1. Nigel Farage seemed to suggest that the existence of the EU is going to end in conflict, as extremists rise in popularity across the union. This seems bizarre to me, when the very existence of the EU is perhaps the largest reason why Western Europe has enjoyed the longest period of peace in its history - no conflicts in 70 years between members of the Union.
Isn't this completely wrong headed?
2. Nigel Farage made a lot last night that the EU trade negotiations lie in the hands of an unelected Dutchman. Which is fine. Except Farage is wrong. He is Karel de Gucht. And he is Belgian.
That doesn't make any difference to the point Farage was making of course. But it does again show his lack of attention to detail. And also a curious failing that he's not that great on what should be his specialist subject. In the Channel 4 film about him the other night, he was shown unsuccessfully trying to find how own office in the Parliament. Maybe he's not going there enough?
3. Farage is privately educated, a former stockbroker, an elected politician and his party is largely funded by a handful of millionaires. Yet he positions himself as anti establishment - and does it very well. But he's not anti establishment. He's the opposite. So why isn't he called on this?