The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Because the result (remaining) is “enacted” first, even if enacting it involves doing nothing. So there is an asymmetry.
That's a fair point.
But the people are allowed to change their mind. If the LibDems had won the election in 2017 with 52% of the vote on a policy of a new referendum, would that be fundamentally undemocratic? Or would that be the people changing their mind?
Fortunately, that didn't happen. But if it had, it wouldn't have been undemocratic, it would have been people changing their mind.
I also don't like (in general) this whole idea of 'a generation'. Voters get to choose their representatives every five years (or less). It shouldn't be the case that some people who voted a couple of General Elections ago, are able to tie the hands of today's elected representatives.
Indeed, especially when considering political parties or referendum positions that rely on the geriatric vote. Rather a lot of those voters will be dead by the time 10 or 20 years or whatever has rolled by. (Which is why I don't approve of IHT relief for political party donations, either).
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
Less ridiculous than your "Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt". And less boring.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
They'd have said the latter, like the SNP. But no serious country can allow itself to be put at risk from continuous constitutional uncertainty. So, like the SNP, they should rightly be told to take a running jump.
There speaks a browbeaten colonist with no backbone and a distaste for democracy. The other cheek of HYFUD's arse.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
They'd have said the latter, like the SNP. But no serious country can allow itself to be put at risk from continuous constitutional uncertainty. So, like the SNP, they should rightly be told to take a running jump.
There speaks a browbeaten colonist with no backbone and a distaste for democracy. The other cheek of HYFUD's arse.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Evidently, this was the clown’s plan to achieve power without being lumbered with any responsibility. Achieve a near enough miss in the referendum, knowing that inside the Tory party leavers would be in a clear majority. Fuel and manipulate their discontent to achieve the leadership after Cameron, based on Sturgeon style agitation for a second referendum that he would know was far enough away that he wouldn’t have to worry about it too much.
That would have given him a comfortable spell of office, free of having to worry about Brexit in reality.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
Yep, I’m with you Richard, My vote, even on the morning, was finely balanced. My wallet and a large part of my head said Remain, another large part of my head and nearly of my heart said Leave. I genuinely decided on the day, after much agonising
But one thing was clear in my mind: whatever the result, respect it. For good and bad
If it had been Remain then, frankly, I would probably be the biggest euro-Federalist on PB by now. The EU only makes sense if you got for full on Federalism. Fiscal distribution, one bank, join the euro, get on with it, free movement yay
The idea of having a 2nd vote to cancel and avoid the first would have appalled me - and people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous
But we chose otherwise
You think that - in the event of a Remain victory - a second vote would have appalled Farage?
Are you on crack?
No, but he would have become a very marginal antiquated figure. A Jacobite in the late 18th century
This is very different to what happened post-2016, when much of the British Establishment conspired to overthrow the biggest vote in British history
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
Yep, I’m with you Richard, My vote, even on the morning, was finely balanced. My wallet and a large part of my head said Remain, another large part of my head and nearly of my heart said Leave. I genuinely decided on the day, after much agonising
But one thing was clear in my mind: whatever the result, respect it. For good and bad
If it had been Remain then, frankly, I would probably be the biggest euro-Federalist on PB by now. The EU only makes sense if you got for full on Federalism. Fiscal distribution, one bank, join the euro, get on with it, free movement yay
The idea of having a 2nd vote to cancel and avoid the first would have appalled me - and people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous
But we chose otherwise
You think that - in the event of a Remain victory - a second vote would have appalled Farage?
Are you on crack?
He didn't say that. He said that people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous. Take the - to actually mean a full stop. (Apologies Leon for considering correcting your writing )
HYUFD will be along in a minute to explain that only a 12 point Labour lead is a crisis, and this represents, in fact, a great victory for Borism.
One poll, it would need to be most polls with Labour leads of over 10% for Boris to be under threat (and I note even on this new Comres the Tories are up 1% to 33%)
HYUFD will be along in a minute to explain that only a 12 point Labour lead is a crisis, and this represents, in fact, a great victory for Borism.
One poll, it would need to be most polls with Labour leads of over 10% for Boris to be under threat (and I note even on this new Comres the Tories are up 1% to 33%)
....aaaaaaaaand the goal posts are on wheels. Or is that tracks?
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
Yep, I’m with you Richard, My vote, even on the morning, was finely balanced. My wallet and a large part of my head said Remain, another large part of my head and nearly of my heart said Leave. I genuinely decided on the day, after much agonising
But one thing was clear in my mind: whatever the result, respect it. For good and bad
If it had been Remain then, frankly, I would probably be the biggest euro-Federalist on PB by now. The EU only makes sense if you got for full on Federalism. Fiscal distribution, one bank, join the euro, get on with it, free movement yay
The idea of having a 2nd vote to cancel and avoid the first would have appalled me - and people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous
But we chose otherwise
You think that - in the event of a Remain victory - a second vote would have appalled Farage?
Are you on crack?
He didn't say that. He said that people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous. Take the - to actually mean a full stop. (Apologies Leon for considering correcting your writing )
No lol Thanks. I am bit pissed. The quantities of gin served in old Galle are enormous, even as the muezzin sing 300m to the south. I guess this is fundamentally a Dutch colonial town so FUCK
Fuck, I love Galle. I love Sri Lanka. I love it all. The food is so good. The girls float by in linen. I am about to fall overrrrr
HYUFD will be along in a minute to explain that only a 12 point Labour lead is a crisis, and this represents, in fact, a great victory for Borism.
One poll, it would need to be most polls with Labour leads of over 10% for Boris to be under threat (and I note even on this new Comres the Tories are up 1% to 33%)
That is, of course, before the opposition parties flood the country (well England & Wales) with posters of the PM with his pants on fire.
Julian Smith MP @JulianSmithUK · 5h The smear made against Keir Starmer relating to Jimmy Saville yesterday is wrong & cannot be defended. It should be withdrawn. False and baseless personal slurs are dangerous, corrode trust & can't just be accepted as part of the cut & thrust of parliamentary debate.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
They'd have said the latter, like the SNP. But no serious country can allow itself to be put at risk from continuous constitutional uncertainty. So, like the SNP, they should rightly be told to take a running jump.
Really? If UKIP had won the 2017 General Election, they should have been prevented from enacting a second referendum?
I don't agree.
If they'd won a General Election on that manifesto then fair enough.
The problem in 2017-19 is that the parties seeking to have a second referendum lost the 2017 election handsomely. Less than 10% of MPs elected in 2017 were done so on a pledge of holding a second referendum.
Grieve, Starmer, Woolaston and the rest who tried to subvert democracy (not the Lib Dems to be fair) were all elected on a platform of saying the 2016 referendum was decisive and that Brexit would happen. Then they worked night and day to prevent it from happening - and to have a second referendum which went against both 2016 and 2017 commitments.
HYUFD will be along in a minute to explain that only a 12 point Labour lead is a crisis, and this represents, in fact, a great victory for Borism.
One poll, it would need to be most polls with Labour leads of over 10% for Boris to be under threat (and I note even on this new Comres the Tories are up 1% to 33%)
The current exponentially weighted moving average lead for Labour is 8% which leads them 24 seats short of a majority.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Because the result (remaining) is “enacted” first, even if enacting it involves doing nothing. So there is an asymmetry.
That's a fair point.
But the people are allowed to change their mind. If the LibDems had won the election in 2017 with 52% of the vote on a policy of a new referendum, would that be fundamentally undemocratic? Or would that be the people changing their mind?
Fortunately, that didn't happen. But if it had, it wouldn't have been undemocratic, it would have been people changing their mind.
I also don't like (in general) this whole idea of 'a generation'. Voters get to choose their representatives every five years (or less). It shouldn't be the case that some people who voted a couple of General Elections ago, are able to tie the hands of today's elected representatives.
Agreed. For similar reasons the US ought to have term limits for the Supreme Court.
HYUFD will be along in a minute to explain that only a 12 point Labour lead is a crisis, and this represents, in fact, a great victory for Borism.
One poll, it would need to be most polls with Labour leads of over 10% for Boris to be under threat (and I note even on this new Comres the Tories are up 1% to 33%)
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
It is not apparent that you are100% sure how democracy works.
No shame there but to boil it down it consists of asking "the people" questions and then they decide one way or another.
David Cameron, speaking directly to the British people, in 2015
“Ultimately it will be the judgment of the British people in the referendum... You will have to judge what is best for you and your family, for your children and grandchildren, for our country, for our future. It will be your decision whether to remain in the EU on the basis of the reforms we secure, or whether we leave. Your decision. Nobody else’s. Not politicians’. Not Parliament’s. Not lobby groups’. Not mine. Just you. You, the British people, will decide. At that moment, you will hold this country’s destiny in your hands. This is a huge decision for our country, perhaps the biggest we will make in our lifetimes. And it will be the final decision.'”
'”So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.'”
I guess you must have been a 2nd “people’s” voter, hence your squirming embarrassment. Fair enough
It's moot now but there are a lot of people here who like to lecture each other about democracy. As I see it western democracy has its roots in Ancient Greek democracy, notably that of Athens. It is not out of the question to adopt precedent from Ancient Athens. In 427BC the Athenian Assembly, open to all male citizens as soon as they qualified for citizenship, voted to massacre all the Mytileneans. A warship was duly despatched. However, the Athenians saw within a day or two that they had made a mistake and decided to vote again. This time the vote went against the proposition. A fast ship was despatched to catch up with the first and made it in time to countermand the order.
Now, I'm a lawyer, I deal with precedent, and I accept that the experiences of two and a half millennia ago may not be the most persuasive to modern voters. But if the people who invented our democratic tradition could change their minds before a popular vote was implemented, then so could we.
As for the overblown "coup" claims - neither People's Vote nor Jan 6.2021 were attempted coups. A coup a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government. In order to achieve that you need to take control of all branches of government and neither had the means or a plan to do that.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
Yep, I’m with you Richard, My vote, even on the morning, was finely balanced. My wallet and a large part of my head said Remain, another large part of my head and nearly of my heart said Leave. I genuinely decided on the day, after much agonising
But one thing was clear in my mind: whatever the result, respect it. For good and bad
If it had been Remain then, frankly, I would probably be the biggest euro-Federalist on PB by now. The EU only makes sense if you got for full on Federalism. Fiscal distribution, one bank, join the euro, get on with it, free movement yay
The idea of having a 2nd vote to cancel and avoid the first would have appalled me - and people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous
But we chose otherwise
You think that - in the event of a Remain victory - a second vote would have appalled Farage?
Are you on crack?
He did post of picture of his G&T quite some time back. And it's mid evening out in Sri Lanka.
11 point Labour lead, an actual literal reversal of the GE result. Labour heading for a majority.
Would you consider voting Labour Max? (Cheer up your leftie missus!)
Not yet, I don't trust Labour on cultural and social issues. If Labour had Blair in charge who could resist the nonsense and call it nonsense then I would. Right now it's hope for a change of leader at the Tories or vote Lib Dem. I live in a Tory/LD marginal anyway. The lack of support for Rosie Duffield and the silence from Labour over the continuing attempt to cancel women's rights and sex based rights campaigners gives me a lot of pause when it comes to voting for Labour.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
Yep, I’m with you Richard, My vote, even on the morning, was finely balanced. My wallet and a large part of my head said Remain, another large part of my head and nearly of my heart said Leave. I genuinely decided on the day, after much agonising
But one thing was clear in my mind: whatever the result, respect it. For good and bad
If it had been Remain then, frankly, I would probably be the biggest euro-Federalist on PB by now. The EU only makes sense if you got for full on Federalism. Fiscal distribution, one bank, join the euro, get on with it, free movement yay
The idea of having a 2nd vote to cancel and avoid the first would have appalled me - and people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous
But we chose otherwise
You think that - in the event of a Remain victory - a second vote would have appalled Farage?
Are you on crack?
No, but he would have become a very marginal antiquated figure. A Jacobite in the late 18th century
This is very different to what happened post-2016, when much of the British Establishment conspired to overthrow the biggest vote in British history
This is simply the case
Still banging on about Brexit - and it's the rest of us that are bores ?
11 point Labour lead, an actual literal reversal of the GE result. Labour heading for a majority.
Would you consider voting Labour Max? (Cheer up your leftie missus!)
Not yet, I don't trust Labour on cultural and social issues. If Labour had Blair in charge who could resist the nonsense and call it nonsense then I would. Right now it's hope for a change of leader at the Tories or vote Lib Dem. I live in a Tory/LD marginal anyway. The lack of support for Rosie Duffield and the silence from Labour over the continuing attempt to cancel women's rights and sex based rights campaigners gives me a lot of pause when it comes to voting for Labour.
Fair enough – and thanks for the reply. I share your concerns over the lack of support for Rosie et al, there are many second-wave feminists in the party who feel uncomfortable, even threatened.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Because the result (remaining) is “enacted” first, even if enacting it involves doing nothing. So there is an asymmetry.
That's a fair point.
But the people are allowed to change their mind. If the LibDems had won the election in 2017 with 52% of the vote on a policy of a new referendum, would that be fundamentally undemocratic? Or would that be the people changing their mind?
Fortunately, that didn't happen. But if it had, it wouldn't have been undemocratic, it would have been people changing their mind.
I also don't like (in general) this whole idea of 'a generation'. Voters get to choose their representatives every five years (or less). It shouldn't be the case that some people who voted a couple of General Elections ago, are able to tie the hands of today's elected representatives.
Fundamentally the public did have a second vote, they had a chance in 2019 to elect a government who would have done things differently, and they chose to Get Brexit Done with Johnson.
So everyone should be happy. Remain had the chance to convince voters they had made a mistake, Leavers had a specific Withdrawal Deal endorsed by the electorate. Democracy was the winner and the issue was settled.
HYUFD will be along in a minute to explain that only a 12 point Labour lead is a crisis, and this represents, in fact, a great victory for Borism.
One poll, it would need to be most polls with Labour leads of over 10% for Boris to be under threat (and I note even on this new Comres the Tories are up 1% to 33%)
....aaaaaaaaand the goal posts are on wheels. Or is that tracks?
They're in the hands of rollerskating badgers. OK, paws.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
It is not apparent that you are100% sure how democracy works.
No shame there but to boil it down it consists of asking "the people" questions and then they decide one way or another.
David Cameron, speaking directly to the British people, in 2015
“Ultimately it will be the judgment of the British people in the referendum... You will have to judge what is best for you and your family, for your children and grandchildren, for our country, for our future. It will be your decision whether to remain in the EU on the basis of the reforms we secure, or whether we leave. Your decision. Nobody else’s. Not politicians’. Not Parliament’s. Not lobby groups’. Not mine. Just you. You, the British people, will decide. At that moment, you will hold this country’s destiny in your hands. This is a huge decision for our country, perhaps the biggest we will make in our lifetimes. And it will be the final decision.'”
'”So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.'”
I guess you must have been a 2nd “people’s” voter, hence your squirming embarrassment. Fair enough
It's moot now but there are a lot of people here who like to lecture each other about democracy. As I see it western democracy has its roots in Ancient Greek democracy, notably that of Athens. It is not out of the question to adopt precedent from Ancient Athens. In 427BC the Athenian Assembly, open to all male citizens as soon as they qualified for citizenship, voted to massacre all the Mytileneans. A warship was duly despatched. However, the Athenians saw within a day or two that they had made a mistake and decided to vote again. This time the vote went against the proposition. A fast ship was despatched to catch up with the first and made it in time to countermand the order.
Now, I'm a lawyer, I deal with precedent, and I accept that the experiences of two and a half millennia ago may not be the most persuasive to modern voters. But if the people who invented our democratic tradition could change their minds before a popular vote was implemented, then so could we.
As for the overblown "coup" claims - neither People's Vote nor Jan 6.2021 were attempted coups. A coup a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government. In order to achieve that you need to take control of all branches of government and neither had the means or a plan to do that.
Indeed. That story BTW was actually very useful evidence for the naval architects building the reconstructed trieres HNS Olympias - a clear itinerary at top sustained speed.
Another 92,368 coronavirus cases were reported for the UK on Monday - a steep rise on the previous day due to a reporting method change https://trib.al/LdOhQoL
Julian Smith MP @JulianSmithUK · 5h The smear made against Keir Starmer relating to Jimmy Saville yesterday is wrong & cannot be defended. It should be withdrawn. False and baseless personal slurs are dangerous, corrode trust & can't just be accepted as part of the cut & thrust of parliamentary debate.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
It is not apparent that you are100% sure how democracy works.
No shame there but to boil it down it consists of asking "the people" questions and then they decide one way or another.
David Cameron, speaking directly to the British people, in 2015
“Ultimately it will be the judgment of the British people in the referendum... You will have to judge what is best for you and your family, for your children and grandchildren, for our country, for our future. It will be your decision whether to remain in the EU on the basis of the reforms we secure, or whether we leave. Your decision. Nobody else’s. Not politicians’. Not Parliament’s. Not lobby groups’. Not mine. Just you. You, the British people, will decide. At that moment, you will hold this country’s destiny in your hands. This is a huge decision for our country, perhaps the biggest we will make in our lifetimes. And it will be the final decision.'”
'”So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.'”
I guess you must have been a 2nd “people’s” voter, hence your squirming embarrassment. Fair enough
It's moot now but there are a lot of people here who like to lecture each other about democracy. As I see it western democracy has its roots in Ancient Greek democracy, notably that of Athens. It is not out of the question to adopt precedent from Ancient Athens. In 427BC the Athenian Assembly, open to all male citizens as soon as they qualified for citizenship, voted to massacre all the Mytileneans. A warship was duly despatched. However, the Athenians saw within a day or two that they had made a mistake and decided to vote again. This time the vote went against the proposition. A fast ship was despatched to catch up with the first and made it in time to countermand the order.
Now, I'm a lawyer, I deal with precedent, and I accept that the experiences of two and a half millennia ago may not be the most persuasive to modern voters. But if the people who invented our democratic tradition could change their minds before a popular vote was implemented, then so could we.
As for the overblown "coup" claims - neither People's Vote nor Jan 6.2021 were attempted coups. A coup a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government. In order to achieve that you need to take control of all branches of government and neither had the means or a plan to do that.
You could certainly argue that Jan 6 was a very poorly planned and executed coup which failed. The definition is somewhat unclear anyway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d'état
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
Yep, I’m with you Richard, My vote, even on the morning, was finely balanced. My wallet and a large part of my head said Remain, another large part of my head and nearly of my heart said Leave. I genuinely decided on the day, after much agonising
But one thing was clear in my mind: whatever the result, respect it. For good and bad
If it had been Remain then, frankly, I would probably be the biggest euro-Federalist on PB by now. The EU only makes sense if you got for full on Federalism. Fiscal distribution, one bank, join the euro, get on with it, free movement yay
The idea of having a 2nd vote to cancel and avoid the first would have appalled me - and people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous
But we chose otherwise
You think that - in the event of a Remain victory - a second vote would have appalled Farage?
Are you on crack?
He did post of picture of his G&T quite some time back. And it's mid evening out in Sri Lanka.
HYUFD will be along in a minute to explain that only a 12 point Labour lead is a crisis, and this represents, in fact, a great victory for Borism.
One poll, it would need to be most polls with Labour leads of over 10% for Boris to be under threat (and I note even on this new Comres the Tories are up 1% to 33%)
What will get Johnson fired isn't lying to opposition MPs about Partygate.
Its lying to his own MPs last night about giving them more say over the government's agenda.
How stupid are they to believe he'll keep his word? Read the Telegraph headline for the details.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
Actually, Boris could defend himself - his argument would be that Starmer was DPP at the time and so should take responsibility, even if he was not directly involved. He may even argue why Starmer didn't take an interest in such a high profile case. Now, that causes problems for his own defence if he argues "I didn't know" about the parties but it's a defence.
Remember, the CPS (as far as I am aware) no longer have the Saville case papers, saying they were shredded "in line with normal procedures". Going to be hard to prove Starmer's total innocence on this.
Since when did the UK become a country where one had to prove their innocence? This is the problem with you Trump people, you want to tear down all of our laws, traditions and culture to protect your chosen one.
You usually are quite level headed Max but you've gone a bit swivel eyed with that comment. You are probably one of those who thinks January 6th was worse than Pearl Harbor, 9/11 and World War I x20 - oh , and probably Auschwitz on top.
In any event, you read my sentence wrong. I wasn't saying it's a legitimate defence itself, it was saying that would probably a defence Boris would / could use to muddy the waters. See what I wrote in reply to Nick P about why I thought BJ made his remarks.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Because the result (remaining) is “enacted” first, even if enacting it involves doing nothing. So there is an asymmetry.
That's a fair point.
But the people are allowed to change their mind. If the LibDems had won the election in 2017 with 52% of the vote on a policy of a new referendum, would that be fundamentally undemocratic? Or would that be the people changing their mind?
Fortunately, that didn't happen. But if it had, it wouldn't have been undemocratic, it would have been people changing their mind.
I also don't like (in general) this whole idea of 'a generation'. Voters get to choose their representatives every five years (or less). It shouldn't be the case that some people who voted a couple of General Elections ago, are able to tie the hands of today's elected representatives.
Fundamentally the public did have a second vote, they had a chance in 2019 to elect a government who would have done things differently, and they chose to Get Brexit Done with Johnson.
So everyone should be happy. Remain had the chance to convince voters they had made a mistake, Leavers had a specific Withdrawal Deal endorsed by the electorate. Democracy was the winner and the issue was settled.
So. Everyone's happy. You are happy, right?
Yep, the public voted Cakeism so now we all got to eat it. And Aaron Bell - yes Johnson does think you are a fool.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
Less ridiculous than your "Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt". And less boring.
But enough said ..
I'd forgotten that he'd called me one of those. Frankly I didn't read his boring screed ending in a quote from the Speccie.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
Actually, Boris could defend himself - his argument would be that Starmer was DPP at the time and so should take responsibility, even if he was not directly involved. He may even argue why Starmer didn't take an interest in such a high profile case. Now, that causes problems for his own defence if he argues "I didn't know" about the parties but it's a defence.
Remember, the CPS (as far as I am aware) no longer have the Saville case papers, saying they were shredded "in line with normal procedures". Going to be hard to prove Starmer's total innocence on this.
Since when did the UK become a country where one had to prove their innocence? This is the problem with you Trump people, you want to tear down all of our laws, traditions and culture to protect your chosen one.
You usually are quite level headed Max but you've gone a bit swivel eyed with that comment. You are probably one of those who thinks January 6th was worse than Pearl Harbor, 9/11 and World War I x20 - oh , and probably Auschwitz on top.
In any event, you read my sentence wrong. I wasn't saying it's a legitimate defence itself, it was saying that would probably a defence Boris would / could use to muddy the waters. See what I wrote in reply to Nick P about why I thought BJ made his remarks.
Boris using an argument that Starmer should have known will come over a bit rich, when Boris doesn't even know if half a dozen parties are happening in his own house while he is there.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
It is not apparent that you are100% sure how democracy works.
No shame there but to boil it down it consists of asking "the people" questions and then they decide one way or another.
David Cameron, speaking directly to the British people, in 2015
“Ultimately it will be the judgment of the British people in the referendum... You will have to judge what is best for you and your family, for your children and grandchildren, for our country, for our future. It will be your decision whether to remain in the EU on the basis of the reforms we secure, or whether we leave. Your decision. Nobody else’s. Not politicians’. Not Parliament’s. Not lobby groups’. Not mine. Just you. You, the British people, will decide. At that moment, you will hold this country’s destiny in your hands. This is a huge decision for our country, perhaps the biggest we will make in our lifetimes. And it will be the final decision.'”
'”So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.'”
I guess you must have been a 2nd “people’s” voter, hence your squirming embarrassment. Fair enough
It's moot now but there are a lot of people here who like to lecture each other about democracy. As I see it western democracy has its roots in Ancient Greek democracy, notably that of Athens. It is not out of the question to adopt precedent from Ancient Athens. In 427BC the Athenian Assembly, open to all male citizens as soon as they qualified for citizenship, voted to massacre all the Mytileneans. A warship was duly despatched. However, the Athenians saw within a day or two that they had made a mistake and decided to vote again. This time the vote went against the proposition. A fast ship was despatched to catch up with the first and made it in time to countermand the order.
Now, I'm a lawyer, I deal with precedent, and I accept that the experiences of two and a half millennia ago may not be the most persuasive to modern voters. But if the people who invented our democratic tradition could change their minds before a popular vote was implemented, then so could we.
As for the overblown "coup" claims - neither People's Vote nor Jan 6.2021 were attempted coups. A coup a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government. In order to achieve that you need to take control of all branches of government and neither had the means or a plan to do that.
You could certainly argue that Jan 6 was a very poorly planned and executed coup which failed. The definition is somewhat unclear anyway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d'état
Trying to overturn the results of the election, then egging on supporters to use violence to achieve that over-turning?
That tips it into the "Coup, stupidly organised and including a Jamiroquai tribute act" section.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
Yep, I’m with you Richard, My vote, even on the morning, was finely balanced. My wallet and a large part of my head said Remain, another large part of my head and nearly of my heart said Leave. I genuinely decided on the day, after much agonising
But one thing was clear in my mind: whatever the result, respect it. For good and bad
If it had been Remain then, frankly, I would probably be the biggest euro-Federalist on PB by now. The EU only makes sense if you got for full on Federalism. Fiscal distribution, one bank, join the euro, get on with it, free movement yay
The idea of having a 2nd vote to cancel and avoid the first would have appalled me - and people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous
But we chose otherwise
You think that - in the event of a Remain victory - a second vote would have appalled Farage?
Are you on crack?
No, but he would have become a very marginal antiquated figure. A Jacobite in the late 18th century
This is very different to what happened post-2016, when much of the British Establishment conspired to overthrow the biggest vote in British history
This is simply the case
"much of the British Establishment" = democratically-elected representatives.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
Actually, Boris could defend himself - his argument would be that Starmer was DPP at the time and so should take responsibility, even if he was not directly involved. He may even argue why Starmer didn't take an interest in such a high profile case. Now, that causes problems for his own defence if he argues "I didn't know" about the parties but it's a defence.
Remember, the CPS (as far as I am aware) no longer have the Saville case papers, saying they were shredded "in line with normal procedures". Going to be hard to prove Starmer's total innocence on this.
Since when did the UK become a country where one had to prove their innocence? This is the problem with you Trump people, you want to tear down all of our laws, traditions and culture to protect your chosen one.
You usually are quite level headed Max but you've gone a bit swivel eyed with that comment. You are probably one of those who thinks January 6th was worse than Pearl Harbor, 9/11 and World War I x20 - oh , and probably Auschwitz on top.
In any event, you read my sentence wrong. I wasn't saying it's a legitimate defence itself, it was saying that would probably a defence Boris would / could use to muddy the waters. See what I wrote in reply to Nick P about why I thought BJ made his remarks.
Boris using an argument that Starmer should have known will come over a bit rich, when Boris doesn't even know if half a dozen parties are happening in his own house while he is there.
"Denmark has lifted all of its domestic Covid-19 restrictions, including the wearing of face masks, making it the first European Union country to do so. Nightclubs have reopened, late-night alcohol sales have resumed, and the contact-tracing app is no longer needed to enter venues. While cases are still relatively high, the authorities say the virus no longer qualifies as a "critical threat". That is due to the country's high vaccination rate, experts say."
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
They'd have said the latter, like the SNP. But no serious country can allow itself to be put at risk from continuous constitutional uncertainty. So, like the SNP, they should rightly be told to take a running jump.
Really? If UKIP had won the 2017 General Election, they should have been prevented from enacting a second referendum?
I don't agree.
If they'd won a General Election on that manifesto then fair enough.
The problem in 2017-19 is that the parties seeking to have a second referendum lost the 2017 election handsomely. Less than 10% of MPs elected in 2017 were done so on a pledge of holding a second referendum.
Grieve, Starmer, Woolaston and the rest who tried to subvert democracy (not the Lib Dems to be fair) were all elected on a platform of saying the 2016 referendum was decisive and that Brexit would happen. Then they worked night and day to prevent it from happening - and to have a second referendum which went against both 2016 and 2017 commitments.
They worked day and night because the British public had not given any party an unambiguous mandate to implement the referendum result. It was a hung parliament and Dominic Grieve et al was returned by his constituents who I'm pretty sure knew his views on the subject.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
Actually, Boris could defend himself - his argument would be that Starmer was DPP at the time and so should take responsibility, even if he was not directly involved. He may even argue why Starmer didn't take an interest in such a high profile case. Now, that causes problems for his own defence if he argues "I didn't know" about the parties but it's a defence.
Remember, the CPS (as far as I am aware) no longer have the Saville case papers, saying they were shredded "in line with normal procedures". Going to be hard to prove Starmer's total innocence on this.
Since when did the UK become a country where one had to prove their innocence? This is the problem with you Trump people, you want to tear down all of our laws, traditions and culture to protect your chosen one.
You usually are quite level headed Max but you've gone a bit swivel eyed with that comment. You are probably one of those who thinks January 6th was worse than Pearl Harbor, 9/11 and World War I x20 - oh , and probably Auschwitz on top.
In any event, you read my sentence wrong. I wasn't saying it's a legitimate defence itself, it was saying that would probably a defence Boris would / could use to muddy the waters. See what I wrote in reply to Nick P about why I thought BJ made his remarks.
Boris using an argument that Starmer should have known will come over a bit rich, when Boris doesn't even know if half a dozen parties are happening in his own house while he is there.
To be fair Boris is not sure if he was there either, he is waiting for Gray to tell him. If he wasn't then he might well not know if a party was happening or not. Perhaps the staff at no 10 think Boris is as much of a c*** as the rest of us do and invite everyone but him?
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
Actually, Boris could defend himself - his argument would be that Starmer was DPP at the time and so should take responsibility, even if he was not directly involved. He may even argue why Starmer didn't take an interest in such a high profile case. Now, that causes problems for his own defence if he argues "I didn't know" about the parties but it's a defence.
Remember, the CPS (as far as I am aware) no longer have the Saville case papers, saying they were shredded "in line with normal procedures". Going to be hard to prove Starmer's total innocence on this.
Since when did the UK become a country where one had to prove their innocence? This is the problem with you Trump people, you want to tear down all of our laws, traditions and culture to protect your chosen one.
You usually are quite level headed Max but you've gone a bit swivel eyed with that comment. You are probably one of those who thinks January 6th was worse than Pearl Harbor, 9/11 and World War I x20 - oh , and probably Auschwitz on top.
In any event, you read my sentence wrong. I wasn't saying it's a legitimate defence itself, it was saying that would probably a defence Boris would / could use to muddy the waters. See what I wrote in reply to Nick P about why I thought BJ made his remarks.
In the annual Whataboutery Contest, we have a clear winner.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
Actually, Boris could defend himself - his argument would be that Starmer was DPP at the time and so should take responsibility, even if he was not directly involved. He may even argue why Starmer didn't take an interest in such a high profile case. Now, that causes problems for his own defence if he argues "I didn't know" about the parties but it's a defence.
Remember, the CPS (as far as I am aware) no longer have the Saville case papers, saying they were shredded "in line with normal procedures". Going to be hard to prove Starmer's total innocence on this.
Since when did the UK become a country where one had to prove their innocence? This is the problem with you Trump people, you want to tear down all of our laws, traditions and culture to protect your chosen one.
You usually are quite level headed Max but you've gone a bit swivel eyed with that comment. You are probably one of those who thinks January 6th was worse than Pearl Harbor, 9/11 and World War I x20 - oh , and probably Auschwitz on top.
In any event, you read my sentence wrong. I wasn't saying it's a legitimate defence itself, it was saying that would probably a defence Boris would / could use to muddy the waters. See what I wrote in reply to Nick P about why I thought BJ made his remarks.
January 6th did more damage to American than Pearl Harbour. All the Japanese achieved with Pearl Harbour was absolute unanimity among Americans that the Japanese (and the rest of the Axis powers) needed to be stepped on.
January 6th actual damaged American in fundamental ways.
9/11 was a couple of building being knocked down - the stupid reaction damaged America greatly.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Because the result (remaining) is “enacted” first, even if enacting it involves doing nothing. So there is an asymmetry.
That's a fair point.
But the people are allowed to change their mind. If the LibDems had won the election in 2017 with 52% of the vote on a policy of a new referendum, would that be fundamentally undemocratic? Or would that be the people changing their mind?
Fortunately, that didn't happen. But if it had, it wouldn't have been undemocratic, it would have been people changing their mind.
I also don't like (in general) this whole idea of 'a generation'. Voters get to choose their representatives every five years (or less). It shouldn't be the case that some people who voted a couple of General Elections ago, are able to tie the hands of today's elected representatives.
Fundamentally the public did have a second vote, they had a chance in 2019 to elect a government who would have done things differently, and they chose to Get Brexit Done with Johnson.
So everyone should be happy. Remain had the chance to convince voters they had made a mistake, Leavers had a specific Withdrawal Deal endorsed by the electorate. Democracy was the winner and the issue was settled.
So. Everyone's happy. You are happy, right?
Absolutely. By 2019 they were clear in their instruction to parliament. Which they hadn't been in 2017.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
It is not apparent that you are100% sure how democracy works.
No shame there but to boil it down it consists of asking "the people" questions and then they decide one way or another.
David Cameron, speaking directly to the British people, in 2015
“Ultimately it will be the judgment of the British people in the referendum... You will have to judge what is best for you and your family, for your children and grandchildren, for our country, for our future. It will be your decision whether to remain in the EU on the basis of the reforms we secure, or whether we leave. Your decision. Nobody else’s. Not politicians’. Not Parliament’s. Not lobby groups’. Not mine. Just you. You, the British people, will decide. At that moment, you will hold this country’s destiny in your hands. This is a huge decision for our country, perhaps the biggest we will make in our lifetimes. And it will be the final decision.'”
'”So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.'”
I guess you must have been a 2nd “people’s” voter, hence your squirming embarrassment. Fair enough
It's moot now but there are a lot of people here who like to lecture each other about democracy. As I see it western democracy has its roots in Ancient Greek democracy, notably that of Athens. It is not out of the question to adopt precedent from Ancient Athens. In 427BC the Athenian Assembly, open to all male citizens as soon as they qualified for citizenship, voted to massacre all the Mytileneans. A warship was duly despatched. However, the Athenians saw within a day or two that they had made a mistake and decided to vote again. This time the vote went against the proposition. A fast ship was despatched to catch up with the first and made it in time to countermand the order.
Now, I'm a lawyer, I deal with precedent, and I accept that the experiences of two and a half millennia ago may not be the most persuasive to modern voters. But if the people who invented our democratic tradition could change their minds before a popular vote was implemented, then so could we.
As for the overblown "coup" claims - neither People's Vote nor Jan 6.2021 were attempted coups. A coup a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government. In order to achieve that you need to take control of all branches of government and neither had the means or a plan to do that.
I find it extremely dubious to claim that in order for there to be an (attempted) coup you need to (attempt to) take control of ALL branches of government. I see no reason why that should be the case. The presidency has some sovereign executive power, and it's arguably the most powerful individual position in the world. You might argue that attempting to take or remain in the job through violent and illegal means (these conditions were certainly met!) would be ineffective on its own (I would dispute that, but let's go with it), but that doesn't mean it's not an attempted coup. You might argue that the Houses could remove such a "president", but again, that doesn't mean they will.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
I wouldn't have stopped campaigning. The people are allowed to change their mind.
Now, I suspect it would have been better to wait until something happened that changed the relationship - because voters do not like (as a rule) being asked the same question twice.
But there is nothing undemocratic about people campaigning on a platform of having a referendum.
The problem was Referenda is they a bit like the old IRA quote "you have to be lucky every time but we only have to be lucky once."
So, when you are pushing for a change to the status quo, it's easy to push for another vote when you lose the vote and continue to do so until you win - and then you say the matter is settled once and for all.
Which leads onto another problem, namely there are no rules around Referenda about what constitutes when is the right time to have them and what happens afterwards.
In an ideal world, a better solution both for Brexit and Scottish independence might have been for both parties to agree a second referendum at a suitable date after the first (let's say 7 years) at which voters could decide whether they wanted to stick by their original decision or not.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
Yep, I’m with you Richard, My vote, even on the morning, was finely balanced. My wallet and a large part of my head said Remain, another large part of my head and nearly of my heart said Leave. I genuinely decided on the day, after much agonising
But one thing was clear in my mind: whatever the result, respect it. For good and bad
If it had been Remain then, frankly, I would probably be the biggest euro-Federalist on PB by now. The EU only makes sense if you got for full on Federalism. Fiscal distribution, one bank, join the euro, get on with it, free movement yay
The idea of having a 2nd vote to cancel and avoid the first would have appalled me - and people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous
But we chose otherwise
You think that - in the event of a Remain victory - a second vote would have appalled Farage?
Are you on crack?
No, but he would have become a very marginal antiquated figure. A Jacobite in the late 18th century
This is very different to what happened post-2016, when much of the British Establishment conspired to overthrow the biggest vote in British history
This is simply the case
Still banging on about Brexit - and it's the rest of us that are bores ?
Leon quite convincingly convinced us all the other day it is us Remainers that keep banging on about it (whilst on every topic he discussed from UFOs to Wokism and Sri Lanka to Gin it was still all about Brexit apparently)
I dunno this case, but it is from ten years ago, AND he was never convicted?!
Is Val McDonut saying any man ever accused of rape must never be allowed to pursue a career ever again, even if he is not convicted? Bit tough on your lifelong political hero, Alex Salmond, if so
He was done in a civil case and had to pay out £10K.
i get that, but he was not criminally convicted and this is ten years later. Should he not be allowed to ply an honest trade, especially as he has no criminal record?
We have civil and criminal cases for as reason. We also have the principles of guilt followed by redemption
Val McDoofus seems to think he should be prevented from earning a living FOREVER
Well , it is her money she is putting into the club, he still has his job. I suppose she can have her own view on it and decide whether she wants to give the club her cash in the end.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
It is not apparent that you are100% sure how democracy works.
No shame there but to boil it down it consists of asking "the people" questions and then they decide one way or another.
David Cameron, speaking directly to the British people, in 2015
“Ultimately it will be the judgment of the British people in the referendum... You will have to judge what is best for you and your family, for your children and grandchildren, for our country, for our future. It will be your decision whether to remain in the EU on the basis of the reforms we secure, or whether we leave. Your decision. Nobody else’s. Not politicians’. Not Parliament’s. Not lobby groups’. Not mine. Just you. You, the British people, will decide. At that moment, you will hold this country’s destiny in your hands. This is a huge decision for our country, perhaps the biggest we will make in our lifetimes. And it will be the final decision.'”
'”So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.'”
I guess you must have been a 2nd “people’s” voter, hence your squirming embarrassment. Fair enough
It's moot now but there are a lot of people here who like to lecture each other about democracy. As I see it western democracy has its roots in Ancient Greek democracy, notably that of Athens. It is not out of the question to adopt precedent from Ancient Athens. In 427BC the Athenian Assembly, open to all male citizens as soon as they qualified for citizenship, voted to massacre all the Mytileneans. A warship was duly despatched. However, the Athenians saw within a day or two that they had made a mistake and decided to vote again. This time the vote went against the proposition. A fast ship was despatched to catch up with the first and made it in time to countermand the order.
Now, I'm a lawyer, I deal with precedent, and I accept that the experiences of two and a half millennia ago may not be the most persuasive to modern voters. But if the people who invented our democratic tradition could change their minds before a popular vote was implemented, then so could we.
As for the overblown "coup" claims - neither People's Vote nor Jan 6.2021 were attempted coups. A coup a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government. In order to achieve that you need to take control of all branches of government and neither had the means or a plan to do that.
I find it extremely dubious to claim that in order for there to be an (attempted) coup you need to (attempt to) take control of ALL branches of government. I see no reason why that should be the case. The presidency has some sovereign executive power, and it's arguably the most powerful individual position in the world. You might argue that attempting to take or remain in the job through violent and illegal means (these conditions were certainly met!) would be ineffective on its own (I would dispute that, but let's go with it), but that doesn't mean it's not an attempted coup. You might argue that the Houses could remove such a "president", but again, that doesn't mean they will.
There is no point arguing with you on this because you will just shout and scream Trumpist but both Glenn Greenwald and Matt Talibi have written very good pieces about why the January 6th riots were not a coup by any stretch of the imagination (as well as the reasons why the Democrats are seeking to turn Jan 6th into some sort of Holy memorial).
The key point being that @Leon, having many times railed against Remoaners not letting Brexit go, himself brought up Brexit on this thread and here we are rehearsing a five year old discussion about second votes, usw.
I dunno this case, but it is from ten years ago, AND he was never convicted?!
Is Val McDonut saying any man ever accused of rape must never be allowed to pursue a career ever again, even if he is not convicted? Bit tough on your lifelong political hero, Alex Salmond, if so
He was done in a civil case and had to pay out £10K.
i get that, but he was not criminally convicted and this is ten years later. Should he not be allowed to ply an honest trade, especially as he has no criminal record?
We have civil and criminal cases for as reason. We also have the principles of guilt followed by redemption
Val McDoofus seems to think he should be prevented from earning a living FOREVER
Well , it is her money she is putting into the club, he still has his job. I suppose she can have her own view on it and decide whether she wants to give the club her cash in the end.
I suspect she is trying to goad him into taking out a libel case and then having it "proved" in a civil court that he committed the rape, thus ending his career.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
Yep, I’m with you Richard, My vote, even on the morning, was finely balanced. My wallet and a large part of my head said Remain, another large part of my head and nearly of my heart said Leave. I genuinely decided on the day, after much agonising
But one thing was clear in my mind: whatever the result, respect it. For good and bad
If it had been Remain then, frankly, I would probably be the biggest euro-Federalist on PB by now. The EU only makes sense if you got for full on Federalism. Fiscal distribution, one bank, join the euro, get on with it, free movement yay
The idea of having a 2nd vote to cancel and avoid the first would have appalled me - and people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous
But we chose otherwise
You think that - in the event of a Remain victory - a second vote would have appalled Farage?
Are you on crack?
He didn't say that. He said that people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous. Take the - to actually mean a full stop. (Apologies Leon for considering correcting your writing )
No lol Thanks. I am bit pissed. The quantities of gin served in old Galle are enormous, even as the muezzin sing 300m to the south. I guess this is fundamentally a Dutch colonial town so FUCK
Fuck, I love Galle. I love Sri Lanka. I love it all. The food is so good. The girls float by in linen. I am about to fall overrrrr
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Because the result (remaining) is “enacted” first, even if enacting it involves doing nothing. So there is an asymmetry.
That's a fair point.
But the people are allowed to change their mind. If the LibDems had won the election in 2017 with 52% of the vote on a policy of a new referendum, would that be fundamentally undemocratic? Or would that be the people changing their mind?
Fortunately, that didn't happen. But if it had, it wouldn't have been undemocratic, it would have been people changing their mind.
I also don't like (in general) this whole idea of 'a generation'. Voters get to choose their representatives every five years (or less). It shouldn't be the case that some people who voted a couple of General Elections ago, are able to tie the hands of today's elected representatives.
Fundamentally the public did have a second vote, they had a chance in 2019 to elect a government who would have done things differently, and they chose to Get Brexit Done with Johnson.
So everyone should be happy. Remain had the chance to convince voters they had made a mistake, Leavers had a specific Withdrawal Deal endorsed by the electorate. Democracy was the winner and the issue was settled.
So. Everyone's happy. You are happy, right?
Yep, the public voted Cakeism so now we all got to eat it. And Aaron Bell - yes Johnson does think you are a fool.
If Bell doesn't have a letter in with Brady, the label fits.
So. I see Lynton Crosby isn't going to work for No. 10. Yet another lie repeated by the useful idiots defending the PM. How long will they put up with it?
The bar for criminality is higher than the civil balance of probabilities. There are also a number of legal loopholes (It was adjunt to his house, working...) that Boris and potentially more junior civil servants can employ to avoid the fine (@Cyclefree has gone into detail on these). Essentially Downing St is now waiting to hear that - and the Met likely already knows this - the matter is below the bar for criminal proceedings; and that will then be used as "No wrongdoing", which of course it absolubtely is not.
Gray's report of course doesn't have to prove to a criminal standard, Downing St will try and nix reporting matters not to a criminal standard (By Gray) after they're dismissed by the Met.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
It is not apparent that you are100% sure how democracy works.
No shame there but to boil it down it consists of asking "the people" questions and then they decide one way or another.
David Cameron, speaking directly to the British people, in 2015
“Ultimately it will be the judgment of the British people in the referendum... You will have to judge what is best for you and your family, for your children and grandchildren, for our country, for our future. It will be your decision whether to remain in the EU on the basis of the reforms we secure, or whether we leave. Your decision. Nobody else’s. Not politicians’. Not Parliament’s. Not lobby groups’. Not mine. Just you. You, the British people, will decide. At that moment, you will hold this country’s destiny in your hands. This is a huge decision for our country, perhaps the biggest we will make in our lifetimes. And it will be the final decision.'”
'”So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.'”
I guess you must have been a 2nd “people’s” voter, hence your squirming embarrassment. Fair enough
It's moot now but there are a lot of people here who like to lecture each other about democracy. As I see it western democracy has its roots in Ancient Greek democracy, notably that of Athens. It is not out of the question to adopt precedent from Ancient Athens. In 427BC the Athenian Assembly, open to all male citizens as soon as they qualified for citizenship, voted to massacre all the Mytileneans. A warship was duly despatched. However, the Athenians saw within a day or two that they had made a mistake and decided to vote again. This time the vote went against the proposition. A fast ship was despatched to catch up with the first and made it in time to countermand the order.
Now, I'm a lawyer, I deal with precedent, and I accept that the experiences of two and a half millennia ago may not be the most persuasive to modern voters. But if the people who invented our democratic tradition could change their minds before a popular vote was implemented, then so could we.
As for the overblown "coup" claims - neither People's Vote nor Jan 6.2021 were attempted coups. A coup a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government. In order to achieve that you need to take control of all branches of government and neither had the means or a plan to do that.
I find it extremely dubious to claim that in order for there to be an (attempted) coup you need to (attempt to) take control of ALL branches of government. I see no reason why that should be the case. The presidency has some sovereign executive power, and it's arguably the most powerful individual position in the world. You might argue that attempting to take or remain in the job through violent and illegal means (these conditions were certainly met!) would be ineffective on its own (I would dispute that, but let's go with it), but that doesn't mean it's not an attempted coup. You might argue that the Houses could remove such a "president", but again, that doesn't mean they will.
There is no point arguing with you on this because you will just shout and scream Trumpist but both Glenn Greenwald and Matt Talibi have written very good pieces about why the January 6th riots were not a coup by any stretch of the imagination (as well as the reasons why the Democrats are seeking to turn Jan 6th into some sort of Holy memorial).
No of course it wasn't. The hangman's noose was just for fun as was the policeman who got a fire extinguisher shoved in his face and the lady shot dead by the police while trying to batter down the doors to the chamber and the vice president and elected officials rushed out by armed guards. And the ex president telling the crown to march on Capitol hill and pressuring the VP to not validate the result. Not a coup attempt at all. No what could we all be thinking? Just a friendly little picnic.
I dunno this case, but it is from ten years ago, AND he was never convicted?!
Is Val McDonut saying any man ever accused of rape must never be allowed to pursue a career ever again, even if he is not convicted? Bit tough on your lifelong political hero, Alex Salmond, if so
He was done in a civil case and had to pay out £10K.
i get that, but he was not criminally convicted and this is ten years later. Should he not be allowed to ply an honest trade, especially as he has no criminal record?
We have civil and criminal cases for as reason. We also have the principles of guilt followed by redemption
Val McDoofus seems to think he should be prevented from earning a living FOREVER
Well , it is her money she is putting into the club, he still has his job. I suppose she can have her own view on it and decide whether she wants to give the club her cash in the end.
I suspect she is trying to goad him into taking out a libel case and then having it "proved" in a civil court that he committed the rape, thus ending his career.
It has already been proved in a civil court (to the civil standard, of course, being balance of probabilities) that Goodwillie committed rape - he and his then teammate, David Robertson lost a case brought by their victim in 2017 and were ordered to pay £100,000 in damages.
It has not, apparently, ended his career as you say.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
Yep, I’m with you Richard, My vote, even on the morning, was finely balanced. My wallet and a large part of my head said Remain, another large part of my head and nearly of my heart said Leave. I genuinely decided on the day, after much agonising
But one thing was clear in my mind: whatever the result, respect it. For good and bad
If it had been Remain then, frankly, I would probably be the biggest euro-Federalist on PB by now. The EU only makes sense if you got for full on Federalism. Fiscal distribution, one bank, join the euro, get on with it, free movement yay
The idea of having a 2nd vote to cancel and avoid the first would have appalled me - and people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous
But we chose otherwise
You think that - in the event of a Remain victory - a second vote would have appalled Farage?
Are you on crack?
No, but he would have become a very marginal antiquated figure. A Jacobite in the late 18th century
This is very different to what happened post-2016, when much of the British Establishment conspired to overthrow the biggest vote in British history
This is simply the case
Still banging on about Brexit - and it's the rest of us that are bores ?
Leon quite convincingly convinced us all the other day it is us Remainers that keep banging on about it (whilst on every topic he discussed from UFOs to Wokism and Sri Lanka to Gin it was still all about Brexit apparently)
Leon is partly right.
New Yougov finds 60% of Leavers and 70% of Tory voters think the media have been talking about No 10 lockdown gatherings too much.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
Actually, Boris could defend himself - his argument would be that Starmer was DPP at the time and so should take responsibility, even if he was not directly involved. He may even argue why Starmer didn't take an interest in such a high profile case. Now, that causes problems for his own defence if he argues "I didn't know" about the parties but it's a defence.
Remember, the CPS (as far as I am aware) no longer have the Saville case papers, saying they were shredded "in line with normal procedures". Going to be hard to prove Starmer's total innocence on this.
Since when did the UK become a country where one had to prove their innocence? This is the problem with you Trump people, you want to tear down all of our laws, traditions and culture to protect your chosen one.
You usually are quite level headed Max but you've gone a bit swivel eyed with that comment. You are probably one of those who thinks January 6th was worse than Pearl Harbor, 9/11 and World War I x20 - oh , and probably Auschwitz on top.
In any event, you read my sentence wrong. I wasn't saying it's a legitimate defence itself, it was saying that would probably a defence Boris would / could use to muddy the waters. See what I wrote in reply to Nick P about why I thought BJ made his remarks.
January 6th did more damage to American than Pearl Harbour. All the Japanese achieved with Pearl Harbour was absolute unanimity among Americans that the Japanese (and the rest of the Axis powers) needed to be stepped on.
January 6th actual damaged American in fundamental ways.
9/11 was a couple of building being knocked down - the stupid reaction damaged America greatly.
I think the 10,000+ (and their families) who died directly and indirectly due to 9/11 plus the ones who died at Pearl Harbor and the Pacific campaign afterwards might disagree with you.
As for 1/6 (in the American way), as I mentioned just now, Matt Talibi and Glenn Greenwald have explained far better than I can do why this idea of Jan 6th was a coup is not only a joke but fundamentally dangerous for American democracy:
But, hey, it's ok for Nancy Pelosi to praise Dick Cheney - a man who did more to undermine American democracy in his time probably since Nixon at least and possibly McCarthy - because he was against Jan 6th. That shows how fucked up the Democrats have become.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
It is not apparent that you are100% sure how democracy works.
No shame there but to boil it down it consists of asking "the people" questions and then they decide one way or another.
David Cameron, speaking directly to the British people, in 2015
“Ultimately it will be the judgment of the British people in the referendum... You will have to judge what is best for you and your family, for your children and grandchildren, for our country, for our future. It will be your decision whether to remain in the EU on the basis of the reforms we secure, or whether we leave. Your decision. Nobody else’s. Not politicians’. Not Parliament’s. Not lobby groups’. Not mine. Just you. You, the British people, will decide. At that moment, you will hold this country’s destiny in your hands. This is a huge decision for our country, perhaps the biggest we will make in our lifetimes. And it will be the final decision.'”
'”So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.'”
I guess you must have been a 2nd “people’s” voter, hence your squirming embarrassment. Fair enough
It's moot now but there are a lot of people here who like to lecture each other about democracy. As I see it western democracy has its roots in Ancient Greek democracy, notably that of Athens. It is not out of the question to adopt precedent from Ancient Athens. In 427BC the Athenian Assembly, open to all male citizens as soon as they qualified for citizenship, voted to massacre all the Mytileneans. A warship was duly despatched. However, the Athenians saw within a day or two that they had made a mistake and decided to vote again. This time the vote went against the proposition. A fast ship was despatched to catch up with the first and made it in time to countermand the order.
Now, I'm a lawyer, I deal with precedent, and I accept that the experiences of two and a half millennia ago may not be the most persuasive to modern voters. But if the people who invented our democratic tradition could change their minds before a popular vote was implemented, then so could we.
As for the overblown "coup" claims - neither People's Vote nor Jan 6.2021 were attempted coups. A coup a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government. In order to achieve that you need to take control of all branches of government and neither had the means or a plan to do that.
I find it extremely dubious to claim that in order for there to be an (attempted) coup you need to (attempt to) take control of ALL branches of government. I see no reason why that should be the case. The presidency has some sovereign executive power, and it's arguably the most powerful individual position in the world. You might argue that attempting to take or remain in the job through violent and illegal means (these conditions were certainly met!) would be ineffective on its own (I would dispute that, but let's go with it), but that doesn't mean it's not an attempted coup. You might argue that the Houses could remove such a "president", but again, that doesn't mean they will.
There is no point arguing with you on this because you will just shout and scream Trumpist but both Glenn Greenwald and Matt Talibi have written very good pieces about why the January 6th riots were not a coup by any stretch of the imagination (as well as the reasons why the Democrats are seeking to turn Jan 6th into some sort of Holy memorial).
Nobody's shouting and screaming. I'm happy to listen to arguments about why you think stopping the EC count to remain in power doesn't constitute a coup. But I do not find the idea that there wasn't an overt attack on the judiciary that day at all persuasive in saying this wasn't a coup attempt.
I dunno this case, but it is from ten years ago, AND he was never convicted?!
Is Val McDonut saying any man ever accused of rape must never be allowed to pursue a career ever again, even if he is not convicted? Bit tough on your lifelong political hero, Alex Salmond, if so
He was done in a civil case and had to pay out £10K.
i get that, but he was not criminally convicted and this is ten years later. Should he not be allowed to ply an honest trade, especially as he has no criminal record?
We have civil and criminal cases for as reason. We also have the principles of guilt followed by redemption
Val McDoofus seems to think he should be prevented from earning a living FOREVER
Well , it is her money she is putting into the club, he still has his job. I suppose she can have her own view on it and decide whether she wants to give the club her cash in the end.
I suspect she is trying to goad him into taking out a libel case and then having it "proved" in a civil court that he committed the rape, thus ending his career.
It has already been proved in a civil court (to the civil standard, of course, being balance of probabilities) that Goodwillie committed rape - he and his then teammate, David Robertson lost a case brought by their victim in 2017 and were ordered to pay £100,000 in damages.
It has not, apparently, ended his career as you say.
I hadn't been aware of that - puts her actions (and the club's) in a different light.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
Actually, Boris could defend himself - his argument would be that Starmer was DPP at the time and so should take responsibility, even if he was not directly involved. He may even argue why Starmer didn't take an interest in such a high profile case. Now, that causes problems for his own defence if he argues "I didn't know" about the parties but it's a defence.
Remember, the CPS (as far as I am aware) no longer have the Saville case papers, saying they were shredded "in line with normal procedures". Going to be hard to prove Starmer's total innocence on this.
Since when did the UK become a country where one had to prove their innocence? This is the problem with you Trump people, you want to tear down all of our laws, traditions and culture to protect your chosen one.
You usually are quite level headed Max but you've gone a bit swivel eyed with that comment. You are probably one of those who thinks January 6th was worse than Pearl Harbor, 9/11 and World War I x20 - oh , and probably Auschwitz on top.
In any event, you read my sentence wrong. I wasn't saying it's a legitimate defence itself, it was saying that would probably a defence Boris would / could use to muddy the waters. See what I wrote in reply to Nick P about why I thought BJ made his remarks.
January 6th did more damage to American than Pearl Harbour. All the Japanese achieved with Pearl Harbour was absolute unanimity among Americans that the Japanese (and the rest of the Axis powers) needed to be stepped on.
January 6th actual damaged American in fundamental ways.
9/11 was a couple of building being knocked down - the stupid reaction damaged America greatly.
I think the 10,000+ (and their families) who died directly and indirectly due to 9/11 plus the ones who died at Pearl Harbor and the Pacific campaign afterwards might disagree with you.
As for 1/6 (in the American way), as I mentioned just now, Matt Talibi and Glenn Greenwald have explained far better than I can do why this idea of Jan 6th was a coup is not only a joke but fundamentally dangerous for American democracy:
But, hey, it's ok for Nancy Pelosi to praise Dick Cheney - a man who did more to undermine American democracy in his time probably since Nixon at least and possibly McCarthy - because he was against Jan 6th. That shows how fucked up the Democrats have become.
Your grubby defence of those who tried to overthrow the government is quite alarming, that you support Boris reaffirms my decision to leave the Tory party and wanting him gone.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
Actually, Boris could defend himself - his argument would be that Starmer was DPP at the time and so should take responsibility, even if he was not directly involved. He may even argue why Starmer didn't take an interest in such a high profile case. Now, that causes problems for his own defence if he argues "I didn't know" about the parties but it's a defence.
Remember, the CPS (as far as I am aware) no longer have the Saville case papers, saying they were shredded "in line with normal procedures". Going to be hard to prove Starmer's total innocence on this.
Since when did the UK become a country where one had to prove their innocence? This is the problem with you Trump people, you want to tear down all of our laws, traditions and culture to protect your chosen one.
You usually are quite level headed Max but you've gone a bit swivel eyed with that comment. You are probably one of those who thinks January 6th was worse than Pearl Harbor, 9/11 and World War I x20 - oh , and probably Auschwitz on top.
In any event, you read my sentence wrong. I wasn't saying it's a legitimate defence itself, it was saying that would probably a defence Boris would / could use to muddy the waters. See what I wrote in reply to Nick P about why I thought BJ made his remarks.
January 6th did more damage to American than Pearl Harbour. All the Japanese achieved with Pearl Harbour was absolute unanimity among Americans that the Japanese (and the rest of the Axis powers) needed to be stepped on.
January 6th actual damaged American in fundamental ways.
9/11 was a couple of building being knocked down - the stupid reaction damaged America greatly.
I think the 10,000+ (and their families) who died directly and indirectly due to 9/11 plus the ones who died at Pearl Harbor and the Pacific campaign afterwards might disagree with you.
As for 1/6 (in the American way), as I mentioned just now, Matt Talibi and Glenn Greenwald have explained far better than I can do why this idea of Jan 6th was a coup is not only a joke but fundamentally dangerous for American democracy:
But, hey, it's ok for Nancy Pelosi to praise Dick Cheney - a man who did more to undermine American democracy in his time probably since Nixon at least and possibly McCarthy - because he was against Jan 6th. That shows how fucked up the Democrats have become.
The key point being that @Leon, having many times railed against Remoaners not letting Brexit go, himself brought up Brexit on this thread and here we are rehearsing a five year old discussion about second votes, usw.
Edit: I see others have also noted this.
Most Leaver PBers have long since moved on – which reflects the mood in the public. I have plenty of family who are Leavers and the last thing they want is the societal divide to endure. They won, the issue is settled, the chances of rejoining for a generation are a statistically zero.
Yet there remains a tiny handful on either side who are hellbent on fighting yesterday's war. Sadly, it seems the otherwise erudite Leon is among them.
Let the lingering culture warriors found a homeland on a remote Essex island, where they can prod each other in symbiotic joy until Kingdom Come, while the rest of us get on with our lives.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
Yep, I’m with you Richard, My vote, even on the morning, was finely balanced. My wallet and a large part of my head said Remain, another large part of my head and nearly of my heart said Leave. I genuinely decided on the day, after much agonising
But one thing was clear in my mind: whatever the result, respect it. For good and bad
If it had been Remain then, frankly, I would probably be the biggest euro-Federalist on PB by now. The EU only makes sense if you got for full on Federalism. Fiscal distribution, one bank, join the euro, get on with it, free movement yay
The idea of having a 2nd vote to cancel and avoid the first would have appalled me - and people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous
But we chose otherwise
You think that - in the event of a Remain victory - a second vote would have appalled Farage?
Are you on crack?
No, but he would have become a very marginal antiquated figure. A Jacobite in the late 18th century
This is very different to what happened post-2016, when much of the British Establishment conspired to overthrow the biggest vote in British history
This is simply the case
Still banging on about Brexit - and it's the rest of us that are bores ?
Leon quite convincingly convinced us all the other day it is us Remainers that keep banging on about it (whilst on every topic he discussed from UFOs to Wokism and Sri Lanka to Gin it was still all about Brexit apparently)
Leon is partly right.
New Yougov finds 60% of Leavers and 70% of Tory voters think the media have been talking about No 10 lockdown gatherings too much.
Think you have missed the topic @HYUFD. Not talking about parties or the wider public but the argument that Leon keeps saying that Remainers keep talking about Brexit on PB when it is obvious the reverse is true, but far more relevant, Leon is about the worst culprit bringing up the topic all the time on on irrelevant subjects randomly. Pot and kettle comes to mind in his case.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Excuse me but some of us stated on here very clearly that if we lost the vote (as to be honest we expected to do) we would abide by the result and not call for a rerun. We would then happily sit on the side saying I told you so as all the things we had predicted came to pass. But the vote would have been final for me.
Yep, I’m with you Richard, My vote, even on the morning, was finely balanced. My wallet and a large part of my head said Remain, another large part of my head and nearly of my heart said Leave. I genuinely decided on the day, after much agonising
But one thing was clear in my mind: whatever the result, respect it. For good and bad
If it had been Remain then, frankly, I would probably be the biggest euro-Federalist on PB by now. The EU only makes sense if you got for full on Federalism. Fiscal distribution, one bank, join the euro, get on with it, free movement yay
The idea of having a 2nd vote to cancel and avoid the first would have appalled me - and people like Farage, if they’d asked for it, would have been peripheral and ludicrous
But we chose otherwise
You think that - in the event of a Remain victory - a second vote would have appalled Farage?
Are you on crack?
No, but he would have become a very marginal antiquated figure. A Jacobite in the late 18th century
This is very different to what happened post-2016, when much of the British Establishment conspired to overthrow the biggest vote in British history
This is simply the case
Still banging on about Brexit - and it's the rest of us that are bores ?
Leon quite convincingly convinced us all the other day it is us Remainers that keep banging on about it (whilst on every topic he discussed from UFOs to Wokism and Sri Lanka to Gin it was still all about Brexit apparently)
Leon is partly right.
New Yougov finds 60% of Leavers and 70% of Tory voters think the media have been talking about No 10 lockdown gatherings too much.
You can argue the other way, though: Leavers are willing to ignore all evidence of Johnsonian malfeasance because he delivered their precious Brexit. Or more generally, people who support X don't like it when the media attack X. Hardly a surprise. Anyway, Brexit is so boring. It's a shit sandwich, but there's nothing new to say about it.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
It is not apparent that you are100% sure how democracy works.
No shame there but to boil it down it consists of asking "the people" questions and then they decide one way or another.
David Cameron, speaking directly to the British people, in 2015
“Ultimately it will be the judgment of the British people in the referendum... You will have to judge what is best for you and your family, for your children and grandchildren, for our country, for our future. It will be your decision whether to remain in the EU on the basis of the reforms we secure, or whether we leave. Your decision. Nobody else’s. Not politicians’. Not Parliament’s. Not lobby groups’. Not mine. Just you. You, the British people, will decide. At that moment, you will hold this country’s destiny in your hands. This is a huge decision for our country, perhaps the biggest we will make in our lifetimes. And it will be the final decision.'”
'”So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.'”
I guess you must have been a 2nd “people’s” voter, hence your squirming embarrassment. Fair enough
It's moot now but there are a lot of people here who like to lecture each other about democracy. As I see it western democracy has its roots in Ancient Greek democracy, notably that of Athens. It is not out of the question to adopt precedent from Ancient Athens. In 427BC the Athenian Assembly, open to all male citizens as soon as they qualified for citizenship, voted to massacre all the Mytileneans. A warship was duly despatched. However, the Athenians saw within a day or two that they had made a mistake and decided to vote again. This time the vote went against the proposition. A fast ship was despatched to catch up with the first and made it in time to countermand the order.
Now, I'm a lawyer, I deal with precedent, and I accept that the experiences of two and a half millennia ago may not be the most persuasive to modern voters. But if the people who invented our democratic tradition could change their minds before a popular vote was implemented, then so could we.
As for the overblown "coup" claims - neither People's Vote nor Jan 6.2021 were attempted coups. A coup a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government. In order to achieve that you need to take control of all branches of government and neither had the means or a plan to do that.
I find it extremely dubious to claim that in order for there to be an (attempted) coup you need to (attempt to) take control of ALL branches of government. I see no reason why that should be the case. The presidency has some sovereign executive power, and it's arguably the most powerful individual position in the world. You might argue that attempting to take or remain in the job through violent and illegal means (these conditions were certainly met!) would be ineffective on its own (I would dispute that, but let's go with it), but that doesn't mean it's not an attempted coup. You might argue that the Houses could remove such a "president", but again, that doesn't mean they will.
There is no point arguing with you on this because you will just shout and scream Trumpist but both Glenn Greenwald and Matt Talibi have written very good pieces about why the January 6th riots were not a coup by any stretch of the imagination (as well as the reasons why the Democrats are seeking to turn Jan 6th into some sort of Holy memorial).
No of course it wasn't. The hangman's noose was just for fun as was the policeman who got a fire extinguisher shoved in his face and the lady shot dead by the police while trying to batter down the doors to the chamber and the vice president and elected officials rushed out by armed guards. And the ex president telling the crown to march on Capitol hill and pressuring the VP to not validate the result. Not a coup attempt at all. No what could we all be thinking? Just a friendly little picnic.
Didn't say it was a picnic. Look at what @DougSeal said, that is my view as well. It was a riot and Trump massively outstepped things. But it was not a coup.
Things don't have to be Black or White, they can be shades of grey.
On the polls - there was definitely a swing back to the Conservatives as partygate faded in resonance. Once back in the spotlight it's clear the polls are going back to Labour. FWIW I think they will swing again but not by enough to save the Tories as long as Boris remains. His time is up and he needs to go. No amount of HYUFD's dodgy poll analysis can alter that. If he goes then it's all to play for as Starmer is currently the 'lucky general' benefiting from Boris's lunacy wrt flouting the covid regs. It really is not very complicated and I agree with Leon it is now truly boring and needs to end.
I have no strong feeling for Aaron Bell either way, I don't know him, and don't really remember him as a poster when he was Tissue Price.
Is there any reason why he commands such adulation among a contingent of PBers? Why is this hero-worship extended to him and not other politicians who have walked these halls, such as Yvette Cooper, Denis McShane, Louise Bagshaw and Nick Palmer himself?
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
The problem I have with that analysis is that if Remain had won 52/48, should UKIP have said 'OK lads, the people have spoken and we're in the EU now.' Should they have moved to support UK membership of the EU out of respect for the referendum?
Or should they have said, 'our voters want us out, and we will fight for a second vote - which we're going to call a peoples' vote - and it's one that we're going to win'?
Thats a fair argument, see also Scotland after 2014. However if there had been a way to a second vote that would have led to damage in peoples perceptions of how the system worked. Just the like EU getting nations to 'have another go' when they voted 'the wrong way' in referenda. And people wonder why some don't vote?
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Orkney has it's own culture and very independent history and was annexed to Scotland in 1471. Suggest you look up history before posting rebuttals and making ludicrous false comparisons maybe?
We finally found a type of nationalism you adore. Hurray. What makes Orcadians so unique?
I don't adore any kind of nationalism. Nationalism requires a belief in exceptionalism, which is genuinely silly and irrational. It can be a rallying point where there is genuine national threat or repression (such as Ireland), but Scotland is not repressed. For large part of history they have been very enthusiastic oppressors!
How many more elections do the SNP have to win before it passes for repression? One, two, three, ten, one hundred?
Nah.
If we really wanted to oppress the SNP we would follow the Spanish route and not only ban indyref2 but arrest Sturgeon too, suspend Holyrood and impose UK government direct rule on Scotland
So pre 1999 Scotland was oppressed in HYFUD world. Interesting.
Scotland was not, as it had MPs at Westminster and Brown, Cook, Dewar etc in Blair's Cabinet and Rifkind, Laing etc in Major's Cabinet were all Scots.
The SNP were as they only surged post devolution
Looking at the Westminster results, the SNP were on 11%-14% before the Poll Tax, and then knocking around the 20% mark afterwards. It was a 50-100% increase in the vote share. That was the foot in the door. The first decade of devolution saw very little change in the SNP vote. Only in 2015 did it suddenly shoot up to 50%.
Poll tax and indyref were the inflection points. Devolution was not.
That is rather ignoring the progress of the SNP at Holyrood elections, where they from 24% in 2003 to 33% in 2007 to 45% in 2011.
Without that progress there would have been no independence referendum.
It could be argued that was as much to do with Lib-Lab incompetence as with SNP competence.
Any objective analysis of the Scottish parties in government would conclude that the SNP are ok. Unexciting, even boring, occasionally crap, but generally decent folk trying to do their best.
Libs and Labs: oh dear. Bunch of total duffers.
Cons? No sane Scot would give them a lever on power.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
For the avoidance of doubt, i will say, for the 90th time, I think Boris should resign, He’s lied too much and too clearly, on a much too resonant subject - lockdown and the breaking thereof - it is immoral for him to stay where he is.
I say this with sadness because ( yes yes, cue much derision) he had greatness in him, from my perspective. But he just can’t deliver anything now
Now, with that established, we can argue the other points. Politically can he survive? Yes, possibly. Also he could even win in 2024, he has the kind of character than can bounce back.
And the motives of some of his enemies - who would have destroyed democracy with a “people’s vote” (ie cancel the first vote) are pukeworthy. Starmer is one such. Happy to cancel democracy. C*nt
Do you view the five-yearly general elections as cancelling democracy.
Stop being ridiculous. And boring
If you ask a different set of people to vote again about a political question that one set of people has voted on, then there is an argument for saying it is an affront to democracy. But a second vote, hugely impractical as it would have been, would have been perfectly democratic because you would have been asking the same people and they would have been allowed to change their minds or not change their minds.
dipshit
“We’re going to give you a once in a lifetime vote on the most important political subject of our time and whatever you vote YOUR vote will be RESPECTED and we will obey it, and there will be no second EU vote, no rethink, nothing like that, this is IT, the will of the British people will be RESPECTED, once and for all and I solemnly promise you this, it is IN or OUT and I am your prime minister”.. and… “What’s more to prove this is true we will send a leaflet to every single British household swearing this is the case, this is it, this is the vote”
Cue the largest EVER vote in the history of British democracy. The largest EVER. 17.4 MILLION votes in favour of LEAVE
I guess these silly stupid thick racist voters didn’t read the bits in invisible ink at the end saying “oh this is all shit you working class idiots if you vote Leave we will just fanny around for three years then have an election then reverse what you said you racist proles”
I’m sorry, there’s no getting round this. Anyone who wanted a 2nd vote, without enacting the first, ie who wanted to “cancel” or “finesse” democracy” is a Trumpite Capitol-storming Fuck-sucker of the first water, just with a posher accent
It is not apparent that you are100% sure how democracy works.
No shame there but to boil it down it consists of asking "the people" questions and then they decide one way or another.
David Cameron, speaking directly to the British people, in 2015
“Ultimately it will be the judgment of the British people in the referendum... You will have to judge what is best for you and your family, for your children and grandchildren, for our country, for our future. It will be your decision whether to remain in the EU on the basis of the reforms we secure, or whether we leave. Your decision. Nobody else’s. Not politicians’. Not Parliament’s. Not lobby groups’. Not mine. Just you. You, the British people, will decide. At that moment, you will hold this country’s destiny in your hands. This is a huge decision for our country, perhaps the biggest we will make in our lifetimes. And it will be the final decision.'”
'”So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.'”
I guess you must have been a 2nd “people’s” voter, hence your squirming embarrassment. Fair enough
It's moot now but there are a lot of people here who like to lecture each other about democracy. As I see it western democracy has its roots in Ancient Greek democracy, notably that of Athens. It is not out of the question to adopt precedent from Ancient Athens. In 427BC the Athenian Assembly, open to all male citizens as soon as they qualified for citizenship, voted to massacre all the Mytileneans. A warship was duly despatched. However, the Athenians saw within a day or two that they had made a mistake and decided to vote again. This time the vote went against the proposition. A fast ship was despatched to catch up with the first and made it in time to countermand the order.
Now, I'm a lawyer, I deal with precedent, and I accept that the experiences of two and a half millennia ago may not be the most persuasive to modern voters. But if the people who invented our democratic tradition could change their minds before a popular vote was implemented, then so could we.
As for the overblown "coup" claims - neither People's Vote nor Jan 6.2021 were attempted coups. A coup a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government. In order to achieve that you need to take control of all branches of government and neither had the means or a plan to do that.
I find it extremely dubious to claim that in order for there to be an (attempted) coup you need to (attempt to) take control of ALL branches of government. I see no reason why that should be the case. The presidency has some sovereign executive power, and it's arguably the most powerful individual position in the world. You might argue that attempting to take or remain in the job through violent and illegal means (these conditions were certainly met!) would be ineffective on its own (I would dispute that, but let's go with it), but that doesn't mean it's not an attempted coup. You might argue that the Houses could remove such a "president", but again, that doesn't mean they will.
There is no point arguing with you on this because you will just shout and scream Trumpist but both Glenn Greenwald and Matt Talibi have written very good pieces about why the January 6th riots were not a coup by any stretch of the imagination (as well as the reasons why the Democrats are seeking to turn Jan 6th into some sort of Holy memorial).
No of course it wasn't. The hangman's noose was just for fun as was the policeman who got a fire extinguisher shoved in his face and the lady shot dead by the police while trying to batter down the doors to the chamber and the vice president and elected officials rushed out by armed guards. And the ex president telling the crown to march on Capitol hill and pressuring the VP to not validate the result. Not a coup attempt at all. No what could we all be thinking? Just a friendly little picnic.
Didn't say it was a picnic. Look at what @DougSeal said, that is my view as well. It was a riot and Trump massively outstepped things. But it was not a coup.
Things don't have to be Black or White, they can be shades of grey.
You are deluded. It was coup attempt clear and simple, admittedly many of the rioters were Trumps pawns, but that is obviously the case in many coups. Trump was trying to overturn the result and if not that stop it being declared.
I have no strong feeling for Aaron Bell either way, I don't know him, and don't really remember him as a poster when he was Tissue Price.
Is there any reason why he commands such adulation among a contingent of PBers? Why is this hero-worship extended to him and not other politicians who have walked these halls, such as Yvette Cooper, Denis McShane, Louise Bagshaw and Nick Palmer himself?
Perhaps because he is giving Bozo a good kick in the nuts?
On the polls - there was definitely a swing back to the Conservatives as partygate faded in resonance. Once back in the spotlight it's clear the polls are going back to Labour. FWIW I think they will swing again but not by enough to save the Tories as long as Boris remains. His time is up and he needs to go. No amount of HYUFD's dodgy poll analysis can alter that. If he goes then it's all to play for as Starmer is currently the 'lucky general' benefiting from Boris's lunacy wrt flouting the covid regs. It really is not very complicated and I agree with Leon it is now truly boring and needs to end.
Of course Boris is in Ukraine this afternoon.
If Putin invaded Ukraine next week partygate would be forgotten within a week.
I have no strong feeling for Aaron Bell either way, I don't know him, and don't really remember him as a poster when he was Tissue Price.
Is there any reason why he commands such adulation among a contingent of PBers? Why is this hero-worship extended to him and not other politicians who have walked these halls, such as Yvette Cooper, Denis McShane, Louise Bagshaw and Nick Palmer himself?
Your point that he was part of the problem in electing the clown is fair, particularly in light of all the good coverage he gets on here.
But it is easily overshadowed by the fact that he is in the top 1-2% of Tory MPs speaking out effectively and saying enough is enough.
I have no strong feeling for Aaron Bell either way, I don't know him, and don't really remember him as a poster when he was Tissue Price.
Is there any reason why he commands such adulation among a contingent of PBers? Why is this hero-worship extended to him and not other politicians who have walked these halls, such as Yvette Cooper, Denis McShane, Louise Bagshaw and Nick Palmer himself?
Perhaps because he is giving Bozo a good kick in the nuts?
I saw that, but has he actually sent in a letter or – better – convened a group to do so?
Comments
And less boring.
But enough said ..
But others may know better.
That would have given him a comfortable spell of office, free of having to worry about Brexit in reality.
Sadly for all of us, he cocked it up.
This is very different to what happened post-2016, when much of the British Establishment conspired to overthrow the biggest vote in British history
This is simply the case
Fuck, I love Galle. I love Sri Lanka. I love it all. The food is so good. The girls float by in linen. I am about to fall overrrrr
@JulianSmithUK
·
5h
The smear made against Keir Starmer relating to Jimmy Saville yesterday is wrong & cannot be defended. It should be withdrawn. False and baseless personal slurs are dangerous, corrode trust & can't just be accepted as part of the cut & thrust of parliamentary debate.
The problem in 2017-19 is that the parties seeking to have a second referendum lost the 2017 election handsomely. Less than 10% of MPs elected in 2017 were done so on a pledge of holding a second referendum.
Grieve, Starmer, Woolaston and the rest who tried to subvert democracy (not the Lib Dems to be fair) were all elected on a platform of saying the 2016 referendum was decisive and that Brexit would happen. Then they worked night and day to prevent it from happening - and to have a second referendum which went against both 2016 and 2017 commitments.
I lose track.
For similar reasons the US ought to have term limits for the Supreme Court.
Now, I'm a lawyer, I deal with precedent, and I accept that the experiences of two and a half millennia ago may not be the most persuasive to modern voters. But if the people who invented our democratic tradition could change their minds before a popular vote was implemented, then so could we.
As for the overblown "coup" claims - neither People's Vote nor Jan 6.2021 were attempted coups. A coup a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government. In order to achieve that you need to take control of all branches of government and neither had the means or a plan to do that.
Both Boris fans please explain
Critics claim PM is being propped up by a frenetic whipping operation that cannot be maintained in the medium term.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/01/boris-johnson-cant-sustain-premiership-permanently-organised/
And it's mid evening out in Sri Lanka.
Labour with a +11 lead and a vote share of 44%.
That 44% is Labour's highest share of the vote since March 2018.
https://twitter.com/SavantaComRes/status/1488521283465846786
So everyone should be happy. Remain had the chance to convince voters they had made a mistake, Leavers had a specific Withdrawal Deal endorsed by the electorate. Democracy was the winner and the issue was settled.
So. Everyone's happy. You are happy, right?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/01/boris-johnson-scraps-brexit-bonfire-eu-red-tape-favour-net-zero/
The definition is somewhat unclear anyway.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d'état
Its lying to his own MPs last night about giving them more say over the government's agenda.
How stupid are they to believe he'll keep his word? Read the Telegraph headline for the details.
In any event, you read my sentence wrong. I wasn't saying it's a legitimate defence itself, it was saying that would probably a defence Boris would / could use to muddy the waters. See what I wrote in reply to Nick P about why I thought BJ made his remarks.
That tips it into the "Coup, stupidly organised and including a Jamiroquai tribute act" section.
dipshit
"Denmark has lifted all of its domestic Covid-19 restrictions, including the wearing of face masks, making it the first European Union country to do so. Nightclubs have reopened, late-night alcohol sales have resumed, and the contact-tracing app is no longer needed to enter venues. While cases are still relatively high, the authorities say the virus no longer qualifies as a "critical threat". That is due to the country's high vaccination rate, experts say."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60215200
Not that it was ever in doubt.
January 6th actual damaged American in fundamental ways.
9/11 was a couple of building being knocked down - the stupid reaction damaged America greatly.
You might argue that attempting to take or remain in the job through violent and illegal means (these conditions were certainly met!) would be ineffective on its own (I would dispute that, but let's go with it), but that doesn't mean it's not an attempted coup. You might argue that the Houses could remove such a "president", but again, that doesn't mean they will.
So, when you are pushing for a change to the status quo, it's easy to push for another vote when you lose the vote and continue to do so until you win - and then you say the matter is settled once and for all.
Which leads onto another problem, namely there are no rules around Referenda about what constitutes when is the right time to have them and what happens afterwards.
In an ideal world, a better solution both for Brexit and Scottish independence might have been for both parties to agree a second referendum at a suitable date after the first (let's say 7 years) at which voters could decide whether they wanted to stick by their original decision or not.
Trust - 29%
Don't trust - 58%
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/legal/survey-results/daily/2022/02/01/e9cda/3?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=daily_questions&utm_campaign=question_3 https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1488531652422819842/photo/1
Edit: I see others have also noted this.
Yet another lie repeated by the useful idiots defending the PM.
How long will they put up with it?
Essentially Downing St is now waiting to hear that - and the Met likely already knows this - the matter is below the bar for criminal proceedings; and that will then be used as "No wrongdoing", which of course it absolubtely is not.
Gray's report of course doesn't have to prove to a criminal standard, Downing St will try and nix reporting matters not to a criminal standard (By Gray) after they're dismissed by the Met.
That is Boris' plan.
It has not, apparently, ended his career as you say.
New Yougov finds 60% of Leavers and 70% of Tory voters think the media have been talking about No 10 lockdown gatherings too much.
By contrast 46% of Remainers and 50% of Labour voters think media coverage has been about right and 26% of Labour voters
and 22% of Remainers even too little
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1488530362879909898?s=20&t=VVQavqNunHCMJNc0nI1E1g
As for 1/6 (in the American way), as I mentioned just now, Matt Talibi and Glenn Greenwald have explained far better than I can do why this idea of Jan 6th was a coup is not only a joke but fundamentally dangerous for American democracy:
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/a-tale-of-two-authoritarians
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/as-the-insurrection-narrative-crumbles
But, hey, it's ok for Nancy Pelosi to praise Dick Cheney - a man who did more to undermine American democracy in his time probably since Nixon at least and possibly McCarthy - because he was against Jan 6th. That shows how fucked up the Democrats have become.
Just found out that Standpoint Magazine has gone out of business, although it happened last year. Anyone know why?
Yet there remains a tiny handful on either side who are hellbent on fighting yesterday's war. Sadly, it seems the otherwise erudite Leon is among them.
Let the lingering culture warriors found a homeland on a remote Essex island, where they can prod each other in symbiotic joy until Kingdom Come, while the rest of us get on with our lives.
Anyway, Brexit is so boring. It's a shit sandwich, but there's nothing new to say about it.
Things don't have to be Black or White, they can be shades of grey.
Is there any reason why he commands such adulation among a contingent of PBers? Why is this hero-worship extended to him and not other politicians who have walked these halls, such as Yvette Cooper, Denis McShane, Louise Bagshaw and Nick Palmer himself?
Any objective analysis of the Scottish parties in government would conclude that the SNP are ok. Unexciting, even boring, occasionally crap, but generally decent folk trying to do their best.
Libs and Labs: oh dear. Bunch of total duffers.
Cons? No sane Scot would give them a lever on power.
https://twitter.com/gavinesler/status/1488536903209136132
https://twitter.com/crampley/status/1488514034689363980
If Putin invaded Ukraine next week partygate would be forgotten within a week.
…when in fact, he’s 2017 Jeremy Corbyn, and he’s up against Theresa May.
https://twitter.com/mikeysmith/status/1488537527657107464
But it is easily overshadowed by the fact that he is in the top 1-2% of Tory MPs speaking out effectively and saying enough is enough.