp school. 

He should have leapt into the car and held the hand of any occupant, paying careful attention to lighting and camera angles, so as to not block any photos.

Once the ambulance was on scene, he should have refused to leave and gone with them to the hospital. 

A quick news conference outside the hospital with appropriate back drop ...thanking nhs staff blah blah... then spend the next 2 weeks referencing it in every conversation. 

Perhaps a follow visit to their home with a bunch of flowers and news crew a week later. 

Report
Trevers - on 13 May 2019
In reply to BFG:

Please read what I said - I regard Farage as an immediate and direct threat to our democracy, and the ends justify the means.

There are many legitimate criticisms of his politics but as you and I both know, his supporters won't be interested to hear those. He's perfected the art of populism and blows simply don't land on him. If this is what is required to make his supporters see him in a different light, so be it. The alternative, if he gets his way, is the piecemeal destruction of our democracy. He's already trampling roughshod all over it.

It's a moot point though because the story doesn't appear to be going anywhere.

Post edited at 12:16
Report
The Lemming - on 13 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> It's a moot point though because the story doesn't appear to be going anywhere.

There is probably good reason that the story is going nowhere.

ITS NOT A STORY!

Two people were travelling in one vehicle that hit another vehicle that had at least one male driver and a child. A passenger of one vehicle, not the driver, may or may not have checked on the occupants of the other vehicle and then the passenger left the scene with or without informing the police.

Unless there is a legal requirement or a need for the passenger to receive medical assistance, then the passenger does not need to stay on scene, especially if they need to continue with their journey.

I'm assuming that there was no legal reason for the passenger to remain on scene otherwise it would have been plastered all over the national media, facebook, twitter, Interpol and Loose Women.

Just because the driver of the other vehicle and you have axes to grind does not change facts. ITS NOT A STORY.

And for full disclosure, I have never voted for UKIP, the Brexit Party or Farage. However I have found him entertaining while on Have I got News for You.

Post edited at 13:49
Report
Trevers - on 13 May 2019
In reply to The Lemming:

> There is probably good reason that the story is going nowhere.

> ITS NOT A STORY!

No, but there doesn't have to be a story. This is politics. I'm talking about an attack on his character, not a case that has to stand up in a court of law.

Report
The Lemming - on 13 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> No, but there doesn't have to be a story. This is politics. I'm talking about an attack on his character, not a case that has to stand up in a court of law.


Maybe this will help.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YuTW8bdIlw

Report
Trevers - on 13 May 2019
In reply to The Lemming:

> Maybe this will help.

Tolerate Farage and his ilk at your peril.

Report
captain paranoia - on 13 May 2019
In reply to summo:

> He's clearly never graduated from mp school. 

Probably because he's never been an MP...

MEP, yes, MP, no.

Report
bouldery bits - on 13 May 2019
In reply to FactorXXX:

> What should he have done?

Been a decent person and helped.

I hate the idea that he thinks he's so famous that helping people is not for him.

Report
arch - on 13 May 2019
In reply to bouldery bits:

> Been a decent person and helped.

How exactly would you have liked him to of helped ??

> I hate the idea that he thinks he's so famous that helping people is not for him.

And you know this for certain ??

Report
arch - on 13 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> Please read what I said - I regard Farage as an immediate and direct threat to our democracy, and the ends justify the means.

> There are many legitimate criticisms of his politics but as you and I both know, his supporters won't be interested to hear those. He's perfected the art of populism and blows simply don't land on him. If this is what is required to make his supporters see him in a different light, so be it. The alternative, if he gets his way, is the piecemeal destruction of our democracy. He's already trampling roughshod all over it.

> It's a moot point though because the story doesn't appear to be going anywhere.

Could you please explain to me how NF is, and I quote "an immediate and direct threat to our democracy" The guy's not even an MP, what are you afraid off ??

Report
bouldery bits - on 13 May 2019
In reply to arch:

> How exactly would you have liked him to of helped ??

By being pleasant and reassuring after a vehicle collision? Is that an unreasonable expectation?

> And you know this for certain ??

‘I didn’t think that me, with a rather a well-known face, going into that situation would have helped anything or anybody.

Ie - my face is too well known to help people. 

Report
bouldery bits - on 13 May 2019
In reply to dh73:

> to be fair, as he wasn't the driver, there is no legal obligation on him to do anything.

A moral one tho? 

Report
arch - on 13 May 2019
In reply to bouldery bits:

You missed this bit out.........

‘Once I had ascertained that everyone was OK I made discreet withdrawal from the situation.

Report
bouldery bits - on 13 May 2019
In reply to arch:

> You missed this bit out.........

> ‘Once I had ascertained that everyone was OK I made discreet withdrawal from the situation.

Checked I wasn't going to get in trouble for anything and left. 

Report
arch - on 13 May 2019
In reply to bouldery bits:

> Checked I wasn't going to get in trouble for anything and left. 

He wasn't even driving. But let's not get the facts in the way of a Nigel bashing, eh ??

Report
bouldery bits - on 13 May 2019
In reply to arch:

I suspect we will likely always disagree on this particular issue. I would like to think that, in the event of a vehicle collision, people would stop and help each other out. 

Sounds like my expectation does not tally with other people's expectations. Each to their own I guess. 

#ClassWar

Report
captain paranoia - on 13 May 2019
In reply to arch:

> Could you please explain to me how NF is

I'd forgotten what this thread was about (lots of tabs open), so I had to think a bit to remember what NF meant...

National Front?

Neo fascist?

Ah, yes: Nigel Farage...

Report
FactorXXX - on 13 May 2019
In reply to bouldery bits:

> #ClassWar

Is that the same as chip on shoulder?

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to arch:

> Could you please explain to me how NF is, and I quote "an immediate and direct threat to our democracy" The guy's not even an MP, what are you afraid off ??

Not even an MP, yet he's driven the biggest foreign policy change in our country in decades.

Now he claims to be defending democracy, but he's refusing to publish a manifesto, his "party" has no democratic party structure, and the sources of his funding are being hidden. And he's stealing huge support from the two main parties, who've been stricken dumb by all of this.

Who is he accountable to?

Report
ena sharples - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

"Stealing huge support from the two main parties". Er, right. So does that mean you think the votes that might otherwise have gone to those parties are their lawful property and that such votes going elsewhere constitute some kind of theft?

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to ena sharples:

> "Stealing huge support from the two main parties". Er, right. So does that mean you think the votes that might otherwise have gone to those parties are their lawful property and that such votes going elsewhere constitute some kind of theft?

No, their implosion is certainly deserved as a result of arrogance, abysmal leadership and years of of bad government. The point was that large swathes of the electorate are falling for Farage's populism.

Report
stu7jokes - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> No, their implosion is certainly deserved as a result of arrogance, abysmal leadership and years of of bad government. The point was that large swathes of the electorate are falling for Farage's populism.

Who's the threat to democracy here?

Report
bouldery bits - on 14 May 2019
In reply to FactorXXX:

> Is that the same as chip on shoulder?

Heheheheh.

Report
arch - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> Not even an MP, yet he's driven the biggest foreign policy change in our country in decades.

> Now he claims to be defending democracy, but he's refusing to publish a manifesto, his "party" has no democratic party structure, and the sources of his funding are being hidden.

 But even after all that, he's still getting all this >

And he's stealing huge support from the two main parties, who've been stricken dumb by all of this.

That says more about the two "Main" parties than than it does about Farage.

> Who is he accountable to?

No one..........Yet.

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to stu7jokes:

> Who's the threat to democracy here?

Farage. I think that was clear from what I said.

Report
thomasadixon - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> Who is he accountable to?

This is obvious isn’t it?  His voters, who keep voting him back in so are clearly quite happy with his actions.

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> This is obvious isn’t it?  His voters, who keep voting him back in so are clearly quite happy with his actions.

It's about as ambiguous as is possible. He has no manifesto, no democratic party structure... How is that accountability? It's pretty clear from his history as an MEP so far that he hasn't cared an ounce about representing his constituents.

Post edited at 10:16
Report
The Lemming - on 14 May 2019
Report
stu7jokes - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> Farage. I think that was clear from what I said.

And yet... 

> No, their implosion is certainly deserved as a result of arrogance, abysmal leadership and years of of bad government. The point was that large swathes of the electorate are falling for Farage's populism.

Perhaps you just have no idea what democracy means

Report
john arran - on 14 May 2019
In reply to The Lemming:

"Immigration will be limited to the many foreign born girlfriends and wives of our leaders and financial backers. Evidence if ever it were needed that immigrants take on the very nastiest jobs that nobody else is prepared to do."

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to stu7jokes:

> Perhaps you just have no idea what democracy means

Kindly either qualify or retract that statement please.

Post edited at 10:49
Report
thomasadixon - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

Seems pretty clear to me that he does, and that he represents them in the way that they’d want him to.  Not the way you would want him to, of course, but then you didn’t vote for him.

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> Seems pretty clear to me that he does, and that he represents them in the way that they’d want him to.  Not the way you would want him to, of course, but then you didn’t vote for him.

So all those fishermen and women, whose side he pretends to be on, didn't want him to attend any of those fisheries meetings which he refused to where he could have represented the interests of the UK fishing industry within the EU?

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> Seems pretty clear to me that he does, and that he represents them in the way that they’d want him to.  Not the way you would want him to, of course, but then you didn’t vote for him.

How about when, as an elected MP (heaven forbid), he pushes for full privatisation of the NHS to US firms. Will that be the representation his voters want? Or are you suggesting his mere existence as an MEP is all the representation his voters really want?

Report
thomasadixon - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

The ones that vote for him want to leave the EU.  If he’s out achieving that then who cares about those meetings?  They’re irrelevant.

Those who don’t want to leave can of course vote for someone else, and presumably do!

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> The ones that vote for him want to leave the EU.  If he’s out achieving that then who cares about those meetings?  They’re irrelevant.

Which version of leave will that be? And how will he achieve it as an MEP? And how much damage to EU-UK relations does he intend to do in the meantime?

I dunno about you, but I'd personally like to know these things.

Report
thomasadixon - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

Presumably you are not voting for him, right?  On your Qs - WTO rules; political pressure (he has a clear record of doing that!); loaded question doesn’t deserve an answer.

Report
stu7jokes - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> Kindly either qualify or retract that statement please.

There's nothing to retract. I'm wondering. Because going by this thread, you seem to believe he is a threat to democracy on the basis that large swathes of the electorate find him convincing.

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> Presumably you are not voting for him, right?  

Very insightful Are you?

> On your Qs - WTO rules; political pressure (he has a clear record of doing that!); loaded question doesn’t deserve an answer.

WTO rules - something that nobody campaigned for and nobody voted for. And something that even Mr Farage knows will do great damage to our economy.

Political pressure - ok, fair enough. I after all did argue that point myself above.

Loaded question - not really, because electing a load of agitators into the EU Parliament who only want to obstruct and create havoc is not going to endear the UK to the EU and may further strain our future relations. I remain a citizen of the UK with an interest in its future and my possible future within the EU so yes, I would very much like to know what damage Farage might cause.

Report
The Lemming - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> Kindly either qualify or retract that statement please.


You are opting for a dictatorship. You are telling people what way to vote and that if people don't agree with you then they are wrong.

Not exactly in the spirit of a democracy, is it?

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to stu7jokes:

> There's nothing to retract. I'm wondering. Because going by this thread, you seem to believe he is a threat to democracy on the basis that large swathes of the electorate find him convincing.

It's both tempting and perfectly relevant to invoke Godwin's Law here. 

But yes. I wouldn't be so bothered if he had the same (lack of) charisma as Nick Griffin, and was so openly racist, because he would be rejected by everyone apart from a small swathe of already rather unpleasant people.

He is a threat because people find him convincing. And for the other reasons (lack of policy or any accountability) that I've already highlighted.

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to The Lemming:

> You are opting for a dictatorship. You are telling people what way to vote and that if people don't agree with you then they are wrong.

I'm doing no such thing. If people wish to vote a certain way, that's their prerogative, even if it's highly inadvisable. But it's also my right to try to point out the inadvisability of voting a certain way. Indeed Electoral Commission rules allow for third-party campaigns against a party or candidate.

> Not exactly in the spirit of a democracy, is it?

It entirely is. I'm free to protest and campaign against policies and against parties. That's the essence of democracy. Far more so than receiving the bulk of funding in small donations to render them non-declarable.

Report
Bjartur i Sumarhus on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> How about when, as an elected MP (heaven forbid), he pushes for full privatisation of the NHS to US firms. Will that be the representation his voters want? Or are you suggesting his mere existence as an MEP is all the representation his voters really want?

History provides a good example of a UK politician that was popular to do a single job, which after he completed it was sent packing. 

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

> History provides a good example of a UK politician that was popular to do a single job, which after he completed it was sent packing. 

True, but I don't think that situation is comparable in any way to the current situation.

That said, I don't think Farage has any designs on becoming Prime Minister, but it's the damage he's doing to democracy now that bothers me.

Report
thomasadixon - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> Very insightful Are you?

Probably.

> WTO rules - something that nobody campaigned for and nobody voted for. And something that even Mr Farage knows will do great damage to our economy.

He’s arguing for it now, has in the past (as an option, if no deal is possible) and as I’m sure you’ll recall I don’t agree no one voted for it - we voted to leave, deal or no deal.

> Loaded question - not really, because electing a load of agitators into the EU Parliament who only want to obstruct and create havoc is not going to endear the UK to the EU and may further strain our future relations. I remain a citizen of the UK with an interest in its future and my possible future within the EU so yes, I would very much like to know what damage Farage might cause.

You’ll just assert that he’s causing damage whatever as you don’t like his choices, he’d say no damage at all.  I can assert that people like Change are, quite deliberately, damaging our country.  They are...but I won’t ask them how much damage they want to do as it’s a meaningless question - they’ll say they’re not doing any, I’ll think they’re doing loads.

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> Probably.

Well please, don't take it as an insult that I'm trying to change your mind.

> He’s arguing for it now, has in the past (as an option, if no deal is possible) and as I’m sure you’ll recall I don’t agree no one voted for it - we voted to leave, deal or no deal.

He argued for Norway during the referendum. If the leave campaigns had clearly stated "we'll leave without a deal, default onto WTO terms and rebuild from there", they would have been destroyed. I don't remember the WTO being mentioned even once during the referendum campaigns, but if you can find a reference to it I'll reassess.

We voted to leave, yes, with strong assurances of a favourable deal. If the only option now is no-deal then quite clearly Brexit was missold, by accident or design.

> You’ll just assert that he’s causing damage whatever as you don’t like his choices, he’d say no damage at all.  I can assert that people like Change are, quite deliberately, damaging our country.  They are...but I won’t ask them how much damage they want to do as it’s a meaningless question - they’ll say they’re not doing any, I’ll think they’re doing loads.

I agree with you regarding Change, they've chosen perhaps the most hypocritcal party name ever. But my point still stands I think - I'm deeply unhappy about the prospect of being represented by a bunch of belligerents. I can't think of any better way to describe them, Farage's record in the EU is clear.

Report
thomasadixon - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> Well please, don't take it as an insult that I'm trying to change your mind.

I won’t, not likely though!

> He argued for Norway during the referendum. If the leave campaigns had clearly stated "we'll leave without a deal, default onto WTO terms and rebuild from there", they would have been destroyed. I don't remember the WTO being mentioned even once during the referendum campaigns, but if you can find a reference to it I'll reassess.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36471787 “No deal is better than the rotten deal we have”

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/infacts.org/anna-soubry-exaggerates-trade-damage/amp/  Article on the WTO from March 2016

You can google yourself for more.

> We voted to leave, yes, with strong assurances of a favourable deal. If the only option now is no-deal then quite clearly Brexit was missold, by accident or design.

Wrong.

> I agree with you regarding Change, they've chosen perhaps the most hypocritcal party name ever. But my point still stands I think - I'm deeply unhappy about the prospect of being represented by a bunch of belligerents. I can't think of any better way to describe them, Farage's record in the EU is clear.

It’s not a point, it’s just rhetoric.  How much damage?  From his POV none, it’s an improvement.

Post edited at 12:38
Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=292WLPCXaKQ

“If this didn’t work, if we reach the worst case scenario of no deal being on offer, no deal is better for us than the rotten deal we have now and very bad for them.”

He called it the "worst case scenario". He wasn't campaigning for it. Nobody was.

One mention of WTO in a fairly low-key article. Can you find any instances of WTO in official campaign material or quotes from key campaigners?

Report
The Lemming - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

Did you really have to turn this into another Brexit discussion?

You need to get out more.

Report
deepsoup - on 14 May 2019
In reply to The Lemming:

> Did you really have to turn this into another Brexit discussion?

The title of this thread is "Nigel Farage" you daft little furry creature, what did you expect!?

Report
tom_in_edinburgh - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

It is far worse than that.  It is unbelievable that someone with this background could be head of a mainstream political party - and that his history with the National Front is not being brought up when he is interviewed on TV.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-fascist-nazi-song-gas-them-all-ukip-brexit-schoolfriend-dulwich-college-a7185236.html

Post edited at 18:53
Report
thomasadixon - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> “If this didn’t work, if we reach the worst case scenario of no deal being on offer, no deal is better for us than the rotten deal we have now and very bad for them.”

> He called it the "worst case scenario". He wasn't campaigning for it. Nobody was.

Yes, they were, you’ve just not got  great memory.  As said, it was one of the range of possibilities if we voted leave.  The “worst case scenario” out of those possibilities, all of which are better than EU membership.

> One mention of WTO in a fairly low-key article. Can you find any instances of WTO in official campaign material or quotes from key campaigners?

You said no mention at all and I gave you an infacts link!  I cba to chase moving goalposts.  Look it up yourself if you want.

Apparently I can - here’s Cameron and Gove, and the head of the WTO - https://www.itv.com/news/story/2016-06-07/live-updates-reaction-to-wto-chiefs-brexit-warning/. I googled “cameron wto 2016 eu” 2nd link.

Post edited at 19:15
Report
captain paranoia - on 14 May 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> The “worst case scenario” out of those possibilities, all of which are better than EU membership.

The Norway deal isn't better than EU membership:

- must comply with all EU regs in order to trade with UE
- have no say in formulating EU regs, or controlling EU policy
- must contribute to the EU

It's the worst of both worlds; neither in nor out. As the Norwegian Foreign minister has made clear a number of times (he regrets Norway's position). It's a purely dogmatic position where 'brexit means brexit', but not really brexiting at all. Anyone with any sense of pragmatism would reject it in favour of remaining in the EU; the 'Germany Plus' deal...

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> Yes, they were, you’ve just not got  great memory.  As said, it was one of the range of possibilities if we voted leave.  The “worst case scenario” out of those possibilities, all of which are better than EU membership.

Are you honestly trying to tell me that he was actively campaigning for an option which he referred to as the “worst case scenario”?

> You said no mention at all and I gave you an infacts link!  I cba to chase moving goalposts.  Look it up yourself if you want.

> Apparently I can - here’s Cameron and Gove, and the head of the WTO - https://www.itv.com/news/story/2016-06-07/live-updates-reaction-to-wto-chiefs-brexit-warning/. I googled “cameron wto 2016 eu” 2nd link.

You've found me one mention of the possibility of defaulting to WTO terms from an article, and, one link to Cameron sharing a platform with the head of the WTO to warn of the dangers of leaving. No suggestion from the leave side of the possibility, letalone desirability, of defaulting onto WTO terms. You cannot claim a manifesto based on Cameron's warnings, even if it weren't the case that the leave side were accusing him of fearmongering the whole time.

Report
thomasadixon - on 14 May 2019
In reply to Trevers:

> Are you honestly trying to tell me that he was actively campaigning for an option which he referred to as the “worst case scenario”?

No, he was campaigning for people to vote leave.  Not for no deal, that wasn’t an option.  He said that if we vote leave there are a range of possibilities, all of which are better than membership of the EU, including the worst case outcome.

> You've found me one mention of the possibility of defaulting to WTO terms from an article, and, one link to Cameron sharing a platform with the head of the WTO to warn of the dangers of leaving. No suggestion from the leave side of the possibility, letalone desirability, of defaulting onto WTO terms. You cannot claim a manifesto based on Cameron's warnings, even if it weren't the case that the leave side were accusing him of fearmongering the whole time.

You said it had never been mentioned, and if I could find a mention you’d reassess, so I did.  You asked for top people and I gave you Cameron, Gove and the head of the WTO talking about it.  You’ve linked Farage saying no deal is better than the EU yourself.  It was discussed at length, you just forgot (or weren’t listening).

Report
Trevers - on 14 May 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> You said it had never been mentioned, and if I could find a mention you’d reassess, so I did.  You asked for top people and I gave you Cameron, Gove and the head of the WTO talking about it.  You’ve linked Farage saying no deal is better than the EU yourself.  It was discussed at length, you just forgot (or weren’t listening).

I did reassess, and my mind hasn't changed. I don't for one second believe that the electorate were voting for no deal, or that they would if they were well informed about what it entailed. And further, given the assurances about a good deal, I don't believe there is any democratic justification in a no-deal outcome.

I'm not trying to be belligerent here. No deal is a truly awful outcome. I have family and friends who rely on medication for their every day health. I don't see what justification there is to them at risk.

Post edited at 23:33
Report
pasbury on 14 May 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> No, he was campaigning for people to vote leave.  Not for no deal, that wasn’t an option.  He said that if we vote leave there are a range of possibilities, all of which are better than membership of the EU, including the worst case outcome.

Then he was misinformed or lying.

> You said it had never been mentioned, and if I could find a mention you’d reassess, so I did.  You asked for top people and I gave you Cameron, Gove and the head of the WTO talking about it.  You’ve linked Farage saying no deal is better than the EU yourself.  It was discussed at length, you just forgot (or weren’t listening).

You, Farage and all the others duped by his populist rhetoric are in a fantasy world where you just make it up as you go along. Are you seriously going to vote for a ‘party’ that won’t announce any policy until after people have voted for them? Seriously? F*cking wake up.

Report
pasbury on 14 May 2019
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

> It is far worse than that.  It is unbelievable that someone with this background could be head of a mainstream political party - and that his history with the National Front is not being brought up when he is interviewed on TV.

Please don’t link to bullshit like this. It is about the lowest standard of journalism I’ve ever read. It has the opposite effect to that intended.

The Independent needs to be put out of it’s misery, such a good paper once, now reduced to a faux left version of the Daily Mail.

Post edited at 23:54
Report
tom_in_edinburgh - on 01:50 Wed
In reply to pasbury:

> Please don’t link to bullshit like this. It is about the lowest standard of journalism I’ve ever read. It has the opposite effect to that intended.

I think you are right, some of it is fairly low standard journalism but the key thing is the black and white photograph of someone that looks a lot like Farage with the leader of the National Front.  Farage is interviewed all the time and the BBC or ITV needs to ask him straight out if it is him in the photo.   

If he denies it then innocent until proven guilty.  But he's been given a free pass, nobody is forcing him to address his early associations and he's the leader of what has become a major political party.

Post edited at 01:52
Report
stu7jokes - on 16:26 Wed
In reply to Trevers:

OK, I see. We need to override democracy because democracy is a threat to democracy.

Report
Trevers - on 16:39 Wed
In reply to stu7jokes:

> OK, I see. We need to override democracy because democracy is a threat to democracy.

Are you only interested in making childish remarks, not engaging with my concerns about accountability?

Report
stu7jokes - on 09:25 Thu
In reply to Trevers:

I thought it was a reasonable summary

Report
john arran - on 09:55 Thu
In reply to stu7jokes:

An essential component of a democracy is an informed electorate. Obviously it's not reasonable to expect all voters to have more than a minimal grasp of policy detail but if significant voting decisions are taken based on the complete absence of necessary information (such as a party manifesto) or incorrect information (such as facebook targeted lies) then what may appear on the surface to be democratic decisions may well turn out to be anti-democratic.

Report
Trevers - on 10:29 Thu
In reply to stu7jokes:

> I thought it was a reasonable summary

It was petty nonsense. I've laid out my case and you completely ignored it. See's John's post for a summary of how democracy should work.

Report
stu7jokes - on 10:40 Thu
In reply to john arran:

You could apply that general argument to any election/vote at any time. I'd suggest that what's different now is that democracy per se is treated with suspicion, for all sorts of complex reasons. In that context, there's a real danger that the remedy only serves to make an imperfect democratic system less democratic.

Report
john arran - on 12:12 Thu
In reply to stu7jokes:

> You could apply that general argument to any election/vote at any time.

Agreed, because it's simply a description of an essential quality of democracy.

> I'd suggest that what's different now is that democracy per se is treated with suspicion, for all sorts of complex reasons.

Disagree. What's different now is that we have new mechanisms for disseminating lies unaccountably (the facebook example) and we have politicians seeking a democratic mandate without the required voter knowledge (the absence of manifesto example).

What is being treated with suspicion isn't democracy itself, rather it's the poor imitation of democracy that's being claimed as such.

Report
Trevers - on 12:46 Thu
In reply to john arran:

> What is being treated with suspicion isn't democracy itself, rather it's the poor imitation of democracy that's being claimed as such.

I'm not sure I entirely agree with this last statement. I think for anyone intending to vote for the Brexit Party, the suspicion is very much against the Westminster establishment and the main political parties. And not without good reason, following a decade of austerity and numerous political scandals, and with an electoral system that disenfranchises a huge proportion of voters, perhaps the majority. And Brexit has muddied the waters like nothing else in our history, based as it was upon an ill-conceived and illegitimate vote.

It's easy to see why a "party" with a clear simple message, and without a manifesto (which many feel are full of empty promises anyway) is gaining huge support.

Of course, anyone with a more nuanced understanding of democracy can see that this isn't the cure for our democracy, instead it's more fuel on the fire. Pointing this out doesn't necessarily constitute a defense of the current broken system.

Report
john arran - on 15:58 Thu
In reply to john arran:

> An essential component of a democracy is an informed electorate. Obviously it's not reasonable to expect all voters to have more than a minimal grasp of policy detail but if significant voting decisions are taken based on the complete absence of necessary information (such as a party manifesto) or incorrect information (such as facebook targeted lies) then what may appear on the surface to be democratic decisions may well turn out to be anti-democratic.

I'm curious as to what the two dislikers of that post have found to disagree with, as it really is a simple statement of fact. Or is it simply an inconvenient truth?

(And yes, I know this post too will now attract dislikes, but they'll be easy to explain as the product of frustrated stand-ups who missed their vocation, and therefore easy to ignore.)

Report
earlsdonwhu - on 17:58 Thu
In reply to Trevers:

Apparently, Channel 4 News is doing a piece on Farage and his dodgy finances tonight. 

Report
Postmanpat on 18:14 Thu
In reply to john arran:

  As a matter of interest, is there much in the manifestos of the remainer parties, or has there ever been in the manifestos of the two major parties, about how they would like to reform the EU and how they would (have?) set about it?

Report
john arran - on 18:49 Thu
In reply to Postmanpat:

Probably not, no, which isn't surprising seeing as they're both supporting Brexit. But my point wasn't about a particular party in this election; it was using Farage's lack of any manifesto at all as one of the examples in making the point about the abuse of the democratic process.

Report
Postmanpat on 21:30 Thu
In reply to john arran:

> Probably not, no, which isn't surprising seeing as they're both supporting Brexit. But my point wasn't about a particular party in this election; it was using Farage's lack of any manifesto at all as one of the examples in making the point about the abuse of the democratic process.

>

   Neither is mine. I think my point is that no party has engaged with the issue. Numerous parties have said it "needs reform" but have not actually clarified what that means or what they intend to do about it. This has created an opportunity for Farage.

   Farage has a policy on the EU, but not much else. The rest have a policy on other issues but apparently not on the EU. Farage doesn't say what happens after we leave. The rest don't say what happens after we remain.

  If, as I suspect may happen, we end up staying in the EU some of these clowns have to start engaging with the EU properly and engaging the electorate with the EU.

Post edited at 21:46
Report
john arran - on 23:02 Thu
In reply to Postmanpat:

I completely agree that any party advocating any form of Brexit, including Farage plus the red and the blue parties, should have a very clear and credible plan for how to replace the huge number of beneficial arrangements and collaborative ongoing projects. Little evidence of any such plans is apparent.

But for Remain parties the story is quite different, since the vast majority of EU involvement is not controversial and maintaining the status quo won't need a detailed and costed new plan. That's not to say that all things EU should be accepted without pushing for change (Greens in particular are notably keen on pushing for further EU environmental policies). It also would help heal some of the Brexit bad feeling if EU permitted immigration and settlement criteria were actually implemented by UK government, although on that issue everyone has been spookily quiet. But in many ways such changes are a normal part of the workings of the EU so it's hardly a massive unknown about which the electorate should rightfully be informed.

Report
Postmanpat on 23:12 Thu
In reply to john arran:

> But for Remain parties the story is quite different, since the vast majority of EU involvement is not controversial and maintaining the status quo won't need a detailed and costed new plan.

>

   If 50% of people vote to leave and a very substantial proportion of those that voted remain (and I include politicians and the media) acknowledge that the EU is very imperfect then clearly there are a lot of controversial things about it.

  The "remain" parties, which until after the referendum included all of them (except UKIP) have shown no appetite for pursuing such reform , preferring instead to shift the blame for their own failings on to the EU. One of the reasons the EU has a democratic deficit is because successive governments and the media have allowed it, indeed encouraged it, to be undemocratic. And they still fail to engage. They want a second referendum but tell us nothing about how they will engage with the EU or push for reform if we stay. You reap what you sow.

Report
john arran - on 23:24 Thu
In reply to Postmanpat:

Most of the UK electorate discontent with the EU derives not from EU policies or lack of EU democracy, but rather from failures of UK government which have then been blamed on the EU, so it's hardly surprising that major EU reform isn't top of the wish list for changes to be made once Brexit has been democratically rejected. I agree that more ideas and discourse along those lines will be needed if the sores are ever going to heal over.

Report
captain paranoia - on 01:17 Fri
In reply to Postmanpat:

> Farage has a policy on the EU, 

Does he?

Is it more than ''Brexit means Brexit'?

Report
RomTheBear on 17:12 Sun
In reply to Postmanpat:

>    If 50% of people vote to leave and a very substantial proportion of those that voted remain (and I include politicians and the media) acknowledge that the EU is very imperfect then clearly there are a lot of controversial things about it.

>   The "remain" parties, which until after the referendum included all of them (except UKIP) have shown no appetite for pursuing such reform , preferring instead to shift the blame for their own failings on to the EU. One of the reasons the EU has a democratic deficit is because successive governments and the media have allowed it, indeed encouraged it, to be undemocratic. And they still fail to engage. They want a second referendum but tell us nothing about how they will engage with the EU or push for reform if we stay. You reap what you sow.

The big hole in the argument is that the EU maybe imperfect but it is a lot less undemocratic that no EU.

Without a platform like the EU to build consensus, decisions are imposed by the strongest on the weakest. Otherwise known as the law of the jungle.

Under the law of the jungle, the opposums can have all the democracy they want between themselves, every aspect of their lives is going to be dictated by what the Jaguar does. 

Moreover, I would argue that the EU is a lot more democratic, as a system, than most European democracies are. The threshold of consensus between all of its parties required for anything to become law at all is quite extraordinary.

Post edited at 17:25
Report
Trevers - on 18:38 Sun
In reply to RomTheBear:

Given the path we've been on since 2016, anyone claiming we're some sort of beacon of democracy compared with the EU must have wool in their eyes.

Report
RomTheBear on 21:27 Sun
In reply to Trevers:

> Given the path we've been on since 2016, anyone claiming we're some sort of beacon of democracy compared with the EU must have wool in their eyes.

One could argue it is indeed only EU membership that has been patching up the wholly archaic, antiquated, Westminster system.

In many ways it has provided the checks and balances that the UK doesn’t have in its constitution, or lack of. This is true of many European democracies but this is particularly severe in the UK.

Remove the patch and what you get is chaos.

Report

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.