Appropriate seeing as our future prospects have been shafted
fuck fuck fuckety fucking Brexit.
UKIP flogs latex love gloves: Because Brexit means Brexit
The UK Independence Party is flogging multi-packs of rubber johnnies bearing the mug of former leader Nigel Farage. It is also unloading single packs for those more realistic about their chances of bedding someone this weekend or beyond. The prophylactics, being peddled by UKIP’s youth wing - Young Independence – from their …
-
-
-
Sunday 23rd September 2018 19:28 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: does not compute
"Sex and Farage in the same sentence does not compute!"
The value of Farage on a prophylactic is that not only will no sperm pass but also that both parties are put off completely by his visage.
I take back what I said about him being a complete waste of space, even here he fails to live up to expectations.
-
-
Friday 21st September 2018 13:33 GMT msknight
Re: Don't need a condom.....
Farage's face puts a lot of people off thought, full stop.... because they seem to stop thinking and believe everything that comes out of his mouth.
What I can't comprehend is what they then think when, after the event, he denies having said what he said, even when presented with the video evidence of him saying what he said. I mean... you can't be capable of independent thought, and also square away that kind of behaviour.
Sorry darling, thinking about Farage has given me a headache.
-
Friday 21st September 2018 18:56 GMT Mark 85
Re: Don't need a condom.....
What I can't comprehend is what they then think when, after the event, he denies having said what he said, even when presented with the video evidence of him saying what he said. I mean... you can't be capable of independent thought, and also square away that kind of behavior'
So he's just like every other politician in the world including the "leader" here in the States?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Monday 24th September 2018 18:18 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: It's a bigger percentage than the French got when they voted to join the EU,
France was one of the founding members of the EEC, which only 26 years later morphed into the EU.
It was actually a founding member of the European coal & steel community which became the EEC 16 years later. 25 years after that they had a referendum on signing Maastricht, to turn the EEC into the EU. They passed that by less than 51% on a 71.1% turnout, so a closer shave than Brexit, yet no-one complains that it should have been rerun the year after just in case the result would change.
-
-
-
-
Friday 21st September 2018 17:25 GMT SImon Hobson
51.89% vs 48.11% is not a resounding victory
Actually, it's not really 48%, in actual fact only 34.7% of eligible voters voted to remain, with about 27.8% not voting and who have to be assumed to be happy with "whatever the outcome is". So there's an argument that around 65% were happy to leave - 65-35 is a somewhat higher margin !
But, the remoaners say, "that's not valid". When you can argue that, but if someone really did want to stay, they should have cast their vote - if they didn't then they should be assumed to be happy with the outcome of the vote by those that did actually vote. I think we can be sure that had the vote been similarly tight the other way, remoaners would be quick to point out that less than 35% of voters actually voted to leave.
-
-
Saturday 22nd September 2018 11:10 GMT VinceH
'What was that with the "not a binding referendum"?'
The referendum was supposed to be non binding in that it was supposed to be advisory only - which (oversimplified) means the result would be looked upon as the advice or suggestion of the people. On that basis, the result should have led the government to start looking at the possibility of leaving the EU, all the possible methods and degrees of doing so, before deciding whether to go ahead (or returning to the public to say "these are our options... what do you think?")
Perhaps more importantly, because it was supposed to be only advisory, it was argued in Parliament that there doesn't need to be a super majority result. The point of a super majority is to ensure there is absolutely no doubt - including a greatly reduced margin for error when taking into account the number of people who didn't bother to vote. A win for either side that is as marginal as that of our EU referendum, when 28% of the people didn't vote, is one that shouldn't be considered a clear win either way - and certainly not one that will change this country in such a fundamental way.
-
-
Biting the hand that feeds IT
