New Alternative News Channel "GB News" chaired by Andrew Neil launching - read OP before posting

The Bould Nigel's MP was elected as a Tory tho, then defected. So zero parliamentary success for his candidates is a fair comment IMO.

The only reason he had any success is PR elections for the EU, and on the local council front the UKIP/Brexit party gaining protest votes that never translated into parliamentary support.

And Euroscepticism has been around since Nige was a young jack the lad in short pants, with so many possibilities of a noble path ahead of him. The way some folk go in here, you'd swear he invented it himself and ploughed a lone furrow all those years before single handedly delivering the big prize in 2016. Delusion doesn't even begin to cover it.

Farage and UKIP definitely had an effect on causing the Brexit referendum. Their pulls from Tory voters helped cause in-fighting between the Tories and caused Cameron to go for a referendum on the issue.

However, the idea that Farage was actually responsible for it is ludicrous. There was already a strong and growing anti-EU contingent, made worse by years of austerity following the recession which worsened anti-EU and anti-immigration rhetoric which Farage and UKIP jumped on. Not to mention the lies and misinformation by the Leave campaign.

Crediting Farage with Brexit after his 30 years of campaigning for it completely ignores the vast number of other factors.

He's only ever been elected as an MEP by anti-EU voters in order to disrupt the UK's EU membership. He's never been elected as an MP because even most anti-EU voters would never want him having any power in their own constituency.

What are the odds on GBnews surviving. From what I can remember of Trumps final days his fans love "looking at the bookies"

LOL. making up quotes. ridiculous.

In the past 18 months, Marcus Rashford formed and spearheaded a public campaign to force the government into a u-turn to provide meals to underprivileged children, then another to make the government pledge to provide funds to help tackle food and poverty throughout the UK.

Farage set up a Cameo account and occasionally tips out on a boat off the UK coast to shout at immigrants.

It's pointless discussing which is more well known under which circumstances etc, as there are far too many variables to judge them on. But Marcus Rashford is undoubtedly a noteworthy public figure for his charitable and campaigning works outside of his football career, and in the last 18 months has been instrumental in affecting changes to public policy. That's undeniable.

Rashford shamed the british government into feeding children that might not otherwise get fed. He has done more to benefit society than Farage will ever do.

"Ratchford".

This is another issue the GBNews Denizens have, the inability to actually know anything about what they are trying to talk about.

how are them food shortages working out in Britain? a resounding success.

Can you answer the question I asked? Thanks.

He's not profiting from charity work though, because that would insinuate he's taking money from charitable donations for himself (like what happened with the Trump Foundation which was legally proven).

The argument can also be made that increasing his personal profile is a by-product of his charity work rather than the aim, and that any additional money he earns through legal and legitimate sponsorship deals also increases his ability to raise/give more money for charity.

It remains to be seen how much he actually profitted from his charity work (if any), but you haven't been able to point to any inappropriate activity (financial, abusive, or any other kind) on behalf of Rashford, and your repeated posts trying to tie in Jimmy Saville to the conversation show a complete lack of good faith on your part.

You said

"Anyone who personally profits from charity work, in any way, cannot be said to legitimately care about the cause in question."

You have made this accusation without a single shred of evidence, that says quite a lot about you!

You seem to think thats a worse comparison than comparing Rashford to a pedo?

Why am I not suprised.

You say you need to wait to see the spectator article yet you are jumping to conclusions as to what it says

Here's his tweets, what do you find so suspicious about them?

You also said the following over your last few posts:

"Like Rashford, we cannot allow someone to use "charity" as a Trojan horse for other, inappropriate activity."

"That said, Marcus Rashford's pre-emptive defence on Twitter at least suggests that there is more than a kernel of truth to the allegations."

"Anyone who personally profits from charity work, in any way, cannot be said to legitimately care about the cause in question. If anything, it demonstrates that this is a political manoeuvre on the part of Rashford."

"I find the entire enterprise shady. It's harnessing charity, and the most vulnerable in society, for self-interested reasons. That doesn't mean the charity isn't welcome, of course it is. But that's why it's shady. It means that powerful, psychopathic people can manipulate the situation for their own interests. From what is hinted at The Spectator piece, it appears Rashford is no different."

You've based all of the above on The Spectator saying they have an article coming soon about Rashford (but with no claims of if it's damaging to him, if they have evidence of anything etc), and your own reading of Rashford's tweets which gives no indication of anything untoward. Not to mention your wilful abandon in tossing Jimmy Saville's name into the mix.

But I'm the one being premature?

Any negative reaction would require Arlene to have some principles. Given she signed that deal with May it is fair to say she doesn't have any.