Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
Leave enthusiasts?
Wow.
It's not particularly surprising, these people have been fed this whole betrayal narrative for years. If you tell people they're under threat by a shadowy elite, some of them are going to act on what you tell them.
Richard is probably right that (at last I think this is what he's implying) there will be more Leave terrorism if there's another referendum and the voters vote to remain. But the point I'm making is that that betrayal narrative is going to be fed to them no matter what the government does, and if anything giving the movement concessions just makes it bolder, including the violent part.
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
Stop being right, it's depressing me...
I don't think they confidence the PM, just make the Tories lives miserable from here on out. A crippled Govt. Labour need to oppose properly though, so still a good chance stuff gets through !
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
Leave enthusiasts?
Wow.
It's not particularly surprising, these people have been fed this whole betrayal narrative for years. If you tell people they're under threat by a shadowy elite, some of them are going to act on what you tell them.
Richard is probably right that (at last I think this is what he's implying) there will be more Leave terrorism if there's another referendum and the voters vote to remain. But the point I'm making is that that betrayal narrative is going to be fed to them no matter what the government does, and if anything giving the movement concessions just makes it bolder, including the violent part.
Brexiteers have spent years telling the British public that someone else is responsible for the country's ills: mainly the EU, although many say the same about immigrants (adding in another layer of people they don't like). Even when their narrative is rubbish (and often it has a grain of truth), the story's a good one. Although that's what it is: a story, fiction.
Now that their plan is coming somewhat off the rails, they're again blaming other people: May, the government, the EU.
At no stage (with one or two honourable exceptions) do they blame themselves.
For this reason, I believe that this will continue whatever Brexit we get. If we get a hard Brexit, and an economic and social crisis, it'd be the EU's fauli for making Brexit hard. If we get May's deal, they'll keep on whinging about officials' pensions. If we remain, they'll continue as they have for years - and as Richard now threatens, go further.
Therefore we should just disregard it: children always try to blame others and absolve themselves of responsibility. We should ignore the children's bleatings.
For the sake of the country, I really, really hope this isn't an accurate account of Labour's thinking, although I fear it is:
Labour believes a majority of MPs would not support a no deal, and that any rejection of May’s final deal by a combination of angry hard Brexiters and opposition parties would lead to chaotic and unstable situation.
In theory, if May’s deal were to be rejected, the UK would head out of the EU on World Trade Organization terms, after MPs voted in principle to quit when the European Union Withdrawal Act was passed.
But the party believes ministers would have to prepare emergency legislation in dozens of areas before the end of March, giving MPs a chance to block an immediate exit. “If Theresa May’s deal fails to command the support of parliament, then we will not stand back and allow her to take this country off a cliff,” Starmer said.
I mean, I know they are cynical lying toads, but surely even the most cynical of lying toads would see that this doesn't actually work - blocking emergency legislation in that scenario wouldn't prevent us leaving the EU, it would just make leaving the EU even more chaotic and destructive than it would be if we left without a deal but at least with some legislative cover.
Labour's intent is pretty clear and consistent with Theresa May's middle option when she warned: "We can choose to leave with no deal, we can risk no Brexit at all, or we can choose to unite and support the best deal that can be negotiated". Or is the Prime Minister also a lying toad? Labour believes, as Jeremy Corbyn told the CBI, that the government and EU would reopen negotiations for a last minute deal. Of course, he hopes it will by then be a Labour government.
ETA: AM's header also posits a last-minute return to action.
The key word in that TM quote - and she is a careful person who so chooses her words - is "choose". She is as good as saying that Brexit would have at least to be put on hold rather than our going over the cliff without having chosen to do so.
"At no stage (with one or two honourable exceptions) do they blame themselves.".......
I cant think of one Brexiter personality who has accepted any blame for this bxxls up, to think Gina Miller got death threats over her efforts to give Parliament a proper say....it makes me rather cross how this situation has developed and it appears that those responsible are indifferent to it
So Theresa May's sold Brexiteers down the river. She's sold Northern Ireland down the river.
Presumably she'll be selling Gibraltar down the river next?
TM has achieved a deal beyond the wildest expectations of David Cameron and would have been taken with open arms by ERG at that time.
Well yes because at the time of his renegotiation we hadn't had the referendum.
Then we had the referendum and voted to leave but Theresa May has come up with a deal that gives no end date on leaving the customs union and gives the final say on whether we can be allowed to leave the customs union to the EU (who are openly set on destroying the country by making us give up Northern Ireland if we ever want to truly leave)
So we're never actually going to leave and the referendum result has basically been overturned.
If it came to that - ie in practice the EU trying to annex Northern Ireland - the government would repudiate the treaty
I think historians will write up Brexit as a peaceful failed revolution. While the status quo did not enjoy majority support, the revolutionaries failed to secure control of the executive and the legislature. Ultimately, the divide between the ‘clean slate’ and ‘trade off’ Brexiteers was ultimately unbridgeable, leading to a second referendum and a vote to Remain.
In a broader sense, the referenda and crises of 2010-2022 can be seen as the consequence of Blair’s botched constitutional and European reforms. The status quo will hold, but only after severe testing.
If it fails it won't be peaceful.
If it fails it will be given a democratic sendoff in a referendum.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
This sort of thing was apparently abolished in this country about 150 years ago:
"We progressives hail opportunity, egalitarianism and diversity. Yet here’s our dirty little secret: Some of our most liberal bastions in America rely on a system of inherited privilege that benefits rich whites at the expense of almost everyone else.
I’m talking about “legacy preferences” that elite universities give to children of graduates. These universities constitute some of the world’s greatest public goods, but they rig admissions to favor applicants who already have had every privilege in life."
This sort of thing was apparently abolished in this country about 150 years ago:
"We progressives hail opportunity, egalitarianism and diversity. Yet here’s our dirty little secret: Some of our most liberal bastions in America rely on a system of inherited privilege that benefits rich whites at the expense of almost everyone else.
I’m talking about “legacy preferences” that elite universities give to children of graduates. These universities constitute some of the world’s greatest public goods, but they rig admissions to favor applicants who already have had every privilege in life."
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
That’s unlike you EiT
What we know is that someone mentally ill killed Jo Cox
The fact that he was muttering right wing slogans doesn’t make it the causi belli
Suing McDonalds but still eats there twice a month ?!?
Once every six months I succumb to BK or McDonalds.
Tastes good whilst I’m eating it. In less than an hour, I feel groggy, my stomach objects and it feels like I’ve ingested an oil slick and fatberg rolled into one.
This sort of thing was apparently abolished in this country about 150 years ago:
"We progressives hail opportunity, egalitarianism and diversity. Yet here’s our dirty little secret: Some of our most liberal bastions in America rely on a system of inherited privilege that benefits rich whites at the expense of almost everyone else.
I’m talking about “legacy preferences” that elite universities give to children of graduates. These universities constitute some of the world’s greatest public goods, but they rig admissions to favor applicants who already have had every privilege in life."
It comes to whether you think an institution should be a community or an academic hot house
My school experimented with the latter but ultimately went back to the former
That's a pretty pathetic excuse.
No, it’s not.
It’s a belief that the institution as a whole benefits from a supportive alumni base and that culture matters. Humans aren’t just economic chess pieces that can be moved around a board by some bureaucrat in an office.
Additionally you wouldn’t *want* a university where 100% of the students were math nerds with a perfect score on their SATs. Diversity is a good thing.
Suing McDonalds but still eats there twice a month ?!?
Once every six months I succumb to BK or McDonalds.
Tastes good whilst I’m eating it. In less than an hour, I feel groggy, my stomach objects and it feels like I’ve ingested an oil slick and fatberg rolled into one.
There is a McDonalds up the road. Its been there for 15 yrs, I think I've had one three times in the last 15 yrs and not had one in the last ten. Its useful on hot days for an ice cream. I avoid burger chains and fizzy pop, very bad for your health imho.
So Theresa May's sold Brexiteers down the river. She's sold Northern Ireland down the river.
Presumably she'll be selling Gibraltar down the river next?
TM has achieved a deal beyond the wildest expectations of David Cameron and would have been taken with open arms by ERG at that time.
Well yes because at the time of his renegotiation we hadn't had the referendum.
Then we had the referendum and voted to leave but Theresa May has come up with a deal that gives no end date on leaving the customs union and gives the final say on whether we can be allowed to leave the customs union to the EU (who are openly set on destroying the country by making us give up Northern Ireland if we ever want to truly leave)
So we're never actually going to leave and the referendum result has basically been overturned.
If it came to that - ie in practice the EU trying to annex Northern Ireland - the government would repudiate the treaty
People think treaties are like contracts. They are not. Unilateral withdrawal from treaties is incredibly common.
Suing McDonalds but still eats there twice a month ?!?
Once every six months I succumb to BK or McDonalds.
Tastes good whilst I’m eating it. In less than an hour, I feel groggy, my stomach objects and it feels like I’ve ingested an oil slick and fatberg rolled into one.
Just so you know, Fatburger in the US is not like that. That's a good burger.
So Theresa May's sold Brexiteers down the river. She's sold Northern Ireland down the river.
Presumably she'll be selling Gibraltar down the river next?
TM has achieved a deal beyond the wildest expectations of David Cameron and would have been taken with open arms by ERG at that time.
Well yes because at the time of his renegotiation we hadn't had the referendum.
Then we had the referendum and voted to leave but Theresa May has come up with a deal that gives no end date on leaving the customs union and gives the final say on whether we can be allowed to leave the customs union to the EU (who are openly set on destroying the country by making us give up Northern Ireland if we ever want to truly leave)
So we're never actually going to leave and the referendum result has basically been overturned.
If it came to that - ie in practice the EU trying to annex Northern Ireland - the government would repudiate the treaty
People think treaties are like contracts. They are not. Unilateral withdrawal from treaties is incredibly common.
This sort of thing was apparently abolished in this country about 150 years ago:
"We progressives hail opportunity, egalitarianism and diversity. Yet here’s our dirty little secret: Some of our most liberal bastions in America rely on a system of inherited privilege that benefits rich whites at the expense of almost everyone else.
I’m talking about “legacy preferences” that elite universities give to children of graduates. These universities constitute some of the world’s greatest public goods, but they rig admissions to favor applicants who already have had every privilege in life."
It comes to whether you think an institution should be a community or an academic hot house
My school experimented with the latter but ultimately went back to the former
That's a pretty pathetic excuse.
No, it’s not.
It’s a belief that the institution as a whole benefits from a supportive alumni base and that culture matters. Humans aren’t just economic chess pieces that can be moved around a board by some bureaucrat in an office.
Additionally you wouldn’t *want* a university where 100% of the students were math nerds with a perfect score on their SATs. Diversity is a good thing.
Yes it is. It makes the erroneous assumption that an educational institution needs to be either a community or an academic hot-house. They can be either, neither, both, or other things as well.
I'm also far from sure that your school was a model of perfect diversity in terms of income and privilege, so I'm unsure you should be using that line.
"At no stage (with one or two honourable exceptions) do they blame themselves.".......
I cant think of one Brexiter personality who has accepted any blame for this bxxls up, to think Gina Miller got death threats over her efforts to give Parliament a proper say....it makes me rather cross how this situation has developed and it appears that those responsible are indifferent to it
The reason the Prime Minister can't just get on a plane and sign her beloved BINO Brexit deal is because of Gina Miller.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
That’s unlike you EiT
What we know is that someone mentally ill killed Jo Cox
The fact that he was muttering right wing slogans doesn’t make it the causi belli
There is the causus belli, and there are causal factors. It may or may not have been the main cause of his actions, but I think you're dead wrong if you're claiming it wasn't a causal factor. You know, given the slogans he was shouting.
Suing McDonalds but still eats there twice a month ?!?
Once every six months I succumb to BK or McDonalds.
Tastes good whilst I’m eating it. In less than an hour, I feel groggy, my stomach objects and it feels like I’ve ingested an oil slick and fatberg rolled into one.
There is a McDonalds up the road. Its been there for 15 yrs, I think I've had one three times in the last 15 yrs and not had one in the last ten. Its useful on hot days for an ice cream. I avoid burger chains and fizzy pop, very bad for your health imho.
This sort of thing was apparently abolished in this country about 150 years ago:
"We progressives hail opportunity, egalitarianism and diversity. Yet here’s our dirty little secret: Some of our most liberal bastions in America rely on a system of inherited privilege that benefits rich whites at the expense of almost everyone else.
I’m talking about “legacy preferences” that elite universities give to children of graduates. These universities constitute some of the world’s greatest public goods, but they rig admissions to favor applicants who already have had every privilege in life."
It comes to whether you think an institution should be a community or an academic hot house
My school experimented with the latter but ultimately went back to the former
That's a pretty pathetic excuse.
No, it’s not.
It’s a belief that the institution as a whole benefits from a supportive alumni base and that culture matters. Humans aren’t just economic chess pieces that can be moved around a board by some bureaucrat in an office.
Additionally you wouldn’t *want* a university where 100% of the students were math nerds with a perfect score on their SATs. Diversity is a good thing.
Yes it is. It makes the erroneous assumption that an educational institution needs to be either a community or an academic hot-house. They can be either, neither, both, or other things as well.
I'm also far from sure that your school was a model of perfect diversity in terms of income and privilege, so I'm unsure you should be using that line.
Actually I think “academic hothouse” implies a focus on that to the exclusion of all else. You can be a community with a strong academic focus but that is not the same thing. And, of course, they can have other specialisms as well: i was responding to the article’s contention.
My school is a good example of a community - a new head man came in, tried to focus on academics only, and reversed his position after push back from the community. It’s a good example of the case it point.
(As for diversity we had pupils from all 5 continents, music and drama scholars, academic scholars, kids who had full scholarships and those who paid the full amount. I’m not sure if “perfect diversity” is possible - whatever it is - but there was a pretty good mix.)
This sort of thing was apparently abolished in this country about 150 years ago:
"We progressives hail opportunity, egalitarianism and diversity. Yet here’s our dirty little secret: Some of our most liberal bastions in America rely on a system of inherited privilege that benefits rich whites at the expense of almost everyone else.
I’m talking about “legacy preferences” that elite universities give to children of graduates. These universities constitute some of the world’s greatest public goods, but they rig admissions to favor applicants who already have had every privilege in life."
It comes to whether you think an institution should be a community or an academic hot house
My school experimented with the latter but ultimately went back to the former
That's a pretty pathetic excuse.
No, it’s not.
It’s a belief that the institution as a whole benefits from a supportive alumni base and that culture matters. Humans aren’t just economic chess pieces that can be moved around a board by some bureaucrat in an office.
Additionally you wouldn’t *want* a university where 100% of the students were math nerds with a perfect score on their SATs. Diversity is a good thing.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
That’s unlike you EiT
What we know is that someone mentally ill killed Jo Cox
The fact that he was muttering right wing slogans doesn’t make it the causi belli
There is the causus belli, and there are causal factors. It may or may not have been the main cause of his actions, but I think you're dead wrong if you're claiming it wasn't a causal factor. You know, given the slogans he was shouting.
It appears to have been the catalyst. If it had not been that perhaps there would have been another catalyst but that is speculation. We have facts, however inconvenient.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
That’s unlike you EiT
What we know is that someone mentally ill killed Jo Cox
The fact that he was muttering right wing slogans doesn’t make it the causi belli
There is the causus belli, and there are causal factors. It may or may not have been the main cause of his actions, but I think you're dead wrong if you're claiming it wasn't a causal factor. You know, given the slogans he was shouting.
We simply don’t know.
he was mentally ill and grabbed onto the latest thing in the media. I suspect he would have harmed someone (or himself) at some point in the future. Brexit was tangential not a causal factor in my view.
In any event to tar all Leavers with the actions of one sick man is unhelpful to a sensible dialogue.
Suing McDonalds but still eats there twice a month ?!?
Once every six months I succumb to BK or McDonalds.
Tastes good whilst I’m eating it. In less than an hour, I feel groggy, my stomach objects and it feels like I’ve ingested an oil slick and fatberg rolled into one.
Just so you know, Fatburger in the US is not like that. That's a good burger.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
That’s unlike you EiT
What we know is that someone mentally ill killed Jo Cox
The fact that he was muttering right wing slogans doesn’t make it the causi belli
There is the causus belli, and there are causal factors. It may or may not have been the main cause of his actions, but I think you're dead wrong if you're claiming it wasn't a causal factor. You know, given the slogans he was shouting.
It appears to have been the catalyst. If it had not been that perhaps there would have been another catalyst but that is speculation. We have facts, however inconvenient.
The very meaning of a catalyst is that it triggers other factors but is not directly involved in, or changed by, the reaction
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
That’s unlike you EiT
What we know is that someone mentally ill killed Jo Cox
The fact that he was muttering right wing slogans doesn’t make it the causi belli
There is the causus belli, and there are causal factors. It may or may not have been the main cause of his actions, but I think you're dead wrong if you're claiming it wasn't a causal factor. You know, given the slogans he was shouting.
We simply don’t know.
he was mentally ill and grabbed onto the latest thing in the media. I suspect he would have harmed someone (or himself) at some point in the future. Brexit was tangential not a causal factor in my view.
In any event to tar all Leavers with the actions of one sick man is unhelpful to a sensible dialogue.
“Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.”
As posted here. Leavers appear to see violence as part of their politcial credo.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
That’s unlike you EiT
What we know is that someone mentally ill killed Jo Cox
The fact that he was muttering right wing slogans doesn’t make it the causi belli
There is the causus belli, and there are causal factors. It may or may not have been the main cause of his actions, but I think you're dead wrong if you're claiming it wasn't a causal factor. You know, given the slogans he was shouting.
We simply don’t know.
he was mentally ill and grabbed onto the latest thing in the media. I suspect he would have harmed someone (or himself) at some point in the future. Brexit was tangential not a causal factor in my view.
In any event to tar all Leavers with the actions of one sick man is unhelpful to a sensible dialogue.
I'd suggest that the slogans he was shouting are a good indicator, and should not be ignored.
I'm not tarring all leavers with the actions, but I am saying much of the talk by leavers fostered a distinctly unhealthy environment that might enable 'sick' people to see a cause on which they could focus their anger.
I'm unsure whitewashing the murder of Jo Cox is helpful to a sensible dialogue.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
That’s unlike you EiT
What we know is that someone mentally ill killed Jo Cox
The fact that he was muttering right wing slogans doesn’t make it the causi belli
There is the causus belli, and there are causal factors. It may or may not have been the main cause of his actions, but I think you're dead wrong if you're claiming it wasn't a causal factor. You know, given the slogans he was shouting.
It appears to have been the catalyst. If it had not been that perhaps there would have been another catalyst but that is speculation. We have facts, however inconvenient.
The very meaning of a catalyst is that it triggers other factors but is not directly involved in, or changed by, the reaction
(It’s been 30 years since I studied chemistry...)
Regardless, the bottom line here is that there should be no place on this site for stirring up talk of violence. The OP was a making a prediction in the same way that Powell made his prediction - no neutral observer but someone with a clear agenda - and on such ground it's a fine distinction from incitement.
Actually I think “academic hothouse” implies a focus on that to the exclusion of all else. You can be a community with a strong academic focus but that is not the same thing. And, of course, they can have other specialisms as well: i was responding to the article’s contention.
My school is a good example of a community - a new head man came in, tried to focus on academics only, and reversed his position after push back from the community. It’s a good example of the case it point.
(As for diversity we had pupils from all 5 continents, music and drama scholars, academic scholars, kids who had full scholarships and those who paid the full amount. I’m not sure if “perfect diversity” is possible - whatever it is - but there was a pretty good mix.)
I deliberately mentioned diversity in terms of income and privilege: from my own school I'm well aware they were not bothered where the money comes from. Heck, for a 'Christian' school they loved to accept kids from Hong Kong and CHina ...
(And those kids were, to a boy, great lads. Oddly I don't think there were any girls.)
Suing McDonalds but still eats there twice a month ?!?
Once every six months I succumb to BK or McDonalds.
Tastes good whilst I’m eating it. In less than an hour, I feel groggy, my stomach objects and it feels like I’ve ingested an oil slick and fatberg rolled into one.
There is a McDonalds up the road. Its been there for 15 yrs, I think I've had one three times in the last 15 yrs and not had one in the last ten. Its useful on hot days for an ice cream. I avoid burger chains and fizzy pop, very bad for your health imho.
Every few years I get a yearning for a Big Mac, and I go and get one. Then I'm sated for the next few years. It's not my favourite food despite having an outlet just outside my 'village'. Their breakfasts are hideous, though.
They're also useful when I'm out on a long-distance walk.
25 years ago I had a mate who worked at a fast-food outlet in Greenwich (I cannot remember if it was a BG of KFC). He said they made their money off the same families coming in three or four times a week for meals after school or work. That was quite a shocking thing to hear.
Mr. Royale, I think the last time I visited McDonalds was late at night, after a hospital visit. The saltiness was astounding. On the plus side, it was actually open (one of the few places that was).
Mr. Jessop, nice article. Although you could replace 'fold, stick, or twist' with 'shoot themselves in the left foot, the right foot, or the underpants' based on recent tactical brilliance.
There is deep suspicion about the motives of some Remain voters. The nonsense of a 'peoples' referendum' doesn't help; does that mean that the referendum in 2016 was restricted to animals? The concept that democracy means we can vote every other day until we get the right result?
Most Remain voters I know were disappointed with the result, but few think it should be re-run. Those that do generally favour a re-run don't give a monkey's about democracy, they just want their side to win.
I occasionally ask what a re-run referendum with a narrow majority for one side would achieve. The answer is more bitterness, whatever the result.
Parliament agreed to ask the people for a verdict. When they received it, they agreed to implement it. Saying now … Parliament is split on the way forward so we must ask the people again .. makes no sense. Unless you mean ... We didn't like the answer, try again.
Suing McDonalds but still eats there twice a month ?!?
Once every six months I succumb to BK or McDonalds.
Tastes good whilst I’m eating it. In less than an hour, I feel groggy, my stomach objects and it feels like I’ve ingested an oil slick and fatberg rolled into one.
There is a McDonalds up the road. Its been there for 15 yrs, I think I've had one three times in the last 15 yrs and not had one in the last ten. Its useful on hot days for an ice cream. I avoid burger chains and fizzy pop, very bad for your health imho.
Every few years I get a yearning for a Big Mac, and I go and get one. Then I'm sated for the next few years. It's not my favourite food despite having an outlet just outside my 'village'. Their breakfasts are hideous, though.
They're also useful when I'm out on a long-distance walk.
25 years ago I had a mate who worked at a fast-food outlet in Greenwich (I cannot remember if it was a BG of KFC). He said they made their money off the same families coming in three or four times a week for meals after school or work. That was quite a shocking thing to hear.
I have a soft spot for a sausage egg mcmuffin, and their coffee is better than any other takeaways.
Too much salt, fat and sugar though. The fast food culture is killing us.
he was mentally ill and grabbed onto the latest thing in the media. I suspect he would have harmed someone (or himself) at some point in the future. Brexit was tangential not a causal factor in my view.
In any event to tar all Leavers with the actions of one sick man is unhelpful to a sensible dialogue.
I'm sure that's right. The same applies to Muslims and ISIS, Trots and the Red Army Faction etc. - one can have views which other people regard as wrong without having the slightest sympathy for violence.
I think a lesser charge is true, that nationalist populism tends to coarsen debate - the political sphere nowdays in Britain and the US is rougher than it used to be, and I'm wuite sure that Trump and to some extent the wilder fringes of Leave have contributed to normalising that.
McDonald's is great. Yes it's not good for you and I shouldn't enjoy it but I do, though I only eat there a couple of times a year.
I like how some of their advertising in recent years open acknowledges that people think their food is garbage, when is think they'd want to ignore that.
Suing McDonalds but still eats there twice a month ?!?
Once every six months I succumb to BK or McDonalds.
Tastes good whilst I’m eating it. In less than an hour, I feel groggy, my stomach objects and it feels like I’ve ingested an oil slick and fatberg rolled into one.
There is a McDonalds up the road. Its been there for 15 yrs, I think I've had one three times in the last 15 yrs and not had one in the last ten. Its useful on hot days for an ice cream. I avoid burger chains and fizzy pop, very bad for your health imho.
Well Trump is a great fan Big Macs
Surely the most compelling reason to bet against his re-election. At his age it is playing with fire.
There is deep suspicion about the motives of some Remain voters. The nonsense of a 'peoples' referendum' doesn't help; does that mean that the referendum in 2016 was restricted to animals? The concept that democracy means we can vote every other day until we get the right result?
Most Remain voters I know were disappointed with the result, but few think it should be re-run. Those that do generally favour a re-run don't give a monkey's about democracy, they just want their side to win.
I occasionally ask what a re-run referendum with a narrow majority for one side would achieve. The answer is more bitterness, whatever the result.
Parliament agreed to ask the people for a verdict. When they received it, they agreed to implement it. Saying now … Parliament is split on the way forward so we must ask the people again .. makes no sense. Unless you mean ... We didn't like the answer, try again.
It makes sense, it just means parliament has failed in it's duty and cannot come up with an answer.
Mr. Royale, I think the last time I visited McDonalds was late at night, after a hospital visit. The saltiness was astounding. On the plus side, it was actually open (one of the few places that was).
Mr. Jessop, nice article. Although you could replace 'fold, stick, or twist' with 'shoot themselves in the left foot, the right foot, or the underpants' based on recent tactical brilliance.
There is deep suspicion about the motives of some Remain voters. The nonsense of a 'peoples' referendum' doesn't help; does that mean that the referendum in 2016 was restricted to animals? The concept that democracy means we can vote every other day until we get the right result?
Most Remain voters I know were disappointed with the result, but few think it should be re-run. Those that do generally favour a re-run don't give a monkey's about democracy, they just want their side to win.
I occasionally ask what a re-run referendum with a narrow majority for one side would achieve. The answer is more bitterness, whatever the result.
Parliament agreed to ask the people for a verdict. When they received it, they agreed to implement it. Saying now … Parliament is split on the way forward so we must ask the people again .. makes no sense. Unless you mean ... We didn't like the answer, try again.
Every 5 years or so we have the opportunity to overturn the result of the previous General Election. Is that undemocratic?
So no vnoc until after the vote in the mddle of next month. The constituency chairs must have scare some of them witless. It is so funny if it was not so serious
The discovery that the ERG are eight letters short of a coup shouldn't come as any surprise.
Yet these are the guys the ultras think should be running the country and negotiating the deal. God help us
I'm not really sure what anyone thinks they've done wrong. Apparently only 40 people have written letters - what were those 40 people to do - not write them?
Not go around saying "we have over 48 people writing letters" when it wasn't true
McDonalds have vegan burger in Sweden now (according to my niece). I mean, I wouldn't eat the fucking thing even though I am a vegan but it's heartening that it exists.
So Theresa May's sold Brexiteers down the river. She's sold Northern Ireland down the river.
Presumably she'll be selling Gibraltar down the river next?
TM has achieved a deal beyond the wildest expectations of David Cameron and would have been taken with open arms by ERG at that time.
Well yes because at the time of his renegotiation we hadn't had the referendum.
Then we had the referendum and voted to leave but Theresa May has come up with a deal that gives no end date on leaving the customs union and gives the final say on whether we can be allowed to leave the customs union to the EU (who are openly set on destroying the country by making us give up Northern Ireland if we ever want to truly leave)
So we're never actually going to leave and the referendum result has basically been overturned.
If it came to that - ie in practice the EU trying to annex Northern Ireland - the government would repudiate the treaty
Exactly. It's not like the Irish Army is going to march on Belfast.
There is deep suspicion about the motives of some Remain voters. The nonsense of a 'peoples' referendum' doesn't help; does that mean that the referendum in 2016 was restricted to animals? The concept that democracy means we can vote every other day until we get the right result?
Most Remain voters I know were disappointed with the result, but few think it should be re-run. Those that do generally favour a re-run don't give a monkey's about democracy, they just want their side to win.
I occasionally ask what a re-run referendum with a narrow majority for one side would achieve. The answer is more bitterness, whatever the result.
Parliament agreed to ask the people for a verdict. When they received it, they agreed to implement it. Saying now … Parliament is split on the way forward so we must ask the people again .. makes no sense. Unless you mean ... We didn't like the answer, try again.
Every 5 years or so we have the opportunity to overturn the result of the previous General Election. Is that undemocratic?
There are 2 answers on the table right now. The supposed difficulty in choosing merely illustrates that remainer MPs who promised to respect the vote have reneged on their promise. Nothing unique in that, politicians do it all the time. That's why so few of us would ever trust the bastards.
So no vnoc until after the vote in the mddle of next month. The constituency chairs must have scare some of them witless. It is so funny if it was not so serious
The discovery that the ERG are eight letters short of a coup shouldn't come as any surprise.
Yet these are the guys the ultras think should be running the country and negotiating the deal. God help us
I'm not really sure what anyone thinks they've done wrong. Apparently only 40 people have written letters - what were those 40 people to do - not write them?
Not go around saying "we have over 48 people writing letters" when it wasn't true
Quite. They absolutely should have sent letters if they think May is leading the party in the wrong direction. Heck they could have acted sooner if they wanted.
But leaking threats of doing it for months and outright stating they had it almost had the numbers on the past few days and then blaming spin for mockery at not managing it? That's pretty shameless.
I don't doubt they'll get there and they will then pretend that vindicates them as if it erases the spinning they did which was incorrect, but that won't make them magically not look silly .
1. McDonald's are great at the right time. You know what you are going to get which is worth a lot.
2. NI NI NI NI who'd a thunk it.
3. Any London PB-ers should try to go and see Soldier On at the Other Palace Theatre. Very good play conceived and performed by ex-servicemen. They even feature a transgender RAF pilot which I'm sure @Dura_Ace will be able to relate to.
There is deep suspicion about the motives of some Remain voters. The nonsense of a 'peoples' referendum' doesn't help; does that mean that the referendum in 2016 was restricted to animals? The concept that democracy means we can vote every other day until we get the right result?
Most Remain voters I know were disappointed with the result, but few think it should be re-run. Those that do generally favour a re-run don't give a monkey's about democracy, they just want their side to win.
I occasionally ask what a re-run referendum with a narrow majority for one side would achieve. The answer is more bitterness, whatever the result.
Parliament agreed to ask the people for a verdict. When they received it, they agreed to implement it. Saying now … Parliament is split on the way forward so we must ask the people again .. makes no sense. Unless you mean ... We didn't like the answer, try again.
Every 5 years or so we have the opportunity to overturn the result of the previous General Election. Is that undemocratic?
There are 2 answers on the table right now. The supposed difficulty in choosing merely illustrates that remainer MPs who promised to respect the vote have reneged on their promise. Nothing unique in that, politicians do it all the time. That's why so few of us would ever trust the bastards.
Well, by voting May’s deal down they are respecting the vote. It’s very different from the unicorns Vote Leave promised.
There is deep suspicion about the motives of some Remain voters. The nonsense of a 'peoples' referendum' doesn't help; does that mean that the referendum in 2016 was restricted to animals? The concept that democracy means we can vote every other day until we get the right result?
Most Remain voters I know were disappointed with the result, but few think it should be re-run. Those that do generally favour a re-run don't give a monkey's about democracy, they just want their side to win.
I occasionally ask what a re-run referendum with a narrow majority for one side would achieve. The answer is more bitterness, whatever the result.
Parliament agreed to ask the people for a verdict. When they received it, they agreed to implement it. Saying now … Parliament is split on the way forward so we must ask the people again .. makes no sense. Unless you mean ... We didn't like the answer, try again.
Every 5 years or so we have the opportunity to overturn the result of the previous General Election. Is that undemocratic?
There are 2 answers on the table right now. The supposed difficulty in choosing merely illustrates that remainer MPs who promised to respect the vote have reneged on their promise. Nothing unique in that, politicians do it all the time. That's why so few of us would ever trust the bastards.
Well, by voting May’s deal down they are respecting the vote. It’s very different from the unicorns Vote Leave promised.
The people voted to leave. Nothing else was on the ballot paper. That was left to the politicians to sort out. May's deal involves leaving, in a softish kind of way. Remainers who promise to respect the vote have a choice. They can vote to leave with a deal or without one. Anything else and they are lying hypocrites.
he was mentally ill and grabbed onto the latest thing in the media. I suspect he would have harmed someone (or himself) at some point in the future. Brexit was tangential not a causal factor in my view.
In any event to tar all Leavers with the actions of one sick man is unhelpful to a sensible dialogue.
I'm sure that's right. The same applies to Muslims and ISIS, Trots and the Red Army Faction etc. - one can have views which other people regard as wrong without having the slightest sympathy for violence.
I think a lesser charge is true, that nationalist populism tends to coarsen debate - the political sphere nowdays in Britain and the US is rougher than it used to be, and I'm wuite sure that Trump and to some extent the wilder fringes of Leave have contributed to normalising that.
Neatly but unsurprisingly sidestepping the Corbyn version of populism there. It doesn’t have to be nationalist to coarsen and debase debate.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
Leave enthusiasts?
Wow.
It's not particularly surprising, these people have been fed this whole betrayal narrative for years. If you tell people they're under threat by a shadowy elite, some of them are going to act on what you tell them.
Richard is probably right that (at last I think this is what he's implying) there will be more Leave terrorism if there's another referendum and the voters vote to remain. But the point I'm making is that that betrayal narrative is going to be fed to them no matter what the government does, and if anything giving the movement concessions just makes it bolder, including the violent part.
I would have to strongly reconsider my belIef in the peaceful democratic process to achieve change.
The status quo will hold, but only after severe testing.
Not sure about that.
When Corbyn becomes Prime Minister we may find another revolution of a very different kind starts to take place...
Oh yes. The AV referendum will seem downright quaint when we’re queuing for loaves of bread that cost £250,000 each.
And people like you will help bring it about, out of spite.
Brexit is more damaging to Britain than Corbyn will be.
Ludicrous.
Look in the mirror. Have you sorted your emigration papers yet?
No I have no intention to emigrate and never said I would. The mirror is fine.
Brexit isn't a problem. If the EU is attempting to become a European USA, Brexit Britain would be a European Canada. Corbyn's Britain would be a European Venezuela.
There is deep suspicion about the motives of some Remain voters. The nonsense of a 'peoples' referendum' doesn't help; does that mean that the referendum in 2016 was restricted to animals? The concept that democracy means we can vote every other day until we get the right result?
Most Remain voters I know were disappointed with the result, but few think it should be re-run. Those that do generally favour a re-run don't give a monkey's about democracy, they just want their side to win.
I occasionally ask what a re-run referendum with a narrow majority for one side would achieve. The answer is more bitterness, whatever the result.
Parliament agreed to ask the people for a verdict. When they received it, they agreed to implement it. Saying now … Parliament is split on the way forward so we must ask the people again .. makes no sense. Unless you mean ... We didn't like the answer, try again.
Every 5 years or so we have the opportunity to overturn the result of the previous General Election. Is that undemocratic?
There are 2 answers on the table right now. The supposed difficulty in choosing merely illustrates that remainer MPs who promised to respect the vote have reneged on their promise. Nothing unique in that, politicians do it all the time. That's why so few of us would ever trust the bastards.
Well, by voting May’s deal down they are respecting the vote. It’s very different from the unicorns Vote Leave promised.
Of course if the DUP pull the plug and we get a general election it would likely end up a Labour minority government which the SNP would demand stays permanently in the SM and CU so Remainer Labour and SNP MPs do have some argument for voting gown the Deal and pushing for an early general election but it still needs 2/3 of MPs to agree that so otherwise they would try for EUref2 but they would have to get the government then to agree to put that on the table
Peter Lilley on Today. He's like Baldrick in court in Blackadder Goes Forth.
Humph: But the CBI speak for business Lilley: No they don't Humph: So why are businesses stockpiling Lilley: They aren't and they shouldn't Humph: But the borders would block up Lilley: No they won't
What an utter moron. A pity that "A Brain" wasn't on his little list of old
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
That’s unlike you EiT
What we know is that someone mentally ill killed Jo Cox
The fact that he was muttering right wing slogans doesn’t make it the causi belli
There is the causus belli, and there are causal factors. It may or may not have been the main cause of his actions, but I think you're dead wrong if you're claiming it wasn't a causal factor. You know, given the slogans he was shouting.
We simply don’t know.
he was mentally ill and grabbed onto the latest thing in the media. I suspect he would have harmed someone (or himself) at some point in the future. Brexit was tangential not a causal factor in my view.
In any event to tar all Leavers with the actions of one sick man is unhelpful to a sensible dialogue.
“Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.”
As posted here. Leavers appear to see violence as part of their politcial credo.
What are they going to do? Trip us up with their Zimmer frames? Throw their false teeth at us?
There is deep suspicion about the motives of some Remain voters. The nonsense of a 'peoples' referendum' doesn't help; does that mean that the referendum in 2016 was restricted to animals? The concept that democracy means we can vote every other day until we get the right result?
Most Remain voters I know were disappointed with the result, but few think it should be re-run. Those that do generally favour a re-run don't give a monkey's about democracy, they just want their side to win.
I occasionally ask what a re-run referendum with a narrow majority for one side would achieve. The answer is more bitterness, whatever the result.
Parliament agreed to ask the people for a verdict. When they received it, they agreed to implement it. Saying now … Parliament is split on the way forward so we must ask the people again .. makes no sense. Unless you mean ... We didn't like the answer, try again.
Every 5 years or so we have the opportunity to overturn the result of the previous General Election. Is that undemocratic?
I have no idea why people compare General Elections to Referendums, they are completely different things
They even feature a transgender RAF pilot which I'm sure @Dura_Ace will be able to relate to.
I will, for possibly the only time, give the crabs some credit on that. They were very accepting and accommodating of that individual well before the subject was au courant in the way it is now.
Suing McDonalds but still eats there twice a month ?!?
Once every six months I succumb to BK or McDonalds.
Tastes good whilst I’m eating it. In less than an hour, I feel groggy, my stomach objects and it feels like I’ve ingested an oil slick and fatberg rolled into one.
That sounds symptomatic of a poorly functioning gall bladder.
If the ERG can’t even form a vaguely united position over something as fundamental as the leadership of the country, or perhaps to be generous the best tactics & strategy to bring about change in the leadership of the country, why should anyone think they could produce a Brexit negotiation strategy that can even unite themselves, let alone secure sufficient support in Parliament or the country?
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
Yet the DUP cannot force a change of Tory PM without Tory MPs voting down May which is very unlikely given over 200 back her Deal and a large number back EUref2 over No Deal
I don't think today's Spain/Gibraltar thing is significant. They are just asking for what they got on the WA for the end state. They'll get it. More worryingly for May are the multiple noises from big states they are uneasy on Fish and Level Playing fields. At the very least it boxes May in because if she tries to reopen the text she knows that will be a two way street. At worst you have to ask whether she will now come back from EUCO with a first amused text even tougher than the current draft. Anyone who thinks the EU wouldn't dare inflame parliament further hasn't been watching closely. They know the game is up and may well take their advantage further.
The EU has said issues like fishing can be decided in the final trade agreement
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
Leave enthusiasts?
Wow.
It's not particularly surprising, these people have been fed this whole betrayal narrative for years. If you tell people they're under threat by a shadowy elite, some of them are going to act on what you tell them.
Richard is probably right that (at last I think this is what he's implying) there will be more Leave terrorism if there's another referendum and the voters vote to remain. But the point I'm making is that that betrayal narrative is going to be fed to them no matter what the government does, and if anything giving the movement concessions just makes it bolder, including the violent part.
I would have to strongly reconsider my belIef in the peaceful democratic process to achieve change.
You'd reconsider your belief in the peaceful democratic process to achieve change if the thing you wanted got out-voted?
The status quo will hold, but only after severe testing.
Not sure about that.
When Corbyn becomes Prime Minister we may find another revolution of a very different kind starts to take place...
Oh yes. The AV referendum will seem downright quaint when we’re queuing for loaves of bread that cost £250,000 each.
And people like you will help bring it about, out of spite.
Brexit is more damaging to Britain than Corbyn will be.
Ludicrous.
Look in the mirror. Have you sorted your emigration papers yet?
No I have no intention to emigrate and never said I would. The mirror is fine.
Brexit isn't a problem. If the EU is attempting to become a European USA, Brexit Britain would be a European Canada. Corbyn's Britain would be a European Venezuela.
Canada has a strong Free Trade Deal with the USA through NAFTA and its proposed replacement the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement
There is deep suspicion about the motives of some Remain voters. The nonsense of a 'peoples' referendum' doesn't help; does that mean that the referendum in 2016 was restricted to animals? The concept that democracy means we can vote every other day until we get the right result?
Most Remain voters I know were disappointed with the result, but few think it should be re-run. Those that do generally favour a re-run don't give a monkey's about democracy, they just want their side to win.
I occasionally ask what a re-run referendum with a narrow majority for one side would achieve. The answer is more bitterness, whatever the result.
Parliament agreed to ask the people for a verdict. When they received it, they agreed to implement it. Saying now … Parliament is split on the way forward so we must ask the people again .. makes no sense. Unless you mean ... We didn't like the answer, try again.
Every 5 years or so we have the opportunity to overturn the result of the previous General Election. Is that undemocratic?
I have no idea why people compare General Elections to Referendums, they are completely different things
Yes, General Elections lead to functioning governments. Referendums on the other hand...
If it fails it will be given a democratic sendoff in a referendum.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
Are you saying that referenda are not democratic, so their results should be ignored?
Nope. I am saying that overturning a referendum result before it has even been enacted is undemocratic. And typical of the EU and the Eurofanatics who care nothing for democracy.
I think historians will write up Brexit as a peaceful failed revolution. While the status quo did not enjoy majority support, the revolutionaries failed to secure control of the executive and the legislature. Ultimately, the divide between the ‘clean slate’ and ‘trade off’ Brexiteers was ultimately unbridgeable, leading to a second referendum and a vote to Remain.
In a broader sense, the referenda and crises of 2010-2022 can be seen as the consequence of Blair’s botched constitutional and European reforms. The status quo will hold, but only after severe testing.
If it fails it won't be peaceful.
If it fails it will be given a democratic sendoff in a referendum.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
...says the Enoch Powell of Brexit?
A remarkably stupid comment from you Ian given my views. Maybe I should start referring to you as a Quisling and see how you like it.
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
Remind me what the favoured DUP solution to delivering Brexit is? Unless it’s no deal in which case Tory MPs will bring down their own Govt anyway.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
Leave enthusiasts?
Wow.
It's not particularly surprising, these people have been fed this whole betrayal narrative for years. If you tell people they're under threat by a shadowy elite, some of them are going to act on what you tell them.
Richard is probably right that (at last I think this is what he's implying) there will be more Leave terrorism if there's another referendum and the voters vote to remain. But the point I'm making is that that betrayal narrative is going to be fed to them no matter what the government does, and if anything giving the movement concessions just makes it bolder, including the violent part.
I would have to strongly reconsider my belIef in the peaceful democratic process to achieve change.
I don't suppose it would make you join a terrorist group, but I agree that people need to feel there's a route through democratic activity to achieving change, as otherwise they either stop voting or look at non-democratic means - I've never blamed the ANC for limited violence since it was evident that apartheid wouldn't permit democracy for the majority. As I said the other day, referendums do offer a way for even extreme groups to exercise influence and therefore to engage with democracy - I gave the innocuous example of Basel Communist Party (with 0.5% of the vote at elections) getting a majority to ban the construction of new inner-city multi-story carparks (on the grounds that it drew in more traffic - voters felt yeah, it's the commies, but they're right on this one).
There is a problem if people vote for something which on closer inspection proves to be almost impossible without great damage - California's abolition of property tax is an example. I think i's reasonable to try to make it work and if hideous problems emerge to go back and say "The policy has proved to have these consequences that you couldn't have foreseen - would you still like us to do it?" Arguably, Leave is turning out to be in that category. If people then voted Leave a second time, I'd feel we needed to do it, regardless of the consequences.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
Leave enthusiasts?
Wow.
It's not particularly surprising, these people have been fed this whole betrayal narrative for years. If you tell people they're under threat by a shadowy elite, some of them are going to act on what you tell them.
Richard is probably right that (at last I think this is what he's implying) there will be more Leave terrorism if there's another referendum and the voters vote to remain. But the point I'm making is that that betrayal narrative is going to be fed to them no matter what the government does, and if anything giving the movement concessions just makes it bolder, including the violent part.
Brexiteers have spent years telling the British public that someone else is responsible for the country's ills: mainly the EU, although many say the same about immigrants (adding in another layer of people they don't like). Even when their narrative is rubbish (and often it has a grain of truth), the story's a good one. Although that's what it is: a story, fiction.
Now that their plan is coming somewhat off the rails, they're again blaming other people: May, the government, the EU.
At no stage (with one or two honourable exceptions) do they blame themselves.
For this reason, I believe that this will continue whatever Brexit we get. If we get a hard Brexit, and an economic and social crisis, it'd be the EU's fauli for making Brexit hard. If we get May's deal, they'll keep on whinging about officials' pensions. If we remain, they'll continue as they have for years - and as Richard now threatens, go further.
Therefore we should just disregard it: children always try to blame others and absolve themselves of responsibility. We should ignore the children's bleatings.
Your whole thesis is based on the frankly moronic idea that no Brexit was possible rather than accepting that there were perfectly reasonable ways to leave the EU but the Remainer PM we have in charge made sure they were not on the table. You are the unbending fanatic rather than people like me who have always looked for reasonable and practical solutions based on compromise.
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
Your whole thesis is based on the frankly moronic idea that no Brexit was possible rather than accepting that there were perfectly reasonable ways to leave the EU but the Remainer PM we have in charge made sure they were not on the table. You are the unbending fanatic rather than people like me who have always looked for reasonable and practical solutions based on compromise.
Your preferred kind of Brexit is still on the table, with the exception of Northern Ireland which I understand you're ok with in principle. It will just take a lot longer to get there.
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
Remind me what the favoured DUP solution to delivering Brexit is? Unless it’s no deal in which case Tory MPs will bring down their own Govt anyway.
Indeed, it only takes Soubry, Wollaston and Grieve to vote down a No Deal Tory PM and they would lose their majority even with the DUP and fall from 328 seats combined to 325 ie under the 326 seats needed for a majority
Your whole thesis is based on the frankly moronic idea that no Brexit was possible rather than accepting that there were perfectly reasonable ways to leave the EU but the Remainer PM we have in charge made sure they were not on the table. You are the unbending fanatic rather than people like me who have always looked for reasonable and practical solutions based on compromise.
Your preferred kind of Brexit is still on the table, with the exception of Northern Ireland which I understand you're ok with in principle. It will just take a lot longer to get there.
I agree. My comments do not relate to the Deal but to the wishes of those people to see it defeated so that we never Leave.
Suing McDonalds but still eats there twice a month ?!?
Once every six months I succumb to BK or McDonalds.
Tastes good whilst I’m eating it. In less than an hour, I feel groggy, my stomach objects and it feels like I’ve ingested an oil slick and fatberg rolled into one.
There is a McDonalds up the road. Its been there for 15 yrs, I think I've had one three times in the last 15 yrs and not had one in the last ten. Its useful on hot days for an ice cream. I avoid burger chains and fizzy pop, very bad for your health imho.
Well Trump is a great fan Big Macs
Warren Buffett breakfasts on McMuffins, and has made it to 88 (years and billions).
Peter Lilley on Today. He's like Baldrick in court in Blackadder Goes Forth.
Humph: But the CBI speak for business Lilley: No they don't Humph: So why are businesses stockpiling Lilley: They aren't and they shouldn't Humph: But the borders would block up Lilley: No they won't
What an utter moron. A pity that "A Brain" wasn't on his little list of old
Lilley seemed awfully crotchety. Perhaps it was being dragged back from rural France to rainy old Brexitland that did it.
Peter Lilley on Today. He's like Baldrick in court in Blackadder Goes Forth.
Humph: But the CBI speak for business Lilley: No they don't Humph: So why are businesses stockpiling Lilley: They aren't and they shouldn't Humph: But the borders would block up Lilley: No they won't
What an utter moron. A pity that "A Brain" wasn't on his little list of old
Lilley seemed awfully crotchety. Perhaps it was being dragged back from rural France to rainy old Brexitland that did it.
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
Remind me what the favoured DUP solution to delivering Brexit is? Unless it’s no deal in which case Tory MPs will bring down their own Govt anyway.
Indeed, it only takes Soubry, Wollaston and Grieve to vote down a No Deal Tory PM and they would lose their majority even with the DUP and fall from 328 seats combined to 325 ie under the 326 seats needed for a majority
With SF not taking their seats the actual number is 322.
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
Just so we can all recognise it when the Remainers impose it.
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
Remind me what the favoured DUP solution to delivering Brexit is? Unless it’s no deal in which case Tory MPs will bring down their own Govt anyway.
Indeed, it only takes Soubry, Wollaston and Grieve to vote down a No Deal Tory PM and they would lose their majority even with the DUP and fall from 328 seats combined to 325 ie under the 326 seats needed for a majority
With SF not taking their seats the actual number is 322.
I'm all for democracy but many NI voters seem bloody perverse, with Unionists voting only for headbangers and nationalists voting only for people who don't turn up. I know I'm generalising/oversimplifying, but aren't many younger NI voters getting a bit tired of this?
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
I think they have that the wrong way round.
It’s a centralised autocratic government (etc) which uses “nation and often race” as a tool to achieve their political ends
I don’t see facism as a extreme form of nationalism - it’s more just a different form of collectivism
The political discourse over most of my lifetime has been "who are these lying liars who are lying to me". It is incredibly rare to get an interview that tells you who a politician and why they believe what they believe. No wonder we get the "you are all the same" on the doorstep. The fact is that on all sides of the political spectrum and, indeed the Brexit debate, there are genuinely honest and caring people trying to do their best for their constituents and the country- often at considerable personal cost.
That a small group of fanatics have been able to hijack politics, injecting poison and lies- yes Nigel "reach for my shotgun" Farage and Dominic "misleading" Cummings, I'm talking about you- is deeply regrettable. The media who create an equivalence between true and false in the interests of "balance" are at least as guilty as politicians themselves. The BBC prefers the "entertainment" of a political cock fight to the "informing" and "educating" part of their mandate, and that should give us considerable pause.
The victors in the referendum would still get their way under the terms of Mrs. Mays deal: the UK would leave the EU. However Brexit cannot be on the extreme terms put forward by the extremists. The closeness of the original result and constant polling since suggests that "the will of the people", in as far as we can tell seems pretty OK with a variety of halfway houses, but the insistence of the extremists to make no compromise and yet not put forward any coherent alternative of their own makes people like me more determined to resist any extreme Brexit and to go for a second referendum to validate that. I can reluctantly accept the deal on offer, in the hope we may limit the damage, and -yes- one day rejoin, since I think that is the best way for the future of the UK. If that deal is rejected then I will fight tooth and nail to get a second referendum and I expect that the voters would reject any Brexit then on offer.
Support for Brexit is collapsing because of the antics of the extremists, and unless a new willingness to compromise emerges from the Brexit camp, I think Remainers are totally justified in calling out the outrageous statements coming from the other camp: "you won, get over it". A fanatic is one who won't change their mind and won't change the subject, and the failure of Johnson, Davies, Raab et al is not the fault of Remainers, it is their own miscalculations that have discredited the Brexit process.
Mrs. May's plan is the only Brexit on offer, and if the Brexiteers can not accept compromise, we are totally entitled to scuttle the whole process- it is not in Britain's interest to leave anyway and the No-deal scenario is way beyond irresponsible.
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
Remind me what the favoured DUP solution to delivering Brexit is? Unless it’s no deal in which case Tory MPs will bring down their own Govt anyway.
Indeed, it only takes Soubry, Wollaston and Grieve to vote down a No Deal Tory PM and they would lose their majority even with the DUP and fall from 328 seats combined to 325 ie under the 326 seats needed for a majority
With SF not taking their seats the actual number is 322.
I'm all for democracy but many NI voters seem bloody perverse, with Unionists voting only for headbangers and nationalists voting only for people who don't turn up. I know I'm generalising/oversimplifying, but aren't many younger NI voters getting a bit tired of this?
Agreed. I do wish SF would realise they can achieve a lot more for their eventual aims if they actually took up their seats rather than leaving their constituents unrepresented. Much as I would hate for it to be right now of course
Surely it must be clear to all now that Theresa May's aim all along has been to prevent Brexit. Which is why she's come back with a bucket of warm sick for a deal, and is now raising the possibility of keeping the status quo. If she got anything better, this would not have worked - a grateful public would have just wanted her to get on with it.
I'm not calling her a bad person for trying to do so - I am sure she means well, and I imagine she's been scared shitless by countless intelligence briefings about how life jettisoned from the EU will be some sort of terrorist wasteland, which have found fertile ground in her naturally statist and somewhat authoritarian mindset. She no doubt thinks she's doing the right thing, in the midst of doing something that is in actuality, exceptionally damaging.
It will fail though. She and the people on her side really do have failure written through them like Blackpool rock - it's inescapable that their fears will come to pass. We will Brexit, and the country will succeed outside the EU. How that happens, I have no idea, but I'm looking forward to seeing.
You know what is going on in Theresa May's head? And yet you don't know how Brexit will succeed but nonetheless know it will. Not sure how well founded your beliefs are.
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
Remind me what the favoured DUP solution to delivering Brexit is? Unless it’s no deal in which case Tory MPs will bring down their own Govt anyway.
Indeed, it only takes Soubry, Wollaston and Grieve to vote down a No Deal Tory PM and they would lose their majority even with the DUP and fall from 328 seats combined to 325 ie under the 326 seats needed for a majority
With SF not taking their seats the actual number is 322.
I'm all for democracy but many NI voters seem bloody perverse, with Unionists voting only for headbangers and nationalists voting only for people who don't turn up. I know I'm generalising/oversimplifying, but aren't many younger NI voters getting a bit tired of this?
Unfortunately it’s learned behaviour from how governments over the last 20 years have chosen to accommodate the extremists. It’s a perfectly rational response by voters
The political discourse over most of my lifetime has been "who are these lying liars who are lying to me". It is incredibly rare to get an interview that tells you who a politician and why they believe what they believe. No wonder we get the "you are all the same" on the doorstep. The fact is that on all sides of the political spectrum and, indeed the Brexit debate, there are genuinely honest and caring people trying to do their best for their constituents and the country- often at considerable personal cost.
That a small group of fanatics have been able to hijack politics, injecting poison and lies- yes Nigel "reach for my shotgun" Farage and Dominic "misleading" Cummings, I'm talking about you- is deeply regrettable. The media who create an equivalence between true and false in the interests of "balance" are at least as guilty as politicians themselves. The BBC prefers the "entertainment" of a political cock fight to the "informing" and "educating" part of their mandate, and that should give us considerable pause.
The victors in the referendum would still get their way under the terms of Mrs. Mays deal: the UK would leave the EU. However Brexit cannot be on the extreme terms put forward by the extremists. The closeness of the original result and constant polling since suggests that "the will of the people", in as far as we can tell seems pretty OK with a variety of halfway houses, but the insistence of the extremists to make no compromise and yet not put forward any coherent alternative of their own makes people like me more determined to resist any extreme Brexit and to go for a second referendum to validate that. I can reluctantly accept the deal on offer, in the hope we may limit the damage, and -yes- one day rejoin, since I think that is the best way for the future of the UK. If that deal is rejected then I will fight tooth and nail to get a second referendum and I expect that the voters would reject any Brexit then on offer.
Support for Brexit is collapsing because of the antics of the extremists, and unless a new willingness to compromise emerges from the Brexit camp, I think Remainers are totally justified in calling out the outrageous statements coming from the other camp: "you won, get over it". A fanatic is one who won't change their mind and won't change the subject, and the failure of Johnson, Davies, Raab et al is not the fault of Remainers, it is their own miscalculations that have discredited the Brexit process.
Mrs. May's plan is the only Brexit on offer, and if the Brexiteers can not accept compromise, we are totally entitled to scuttle the whole process- it is not in Britain's interest to leave anyway and the No-deal scenario is way beyond irresponsible.
The political discourse over most of my lifetime has been "who are these lying liars who are lying to me". It is incredibly rare to get an interview that tells you who a politician and why they believe what they believe. No wonder we get the "you are all the same" on the doorstep. The fact is that on all sides of the political spectrum and, indeed the Brexit debate, there are genuinely honest and caring people trying to do their best for their constituents and the country- often at considerable personal cost.
That a small group of fanatics have been able to hijack politics, injecting poison and lies- yes Nigel "reach for my shotgun" Farage and Dominic "misleading" Cummings, I'm talking about you- is deeply regrettable. The media who create an equivalence between true and false in the interests of "balance" are at least as guilty as politicians themselves. The BBC prefers the "entertainment" of a political cock fight to the "informing" and "educating" part of their mandate, and that should give us considerable pause.
The victors in the referendum would still get their way under the terms of Mrs. Mays deal: the UK would leave the EU. However Brexit cannot be on the extreme terms put forward by the extremists. The closeness of the original result and constant polling since suggests that "the will of the people", in as far as we can tell seems pretty OK with a variety of halfway houses, but the insistence of the extremists to make no compromise and yet not put forward any coherent alternative of their own makes people like me more determined to resist any extreme Brexit and to go for a second referendum to validate that. I can reluctantly accept the deal on offer, in the hope we may limit the damage, and -yes- one day rejoin, since I think that is the best way for the future of the UK. If that deal is rejected then I will fight tooth and nail to get a second referendum and I expect that the voters would reject any Brexit then on offer.
Support for Brexit is collapsing because of the antics of the extremists, and unless a new willingness to compromise emerges from the Brexit camp, I think Remainers are totally justified in calling out the outrageous statements coming from the other camp: "you won, get over it". A fanatic is one who won't change their mind and won't change the subject, and the failure of Johnson, Davies, Raab et al is not the fault of Remainers, it is their own miscalculations that have discredited the Brexit process.
Mrs. May's plan is the only Brexit on offer, and if the Brexiteers can not accept compromise, we are totally entitled to scuttle the whole process- it is not in Britain's interest to leave anyway and the No-deal scenario is way beyond irresponsible.
Your whole thesis is based on the frankly moronic idea that no Brexit was possible rather than accepting that there were perfectly reasonable ways to leave the EU but the Remainer PM we have in charge made sure they were not on the table. You are the unbending fanatic rather than people like me who have always looked for reasonable and practical solutions based on compromise.
Your preferred kind of Brexit is still on the table, with the exception of Northern Ireland which I understand you're ok with in principle. It will just take a lot longer to get there.
I agree. My comments do not relate to the Deal but to the wishes of those people to see it defeated so that we never Leave.
At the moment the biggest threat to the deal, and therefore no Brexit, is supposed Brexit supporters. The only reason that the referendum campaign is getting any traction is because they are refusing to back it and stirring up their supporters to do the same. When you’ve got Brexiteers all over the airwaves saying “this deal is worse than remain”, what do you expect?
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
Remind me what the favoured DUP solution to delivering Brexit is? Unless it’s no deal in which case Tory MPs will bring down their own Govt anyway.
Indeed, it only takes Soubry, Wollaston and Grieve to vote down a No Deal Tory PM and they would lose their majority even with the DUP and fall from 328 seats combined to 325 ie under the 326 seats needed for a majority
With SF not taking their seats the actual number is 322.
I'm all for democracy but many NI voters seem bloody perverse, with Unionists voting only for headbangers and nationalists voting only for people who don't turn up. I know I'm generalising/oversimplifying, but aren't many younger NI voters getting a bit tired of this?
Agreed. I do wish SF would realise they can achieve a lot more for their eventual aims if they actually took up their seats rather than leaving their constituents unrepresented. Much as I would hate for it to be right now of course
I'm sure they appreciate your advice on achieving their aim of a united Ireland, Richard.
In the context of the (very welcome) reduction in the level of violence in the Six Counties, SF (no not that SF. Or that one) is registering the continued struggle in the only meaningful way, namely, to boycott the administration which recognises Northern Ireland as a constituent part. If they take their seats they are acquiescing in that recognition.
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
Remind me what the favoured DUP solution to delivering Brexit is? Unless it’s no deal in which case Tory MPs will bring down their own Govt anyway.
Indeed, it only takes Soubry, Wollaston and Grieve to vote down a No Deal Tory PM and they would lose their majority even with the DUP and fall from 328 seats combined to 325 ie under the 326 seats needed for a majority
With SF not taking their seats the actual number is 322.
I'm all for democracy but many NI voters seem bloody perverse, with Unionists voting only for headbangers and nationalists voting only for people who don't turn up. I know I'm generalising/oversimplifying, but aren't many younger NI voters getting a bit tired of this?
Unfortunately it’s learned behaviour from how governments over the last 20 years have chosen to accommodate the extremists. It’s a perfectly rational response by voters
I'm all for democracy but many NI voters seem bloody perverse, with Unionists voting only for headbangers and nationalists voting only for people who don't turn up. I know I'm generalising/oversimplifying, but aren't many younger NI voters getting a bit tired of this?
Unfortunately it’s learned behaviour from how governments over the last 20 years have chosen to accommodate the extremists. It’s a perfectly rational response by voters
No, I don't think that's true. You can argue that Britain has chosen to compromise with armed enemies (the IRA and to a lesser extent Protestant gangs) but nobody gives a thoiught to the absent Sinn Fein MPs (Labour will never have a leadership more friendly in principle to Irish nationalism, but they are devoting zero time to thinking about it) and the DUP are only influential due to an accident of electoral outcome. Someone like Bernadette Devlin - angry, disruptive, and noisy - would do nationalism much more good than silent absentees.
Comments
Richard is probably right that (at last I think this is what he's implying) there will be more Leave terrorism if there's another referendum and the voters vote to remain. But the point I'm making is that that betrayal narrative is going to be fed to them no matter what the government does, and if anything giving the movement concessions just makes it bolder, including the violent part.
Labour need to oppose properly though, so still a good chance stuff gets through !
Now that their plan is coming somewhat off the rails, they're again blaming other people: May, the government, the EU.
At no stage (with one or two honourable exceptions) do they blame themselves.
For this reason, I believe that this will continue whatever Brexit we get. If we get a hard Brexit, and an economic and social crisis, it'd be the EU's fauli for making Brexit hard. If we get May's deal, they'll keep on whinging about officials' pensions. If we remain, they'll continue as they have for years - and as Richard now threatens, go further.
Therefore we should just disregard it: children always try to blame others and absolve themselves of responsibility. We should ignore the children's bleatings.
I cant think of one Brexiter personality who has accepted any blame for this bxxls up, to think Gina Miller got death threats over her efforts to give Parliament a proper say....it makes me rather cross how this situation has developed and it appears that those responsible are indifferent to it
Suing McDonalds but still eats there twice a month ?!?
My school experimented with the latter but ultimately went back to the former
What we know is that someone mentally ill killed Jo Cox
The fact that he was muttering right wing slogans doesn’t make it the causi belli
Tastes good whilst I’m eating it. In less than an hour, I feel groggy, my stomach objects and it feels like I’ve ingested an oil slick and fatberg rolled into one.
It’s a belief that the institution as a whole benefits from a supportive alumni base and that culture matters. Humans aren’t just economic chess pieces that can be moved around a board by some bureaucrat in an office.
Additionally you wouldn’t *want* a university where 100% of the students were math nerds with a perfect score on their SATs. Diversity is a good thing.
I'm also far from sure that your school was a model of perfect diversity in terms of income and privilege, so I'm unsure you should be using that line.
Bxxls up by Remainers much?
My school is a good example of a community - a new head man came in, tried to focus on academics only, and reversed his position after push back from the community. It’s a good example of the case it point.
(As for diversity we had pupils from all 5 continents, music and drama scholars, academic scholars, kids who had full scholarships and those who paid the full amount. I’m not sure if “perfect diversity” is possible - whatever it is - but there was a pretty good mix.)
he was mentally ill and grabbed onto the latest thing in the media. I suspect he would have harmed someone (or himself) at some point in the future. Brexit was tangential not a causal factor in my view.
In any event to tar all Leavers with the actions of one sick man is unhelpful to a sensible dialogue.
(It’s been 30 years since I studied chemistry...)
As posted here. Leavers appear to see violence as part of their politcial credo.
I'm not tarring all leavers with the actions, but I am saying much of the talk by leavers fostered a distinctly unhealthy environment that might enable 'sick' people to see a cause on which they could focus their anger.
I'm unsure whitewashing the murder of Jo Cox is helpful to a sensible dialogue.
(And those kids were, to a boy, great lads. Oddly I don't think there were any girls.)
They're also useful when I'm out on a long-distance walk.
25 years ago I had a mate who worked at a fast-food outlet in Greenwich (I cannot remember if it was a BG of KFC). He said they made their money off the same families coming in three or four times a week for meals after school or work. That was quite a shocking thing to hear.
Mr. Royale, I think the last time I visited McDonalds was late at night, after a hospital visit. The saltiness was astounding. On the plus side, it was actually open (one of the few places that was).
Mr. Jessop, nice article. Although you could replace 'fold, stick, or twist' with 'shoot themselves in the left foot, the right foot, or the underpants' based on recent tactical brilliance.
Most Remain voters I know were disappointed with the result, but few think it should be re-run. Those that do generally favour a re-run don't give a monkey's about democracy, they just want their side to win.
I occasionally ask what a re-run referendum with a narrow majority for one side would achieve. The answer is more bitterness, whatever the result.
Parliament agreed to ask the people for a verdict. When they received it, they agreed to implement it. Saying now … Parliament is split on the way forward so we must ask the people again .. makes no sense. Unless you mean ... We didn't like the answer, try again.
Too much salt, fat and sugar though. The fast food culture is killing us.
I think a lesser charge is true, that nationalist populism tends to coarsen debate - the political sphere nowdays in Britain and the US is rougher than it used to be, and I'm wuite sure that Trump and to some extent the wilder fringes of Leave have contributed to normalising that.
I like how some of their advertising in recent years open acknowledges that people think their food is garbage, when is think they'd want to ignore that.
You’re sure it was after the hospital visit?
But leaking threats of doing it for months and outright stating they had it almost had the numbers on the past few days and then blaming spin for mockery at not managing it? That's pretty shameless.
I don't doubt they'll get there and they will then pretend that vindicates them as if it erases the spinning they did which was incorrect, but that won't make them magically not look silly .
2. NI NI NI NI who'd a thunk it.
3. Any London PB-ers should try to go and see Soldier On at the Other Palace Theatre. Very good play conceived and performed by ex-servicemen. They even feature a transgender RAF pilot which I'm sure @Dura_Ace will be able to relate to.
"Every 5 years or so we have the opportunity to overturn the result of the previous General Election. Is that undemocratic?"
Every five minutes, the Labour Party demand a General Election, does anyone take any notice?
People are cynical about politicians, and rightly so. Is it any wonder?
Brexit isn't a problem. If the EU is attempting to become a European USA, Brexit Britain would be a European Canada. Corbyn's Britain would be a European Venezuela.
Humph: But the CBI speak for business
Lilley: No they don't
Humph: So why are businesses stockpiling
Lilley: They aren't and they shouldn't
Humph: But the borders would block up
Lilley: No they won't
What an utter moron. A pity that "A Brain" wasn't on his little list of old
How could this happen in a closely watched and analysed PLC equivalent?
That sounds symptomatic of a poorly functioning gall bladder.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIsSbtQ3hug
There is a problem if people vote for something which on closer inspection proves to be almost impossible without great damage - California's abolition of property tax is an example. I think i's reasonable to try to make it work and if hideous problems emerge to go back and say "The policy has proved to have these consequences that you couldn't have foreseen - would you still like us to do it?" Arguably, Leave is turning out to be in that category. If people then voted Leave a second time, I'd feel we needed to do it, regardless of the consequences.
fascism noun
fas·cism | \ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi- \
Definition of fascism
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
It’s a centralised autocratic government (etc) which uses “nation and often race” as a tool to achieve their political ends
I don’t see facism as a extreme form of nationalism - it’s more just a different form of collectivism
That a small group of fanatics have been able to hijack politics, injecting poison and lies- yes Nigel "reach for my shotgun" Farage and Dominic "misleading" Cummings, I'm talking about you- is deeply regrettable. The media who create an equivalence between true and false in the interests of "balance" are at least as guilty as politicians themselves. The BBC prefers the "entertainment" of a political cock fight to the "informing" and "educating" part of their mandate, and that should give us considerable pause.
The victors in the referendum would still get their way under the terms of Mrs. Mays deal: the UK would leave the EU. However Brexit cannot be on the extreme terms put forward by the extremists. The closeness of the original result and constant polling since suggests that "the will of the people", in as far as we can tell seems pretty OK with a variety of halfway houses, but the insistence of the extremists to make no compromise and yet not put forward any coherent alternative of their own makes people like me more determined to resist any extreme Brexit and to go for a second referendum to validate that. I can reluctantly accept the deal on offer, in the hope we may limit the damage, and -yes- one day rejoin, since I think that is the best way for the future of the UK. If that deal is rejected then I will fight tooth and nail to get a second referendum and I expect that the voters would reject any Brexit then on offer.
Support for Brexit is collapsing because of the antics of the extremists, and unless a new willingness to compromise emerges from the Brexit camp, I think Remainers are totally justified in calling out the outrageous statements coming from the other camp: "you won, get over it". A fanatic is one who won't change their mind and won't change the subject, and the failure of Johnson, Davies, Raab et al is not the fault of Remainers, it is their own miscalculations that have discredited the Brexit process.
Mrs. May's plan is the only Brexit on offer, and if the Brexiteers can not accept compromise, we are totally entitled to scuttle the whole process- it is not in Britain's interest to leave anyway and the No-deal scenario is way beyond irresponsible.
In the context of the (very welcome) reduction in the level of violence in the Six Counties, SF (no not that SF. Or that one) is registering the continued struggle in the only meaningful way, namely, to boycott the administration which recognises Northern Ireland as a constituent part. If they take their seats they are acquiescing in that recognition.