I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
I don't know why you or the likes of Casino on the other side get so worked up by this. You're literally jizzing yer pants every time you mention it .People I know on either side have barely mentioned it, apart from a good friend who posts pro EU stuff on Faceache a lot. If there is a second referendum, I reckon remain will edge it by not much more than leave edged it last time. The country is split down the middle, always has been, always will be.
If people are forced into a straight choice between Revoke A50/ No Deal, Survation suggests the result would be 51/49, which I think is plausible.
I am still struggling to understand why Theresa May (or the Cabinet, since they now seem to be in control) don;t take the obvious way out and put the Deal to a HoC vote subject to a confirmatory referendum (Deal versus Revoke). ...
Because half the Tory party wouldn't stand for it?
We keep hearing this. But the ERG have nowhere else to go. They sit in safe seats parasitically feeding off their Tory host; they aren't going to jump ship any time soon.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
I don't know why you or the likes of Casino on the other side get so worked up by this. You're literally jizzing yer pants every time you mention it .People I know on either side have barely mentioned it, apart from a good friend who posts pro EU stuff on Faceache a lot. If there is a second referendum, I reckon remain will edge it by not much more than leave edged it last time. The country is split down the middle, always has been, always will be.
If people are forced into a straight choice between Revoke A50/ No Deal, Survation suggests the result would be 51/49, which I think is plausible.
I am still struggling to understand why Theresa May (or the Cabinet, since they now seem to be in control) don;t take the obvious way out and put the Deal to a HoC vote subject to a confirmatory referendum (Deal versus Revoke).
That would surely be worth a try. Bercow would accept it. Labour would find it difficult (not impossible) to whip against but many Labour MPs would abstain or vote for it anyway imho.
Although it wouldn't be my desired outcome, I suspect Deal would win that referendum.
Why should Remain get two chances? The decision to leave was in 2016.
Its an important and critical decision, not some sort of game or sporting contest.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
I don't know why you or the likes of Casino on the other side get so worked up by this. You're literally jizzing yer pants every time you mention it .People I know on either side have barely mentioned it, apart from a good friend who posts pro EU stuff on Faceache a lot. If there is a second referendum, I reckon remain will edge it by not much more than leave edged it last time. The country is split down the middle, always has been, always will be.
If people are forced into a straight choice between Revoke A50/ No Deal, Survation suggests the result would be 51/49, which I think is plausible.
I am still struggling to understand why Theresa May (or the Cabinet, since they now seem to be in control) don;t take the obvious way out and put the Deal to a HoC vote subject to a confirmatory referendum (Deal versus Revoke).
That would surely be worth a try. Bercow would accept it. Labour would find it difficult (not impossible) to whip against but many Labour MPs would abstain or vote for it anyway imho.
Although it wouldn't be my desired outcome, I suspect Deal would win that referendum.
Hope you had a great cruise. Your suggestion is proposed for this week
Thanks Big_G Very nice cruise - we needed it too!
Crossed the Biscay southbound in the tail of Storm Gareth which was interesting but we found the ship very stable considering the seas. I certainly felt for the passengers and crew on the Viking Sky when I saw the footage of that a few hours ago.
Re my susgestion - is it a tabled amendment do you know?
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
I don't know why you or the likes of Casino on the other side get so worked up by this. You're literally jizzing yer pants every time you mention it .People I know on either side have barely mentioned it, apart from a good friend who posts pro EU stuff on Faceache a lot. If there is a second referendum, I reckon remain will edge it by not much more than leave edged it last time. The country is split down the middle, always has been, always will be.
If people are forced into a straight choice between Revoke A50/ No Deal, Survation suggests the result would be 51/49, which I think is plausible.
I am still struggling to understand why Theresa May (or the Cabinet, since they now seem to be in control) don;t take the obvious way out and put the Deal to a HoC vote subject to a confirmatory referendum (Deal versus Revoke).
That would surely be worth a try. Bercow would accept it. Labour would find it difficult (not impossible) to whip against but many Labour MPs would abstain or vote for it anyway imho.
Although it wouldn't be my desired outcome, I suspect Deal would win that referendum.
Why should Remain get two chances? The decision to leave was in 2016.
Rather than buying dollars, viewcode might be better off buying US stocks/global tracker fund.
The stocks may appreciate in value, pay dividends and he/she can probably get some kind of tax relief e.g. SIPP/ISA.
Viewcode's replacement bet is also a likely loser. At just over $1.32 there is a lot of bad news already priced in. If Brexit gets canned or significantly delayed, or if Parliament votes for a softer exit, there's a significant upside opportunity. I doubt there's more than a few cents' opportunity on the downside if we start to move toward no deal.
Tbh, I think it's very possible that he/she has made the same mistake again, in terms of failing to buy insurance which matches the risk. The GBP/USD relationship has a lot of factors, of which Brexit is only one.
But I disagree in that I think the market still reckons No Deal is unlikely. It is 4.4 on betfair to happen in 2019. There must be some possibility of No Deal in 2020/later, but that would seem much less likely than No Deal this year. So overall the market is pricing No Deal at something like 25-30% probability... so not at all fully priced in.
The betting and currency markets aren't perfectly aligned, however. Since MV2 went down, the betting market moved significantly back toward no deal (having got down to negligible probability) whereas the pound only dipped slightly.
Taking a longer view it is hard to see that you wont make money buying £s for $1.30.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
If I were to guess I'd put the number of fake signatures somewhere in the hundred thousand regime, given the government themselves admit they don't even check for people using duplicate accounts from the big email providers (e.g., Microsoft, Google).
Probably fair. The percentage sign up from some of the university seats is remarkable, and there must be students well able to get round the checks on the site.
Nevertheless the inexorably steady round-the-clock (slower at night) rise in the number of signatures, the entirely credible distribution of postcodes, and the number of people prepared to spend time and money pitching up in central London, suggests the total isn't unrealistic. Surely almost everyone who attended yesterday had signed, and they only need one or two friends or family members to have signed also to justify the total.
You're even allowed to sign from Dubai, if you like...
No doubt there are passionate supporters on both sides. Doesn’t mean a majority share either of their opinions.
The funniest one was yesterday someone on Twitter was making a big deal out of the fact that there was a signature from Kyrgyzstan proved the whole thing is fraudulent, then the Brit who was working out there came on to claim ownership of that signature.
If you were going to play games with it, you wouldn't make it so obvious.
Mr. Pointer, disagree on both counts. I suspect tens or hundreds of thousands of signatures will be fraudulent. That doesn't mean it's invalid.
It also doesn't mean a petition matters more than a vote.
I suspect 5m signatures is a large enough number to influence more than a few MPs. It's now easily the largest parliament petition, I believe. Can't remember the next biggest...
Next biggest was also Brexit related.
At just over 4 million
'twas the petition started by a Leaver, BEFORE the 2016 vote, calling for a second referendum, that after 2016 became suddenly popular with Remainers.
Ahahah.
Mind you wasn't a second referendum first suggested by several Leavers before the 2016 vote too?
I have to admit it the whole Brexit project has been a wonderfully run exercise in self-destruction by the Brexiteers. Now they are destroying the project itself.
Maybe Vladimir has decided it's served its purpose?
One Mr N. Farage floated the idea on national television, as I recall.
Well let's hope he took time off from his long-distance walk to sign it then!
The problem I have with a second referendum is that it should have been set out prior to the previous vote. If it had I would have voted Leave not Remain, as I would have been able to review before reconfirming.
A lot more people would have voted Leave, in round 1, if they knew that it was subject to review.
The only way to test whether shenanigans are involved in this petition is to create a petition against bots and then bot it to h*ll, just to see what happens.
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse Act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
Got to be gutting when you turn up to a San Marino match and they concede in the first 5 minutes. Isn't the whole point for them to cling on to 0-0 for as long as possible, while the opponents become slowly more nervous of messing up?
Quite something that you can go 1-0 down and be more than 500/1 on Betfair!
The only way to test whether shenanigans are involved in this petition is to create a petition against bots and then bot it to h*ll, just to see what happens.
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
I agree there will be an amount of people using multiple email addresses. Hard to see what else could be done to prevent fraud though. (Require your NI number? Introduce a national ID?)
The only way to test whether shenanigans are involved in this petition is to create a petition against bots and then bot it to h*ll, just to see what happens.
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse Act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
As I recall the first person to challenge the nighttime signup rate made his point in a post to PB at round 4am UK time.
Casino_Royale said: 'What, like post her election in 1975?
What you forget is that she was a skilled politician. Very skilled.
She only lost it post GE1987. '
I would not accept that Thatcher was a particularly effective Opposition Leader. As PM in a Hung Parliament she would not have been able to obtain concensus from other parties - bar the Unionists. Beyond that she would have faced serious dissent from the 'Wets' and Heathites within the Tory ranks.
The last time a government fell thanks to a vote of confidence/no confidence was when Mrs Thatcher worked skilfully with other opposition parties to bring down the government.
Blair never managed it, Corbyn hasn't, yet.
To criticise Blair for not winning a VoNC between 94 and 97 is in IMO very unfair. For a start the Conservatives started in 1992 with an absolute majority of 25 and and extra 10 or so unionists to act as a buffer. Although there were two or three VoNCs in this period, they were all linkte to other votes by Major as a means of forcing the euroseptic Tories into in line. TB never seriosly went for this strategy.
Instead he and his shadow cabinet concentrated on driving the news agenda so that in the last year New Labour really was the government in waiting. The news and the political interviews were often focussed on what New Labour will do not what the Major government should not be doing. I feel most people now remember how rudderless the second Major government was, but have forgotten how much the sucessful shadow cabinet was. The current LOTO and shadow cabinet is absolutely hopeless in this respect.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
If I were to guess I'd put the number of fake signatures somewhere in the hundred thousand regime, given the government themselves admit they don't even check for people using duplicate accounts from the big email providers (e.g., Microsoft, Google).
Probably fair. The percentage sign up from some of the university seats is remarkable, and there must be students well able to get round the checks on the site.
Nevertheless the inexorably steady round-the-clock (slower at night) rise in the number of signatures, the entirely credible distribution of postcodes, and the number of people prepared to spend time and money pitching up in central London, suggests the total isn't unrealistic. Surely almost everyone who attended yesterday had signed, and they only need one or two friends or family members to have signed also to justify the total.
You're even allowed to sign from Dubai, if you like...
No doubt there are passionate supporters on both sides. Doesn’t mean a majority share either of their opinions.
The funniest one was yesterday someone on Twitter was making a big deal out of the fact that there was a signature from Kyrgyzstan proved the whole thing is fraudulent, then the Brit who was working out there came on to claim ownership of that signature.
If you were going to play games with it, you wouldn't make it so obvious.
It would take some dedication to spread fake signatures in significant numbers across every council area by full postcode in a pattern close to the Remain referendum result.
The targeted advertising is working well today - I am getting an offer for Indian home loans from 8.8% from a company based in Mumbai. Restores my confidence in the inability of Google et al to control everything.
Some deluded Leavers in the Tory party still think they can get the UK out by next Friday .
I will very much enjoy the odious pathetic Bone not having his party on the 29th .
Yes. Just been reading the BTL Express comments (someone has to). People are still convinced we are leaving on Friday BY LAW!!!!! Lots and lots of them... They are going to be disabused of that notion.
* US stocks/global tracker fund via an ISA might be better * Buying dollars at £1=$1.32 is not an unambiguous good, and may even be bad * Betfair Exchange has a good bet on "not in 2019" which may be better
I have to run to catch a train so I cannot respond in more detail now but will do so later tonight. If you or anybody else wishes to make suggestions, please do so.
The cunning plan of Revoke versus the May deal has an obvious flaw. Those leavers who prefer a softer Brexit or a harder Brexit have no obvious choice, but that is the aim isn't it? Whereas if it were a straight re-run, they could all vote Leave.
I know this is bleeding obvious, verging on childish, but I'll join in the fun and propose an alternative. How about the MPs keeping their word? Sorry, now I'm being silly, but you started it.
Whatever your imaginative options, many MPs lied about honouring the referendum result. How will they explain that to Leavers during canvassing next time? At least the LDs were openly refusing to honour the vote.
If it comes to another referendum, I won't bother voting. There's absolutely no point. At least, I know for sure now.
Got to be gutting when you turn up to a San Marino match and they concede in the first 5 minutes. Isn't the whole point for them to cling on to 0-0 for as long as possible, while the opponents become slowly more nervous of messing up?
Quite something that you can go 1-0 down and be more than 500/1 on Betfair!
Wasn't it against San Marino, where England needed to win at least 7-0 to qualify for the World Cup (I'm guessing it was for USA 94) and after a couple of minutes England had conceeded a goal?
Some deluded Leavers in the Tory party still think they can get the UK out by next Friday .
I will very much enjoy the odious pathetic Bone not having his party on the 29th .
Yes. Just been reading the BTL Express comments (someone has to). People are still convinced we are leaving on Friday BY LAW!!!!! Lots and lots of them... They are going to be disabused of that notion.
Why don't we just let them think we've left on Saturday? Maybe they will STFU and go away.
Edit: I will be looking out for the first person to say "See I told you leaving the EU would be painless" on Saturday.
The only way to test whether shenanigans are involved in this petition is to create a petition against bots and then bot it to h*ll, just to see what happens.
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
I agree there will be an amount of people using multiple email addresses. Hard to see what else could be done to prevent fraud though. (Require your NI number? Introduce a national ID?)
Yes, it does look to have been fairly flat last night. The conspiracy theorist in me might suggest that the bot algorithms have been trained...
I'm sure Theresa May would like the idea of a national ID card, although an actual card seems to have disappeared from the agenda for the moment. Perhaps their database is now good enough without a physical card being needed.
Casino_Royale said: 'What, like post her election in 1975?
What you forget is that she was a skilled politician. Very skilled.
She only lost it post GE1987. '
I would not accept that Thatcher was a particularly effective Opposition Leader. As PM in a Hung Parliament she would not have been able to obtain concensus from other parties - bar the Unionists. Beyond that she would have faced serious dissent from the 'Wets' and Heathites within the Tory ranks.
The last time a government fell thanks to a vote of confidence/no confidence was when Mrs Thatcher worked skilfully with other opposition parties to bring down the government.
Blair never managed it, Corbyn hasn't, yet.
Any Con MP who failed to support the government in a VONC would be out on their ear immediately and would never stand again as a Conservative candidate for anything. It would be swift and permanent.
Mr. Pointer, disagree on both counts. I suspect tens or hundreds of thousands of signatures will be fraudulent. That doesn't mean it's invalid.
It also doesn't mean a petition matters more than a vote.
I suspect 5m signatures is a large enough number to influence more than a few MPs. It's now easily the largest parliament petition, I believe. Can't remember the next biggest...
Next biggest was also Brexit related.
At just over 4 million
'twas the petition started by a Leaver, BEFORE the 2016 vote, calling for a second referendum, that after 2016 became suddenly popular with Remainers.
Ahahah.
Mind you wasn't a second referendum first suggested by several Leavers before the 2016 vote too?
I have to admit it the whole Brexit project has been a wonderfully run exercise in self-destruction by the Brexiteers. Now they are destroying the project itself.
Maybe Vladimir has decided it's served its purpose?
One Mr N. Farage floated the idea on national television, as I recall.
Well let's hope he took time off from his long-distance walk to sign it then!
The problem I have with a second referendum is that it should have been set out prior to the previous vote. If it had I would have voted Leave not Remain, as I would have been able to review before reconfirming.
A lot more people would have voted Leave, in round 1, if they knew that it was subject to review.
And your evidence for that is?....
It would be a free hit, a "send them a message" vote.
Wish Mike would stop using that picture. It may have been mildly amusing at first but it isn't nice to mock the grammatical errors of the less well-educated, even if they are Kippers.
Time to bin it?
It was my choice, I chose it solely to show that it turns out Brexit doesn't mean Brexit.
Thanks TSE. Still don't like it though. Smacks of sneering?
I can imagine it really upsets JRM. Which is justifucation enough to keep using it.
I imagine JRM is perfectly happy with it. People who don't understand basic grammar are more likely to know their place.
Wish Mike would stop using that picture. It may have been mildly amusing at first but it isn't nice to mock the grammatical errors of the less well-educated, even if they are Kippers.
Time to bin it?
It was my choice, I chose it solely to show that it turns out Brexit doesn't mean Brexit.
Thanks TSE. Still don't like it though. Smacks of sneering?
It isn't meant to be sneering.
However I shall retire the use of this picture unless the thread writer specifies it.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
I don't know why you or the likes of Casino on the other side get so worked up
If people are forced into a straight choice between Revoke A50/ No Deal, Survation suggests the result would be 51/49, which I think is plausible.
I am still struggling to understand why Theresa May (or the Cabinet, since they now seem to be in control) don;t take the obvious way out and put the Deal to a HoC vote subject to a confirmatory referendum (Deal versus Revoke).
That would surely be worth a try. Bercow would accept it. Labour would find it difficult (not impossible) to whip against but many Labour MPs would abstain or vote for it anyway imho.
Although it wouldn't be my desired outcome, I suspect Deal would win that referendum.
Hope you had a great cruise. Your suggestion is proposed for this week
Thanks Big_G Very nice cruise - we needed it too!
Crossed the Biscay southbound in the tail of Storm Gareth which was interesting but we found the ship very stable considering the seas. I certainly felt for the passengers and crew on the Viking Sky when I saw the footage of that a few hours ago.
Re my susgestion - is it a tabled amendment do you know?
I have been on cruise ships in the North Sea, Atlantic and Antartica in seas as bad and many passengers were very scared. The main problem with these high seas and wind at storm force is launching the lifeboats which becomes impossible. Of course we did not lose our engines which is very serious as the skipper cannot position the ship into the seas, risking going broadside to the waves and capsizing
As far as I know all options are going to be put into the indicative vote
Wish Mike would stop using that picture. It may have been mildly amusing at first but it isn't nice to mock the grammatical errors of the less well-educated, even if they are Kippers.
Time to bin it?
It was my choice, I chose it solely to show that it turns out Brexit doesn't mean Brexit.
Thanks TSE. Still don't like it though. Smacks of sneering?
I can imagine it really upsets JRM. Which is justifucation enough to keep using it.
I imagine JRM is perfectly happy with it. People who don't understand basic grammar are more likely to know their place.
The only way to test whether shenanigans are involved in this petition is to create a petition against bots and then bot it to h*ll, just to see what happens.
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
I agree there will be an amount of people using multiple email addresses. Hard to see what else could be done to prevent fraud though. (Require your NI number? Introduce a national ID?)
Yes, it does look to have been fairly flat last night. The conspiracy theorist in me might suggest that the bot algorithms have been trained...
I'm sure Theresa May would like the idea of a national ID card, although an actual card seems to have disappeared from the agenda for the moment. Perhaps their database is now good enough without a physical card being needed.
It’s quite clear that mass free movement of labour is incompatible with the laissez faire approach we have historically had to the registration of people and ID cards. We were totally and utterly unprepared for the changes that came about due to the expansion to the east and the need for a multitude of reasons to have an adequate monitoring (and deportation process) to cope with the ‘challenges’ it brought.
Mr. Pointer, disagree on both counts. I suspect tens or hundreds of thousands of signatures will be fraudulent. That doesn't mean it's invalid.
It also doesn't mean a petition matters more than a vote.
I suspect 5m signatures is a large enough number to influence more than a few MPs. It's now easily the largest parliament petition, I believe. Can't remember the next biggest...
Next biggest was also Brexit related.
At just over 4 million
'twas the petition started by a Leaver, BEFORE the 2016 vote, calling for a second referendum, that after 2016 became suddenly popular with Remainers.
Ahahah.
Mind you wasn't a second referendum first suggested by several Leavers before the 2016 vote too?
I have to admit it the whole Brexit project has been a wonderfully run exercise in self-destruction by the Brexiteers. Now they are destroying the project itself.
Maybe Vladimir has decided it's served its purpose?
One Mr N. Farage floated the idea on national television, as I recall.
Well let's hope he took time off from his long-distance walk to sign it then!
The problem I have with a second referendum is that it should have been set out prior to the previous vote. If it had I would have voted Leave not Remain, as I would have been able to review before reconfirming.
A lot more people would have voted Leave, in round 1, if they knew that it was subject to review.
And your evidence for that is?....
It would be a free hit, a "send them a message" vote.
I think you'll find that's an opinion not evidence.
One of my colleagues confessed he had voted Leave as a protest safe in the knowledge that it wouldn't count because his constituency was overwhelmingly Remain. He was genuinely shocked and surprised when I told him his constituency was irrelevant.
Some deluded Leavers in the Tory party still think they can get the UK out by next Friday .
I will very much enjoy the odious pathetic Bone not having his party on the 29th .
Yes. Just been reading the BTL Express comments (someone has to). People are still convinced we are leaving on Friday BY LAW!!!!! Lots and lots of them... They are going to be disabused of that notion.
Is that not the truth about this chaos. So many do not have a clue, starting with ERG
The cunning plan of Revoke versus the May deal has an obvious flaw. Those leavers who prefer a softer Brexit or a harder Brexit have no obvious choice, but that is the aim isn't it? Whereas if it were a straight re-run, they could all vote Leave.
I know this is bleeding obvious, verging on childish, but I'll join in the fun and propose an alternative. How about the MPs keeping their word? Sorry, now I'm being silly, but you started it.
Whatever your imaginative options, many MPs lied about honouring the referendum result. How will they explain that to Leavers during canvassing next time? At least the LDs were openly refusing to honour the vote.
If it comes to another referendum, I won't bother voting. There's absolutely no point. At least, I know for sure now.
Labour would presumably say that it assumed Brexit would be negotiated sensibly but when it wasn't they were not obliged to continue their support. Yes, it's a bit weak, and dishonest, but it would probably just about pass muster.
There is a counter petition - it's currently under 10% of the Revoke one.
And it runs out in less than a month; the Revoke petition has 5 months to run yet.
How 5 months. If we do not agree by the 12th April to hold EU elections we are out of the EU on the 22nd May. Revoke and referendum dies if their are no EU elections in the UK
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
I don't know why you or the likes of Casino on the other side get so worked up by this. You're literally jizzing yer pants every time you mention it .People I know on either side have barely mentioned it, apart from a good friend who posts pro EU stuff on Faceache a lot. If there is a second referendum, I reckon remain will edge it by not much more than leave edged it last time. The country is split down the middle, always has been, always will be.
If people are forced into a straight choice between Revoke A50/ No Deal, Survation suggests the result would be 51/49, which I think is plausible.
I am still struggling to understand why Theresa May (or the Cabinet, since they now seem to be in control) don;t take the obvious way out and put the Deal to a HoC vote subject to a confirmatory referendum (Deal versus Revoke).
That would surely be worth a try. Bercow would accept it. Labour would find it difficult (not impossible) to whip against but many Labour MPs would abstain or vote for it anyway imho.
Although it wouldn't be my desired outcome, I suspect Deal would win that referendum.
Why should Remain get two chances? The decision to leave was in 2016.
Its an important and critical decision, not some sort of game or sporting contest.
Indeed. It is normal with very big decisions, after the first approval, to scope the technical details, exact costs, possible pitfalls and legal implications. A that stage there is another decision made whether to really go for it based on the full information.
Casino_Royale said: 'What, like post her election in 1975?
What you forget is that she was a skilled politician. Very skilled.
She only lost it post GE1987. '
I would not accept that Thatcher was a particularly effective Opposition Leader. As PM in a Hung Parliament she would not have been able to obtain concensus from other parties - bar the Unionists. Beyond that she would have faced serious dissent from the 'Wets' and Heathites within the Tory ranks.
The last time a government fell thanks to a vote of confidence/no confidence was when Mrs Thatcher worked skilfully with other opposition parties to bring down the government.
Blair never managed it, Corbyn hasn't, yet.
Any Con MP who failed to support the government in a VONC would be out on their ear immediately and would never stand again as a Conservative candidate for anything. It would be swift and permanent.
I'm sure there could be a few abstentions for wisdom teeth and the like.
Mr. Pointer, disagree on both counts. I suspect tens or hundreds of thousands of signatures will be fraudulent. That doesn't mean it's invalid.
It also doesn't mean a petition matters more than a vote.
I suspect 5m signatures is a large enough number to influence more than a few MPs. It's now easily the largest parliament petition, I believe. Can't remember the next biggest...
Next biggest was also Brexit related.
At just over 4 million
'twas the petition started by a Leaver, BEFORE the 2016 vote, calling for a second referendum, that after 2016 became suddenly popular with Remainers.
Ahahah.
Mind you wasn't a second referendum first suggested by several Leavers before the 2016 vote too?
I have to admit it the whole Brexit project has been a wonderfully run exercise in self-destruction by the Brexiteers. Now they are destroying the project itself.
Maybe Vladimir has decided it's served its purpose?
One Mr N. Farage floated the idea on national television, as I recall.
Well let's hope he took time off from his long-distance walk to sign it then!
The problem I have with a second referendum is that it should have been set out prior to the previous vote. If it had I would have voted Leave not Remain, as I would have been able to review before reconfirming.
A lot more people would have voted Leave, in round 1, if they knew that it was subject to review.
And your evidence for that is?....
It would be a free hit, a "send them a message" vote.
I think you'll find that's an opinion not evidence.
One of my colleagues confessed he had voted Leave as a protest safe in the knowledge that it wouldn't count because his constituency was overwhelmingly Remain. He was genuinely shocked and surprised when I told him his constituency was irrelevant.
And it was counted at a district council level not constituency...
The only way to test whether shenanigans are involved in this petition is to create a petition against bots and then bot it to h*ll, just to see what happens.
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse Act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
You can use the same email address to register at least two signatures. I've done it (albeit on a different petition).
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
I don't know why you or the likes of Casino on the other side get so worked up by this. You're literally jizzing yer pants every time you mention it .People I know on either side have barely mentioned it, apart from a good friend who posts pro EU stuff on Faceache a lot. If there is a second referendum, I reckon remain will edge it by not much more than leave edged it last time. The country is split down the middle, always has been, always will be.
If people are forced into a straight choice between Revoke A50/ No Deal, Survation suggests the result would be 51/49, which I think is plausible.
I am still struggling to understand why Theresa May (or the Cabinet, since they now seem to be in control) don;t take the obvious way out and put the Deal to a HoC vote subject to a confirmatory referendum (Deal versus Revoke).
That would surely be worth a try. Bercow would accept it. Labour would find it difficult (not impossible) to whip against but many Labour MPs would abstain or vote for it anyway imho.
Although it wouldn't be my desired outcome, I suspect Deal would win that referendum.
Why should Remain get two chances? The decision to leave was in 2016.
Its an important and critical decision, not some sort of game or sporting contest.
Indeed. It is normal with very big decisions, after the first approval, to scope the technical details, exact costs, possible pitfalls and legal implications. A that stage there is another decision made whether to really go for it based on the full information.
So, would that apply to (for example) a Corbyn government?
Reading the last thread's criticism of the appalling James O'Brien... I think he personifies everything I dislike in someone, not least his inabilty to admit when he is wrong, a trait he shares with a similarly unlikeable person with a similarly inflated opinion of himself, Owen Jones... How To Be Wrong
The only way to test whether shenanigans are involved in this petition is to create a petition against bots and then bot it to h*ll, just to see what happens.
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse Act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
You can use the same email address to register at least two signatures. I've done it (albeit on a different petition).
I have 3 e mail addreses and my wife has 2 and no doubt I could create many more if I could have wanted to try to influence the petition. But I just could not be bothered
The only way to test whether shenanigans are involved in this petition is to create a petition against bots and then bot it to h*ll, just to see what happens.
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
I agree there will be an amount of people using multiple email addresses. Hard to see what else could be done to prevent fraud though. (Require your NI number? Introduce a national ID?)
Yes, it does look to have been fairly flat last night. The conspiracy theorist in me might suggest that the bot algorithms have been trained...
I'm sure Theresa May would like the idea of a national ID card, although an actual card seems to have disappeared from the agenda for the moment. Perhaps their database is now good enough without a physical card being needed.
It’s quite clear that mass free movement of labour is incompatible with the laissez faire approach we have historically had to the registration of people and ID cards. We were totally and utterly unprepared for the changes that came about due to the expansion to the east and the need for a multitude of reasons to have an adequate monitoring (and deportation process) to cope with the ‘challenges’ it brought.
The only way to test whether shenanigans are involved in this petition is to create a petition against bots and then bot it to h*ll, just to see what happens.
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse Act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
You can use the same email address to register at least two signatures. I've done it (albeit on a different petition).
It seems to be the case that duplicates are periodically stripped from the count. I suspect that is an easier way to manage the process, requiring less computer power and improving response times, than searching to email database for every new request... especially for petitions of 5m or more.
I am only speculating, if someone knows better it would interesting to hear from them.
Got to be gutting when you turn up to a San Marino match and they concede in the first 5 minutes. Isn't the whole point for them to cling on to 0-0 for as long as possible, while the opponents become slowly more nervous of messing up?
Quite something that you can go 1-0 down and be more than 500/1 on Betfair!
Wasn't it against San Marino, where England needed to win at least 7-0 to qualify for the World Cup (I'm guessing it was for USA 94) and after a couple of minutes England had conceeded a goal?
No. To my memory that has never happened. There was a match where we went one-nil down but there wasn’t that riding on it. I believe we won 7-1 in the end.
The only way to test whether shenanigans are involved in this petition is to create a petition against bots and then bot it to h*ll, just to see what happens.
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse Act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
You can use the same email address to register at least two signatures. I've done it (albeit on a different petition).
It seems to be the case that duplicates are periodically stripped from the count. I suspect that is an easier way to manage the process, requiring less computer power and improving response times, than searching to email database for every new request... especially for petitions of 5m or more.
I am only speculating, if someone knows better it would interesting to hear from them.
So how would a couple, using one family email address, register both their signatures?
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
I don't know why you or the likes of Casino on the other side get so worked up by this. You're literally jizzing yer pants every time you mention it .People I know on either side have barely mentioned it, apart from a good friend who posts pro EU stuff on Faceache a lot. If there is a second referendum, I reckon remain will edge it by not much more than leave edged it last time. The country is split down the middle, always has been, always will be.
If people are forced into a straight choice between Revoke A50/ No Deal, Survation suggests the result would be 51/49, which I think is plausible.
I am still struggling to understand why Theresa May (or the Cabinet, since they now seem to be in control) don;t take the obvious way out and put the Deal to a HoC vote subject to a confirmatory referendum (Deal versus Revoke).
That would surely be worth a try. Bercow would accept it. Labour would find it difficult (not impossible) to whip against but many Labour MPs would abstain or vote for it anyway imho.
Although it wouldn't be my desired outcome, I suspect Deal would win that referendum.
Why should Remain get two chances? The decision to leave was in 2016.
Their 'stance' was doubtless adopted for electoral advantage and I suspect they thought it would never be tested. They should of course have opposed Brexit, on the grounds that a) its supporters tended to that view and b) Brexit is stupid, but of course they preferred to be 'smart' electorally.
They can just about wriggle their way round it now, as I indicated, but as you rightly suggest, only the more gullible will be taken in.
Labour's position on this historic matter is hardly more defensible than the Government's.
Mr. Pointer, disagree on both counts. I suspect tens or hundreds of thousands of signatures will be fraudulent. That doesn't mean it's invalid.
It also doesn't mean a petition matters more than a vote.
I suspect 5m signatures is a large enough number to influence more than a few MPs. It's now easily the largest parliament petition, I believe. Can't remember the next biggest...
Next biggest was also Brexit related.
At just over 4 million
'twas the petition started by a Leaver, BEFORE the 2016 vote, calling for a second referendum, that after 2016 became suddenly popular with Remainers.
Ahahah.
Mind you wasn't a second referendum first suggested by several Leavers before the 2016 vote too?
I have to admit it the whole Brexit project has been a wonderfully run exercise in self-destruction by the Brexiteers. Now they are destroying the project itself.
Maybe Vladimir has decided it's served its purpose?
One Mr N. Farage floated the idea on national television, as I recall.
Well let's hope he took time off from his long-distance walk to sign it then!
The problem I have with a second referendum is that it should have been set out prior to the previous vote. If it had I would have voted Leave not Remain, as I would have been able to review before reconfirming.
A lot more people would have voted Leave, in round 1, if they knew that it was subject to review.
And your evidence for that is?....
It would be a free hit, a "send them a message" vote.
I think you'll find that's an opinion not evidence.
One of my colleagues confessed he had voted Leave as a protest safe in the knowledge that it wouldn't count because his constituency was overwhelmingly Remain. He was genuinely shocked and surprised when I told him his constituency was irrelevant.
And it was counted at a district council level not constituency...
I know but I kid you not, he genuinely believe his was going to be a wasted vote à la FPTP.
The only way to test whether shenanigans are involved in this petition is to create a petition against bots and then bot it to h*ll, just to see what happens.
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse Act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
You can use the same email address to register at least two signatures. I've done it (albeit on a different petition).
It seems to be the case that duplicates are periodically stripped from the count. I suspect that is an easier way to manage the process, requiring less computer power and improving response times, than searching to email database for every new request... especially for petitions of 5m or more.
I am only speculating, if someone knows better it would interesting to hear from them.
So how would a couple, using one family email address, register both their signatures?
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
I don't know why you or the likes of Casino on the other side get so worked up by this. You're literally jizzing yer pants every time you mention it .People I know on either side have barely mentioned it, apart from a good friend who posts pro EU stuff on Faceache a lot. If there is a second referendum, I reckon remain will edge it by not much more than leave edged it last time. The country is split down the middle, always has been, always will be.
If people are forced into a straight choice between Revoke A50/ No Deal, Survation suggests the result would be 51/49, which I think is plausible.
I am still struggling to understand why Theresa May (or the Cabinet, since they now seem to be in control) don;t take the obvious way out and put the Deal to a HoC vote subject to a confirmatory referendum (Deal versus Revoke).
That would surely be worth a try. Bercow would accept it. Labour would find it difficult (not impossible) to whip against but many Labour MPs would abstain or vote for it anyway imho.
Although it wouldn't be my desired outcome, I suspect Deal would win that referendum.
Why should Remain get two chances? The decision to leave was in 2016.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
And probably 3 to 5 times that number who would gladly take part in the the demo, but live too far away to take part or have other obligations that they just can't avoid.
Today's papers are strange. Peter Hitchens sounds like a leftie, bemoaning the possible rise of a Donald Trump figure in Britain. On the other hand Dan Hodges is claiming Brexit is going to be betrayed.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
I don't know why you or the likes of Casino on the other side get so worked up by this. You're literally jizzing yer pants every time you mention it .People I know on either side have barely mentioned it, apart from a good friend who posts pro EU stuff on Faceache a lot. If there is a second referendum, I reckon remain will edge it by not much more than leave edged it last time. The country is split down the middle, always has been, always will be.
If people are forced into a straight choice between Revoke A50/ No Deal, Survation suggests the result would be 51/49, which I think is plausible.
I am still struggling to understand why Theresa May (or the Cabinet, since they now seem to be in control) don;t take the obvious way out and put the Deal to a HoC vote subject to a confirmatory referendum (Deal versus Revoke).
That would surely be worth a try. Bercow would accept it. Labour would find it difficult (not impossible) to whip against but many Labour MPs would abstain or vote for it anyway imho.
Although it wouldn't be my desired outcome, I suspect Deal would win that referendum.
Why should Remain get two chances? The decision to leave was in 2016.
Yawn.
So no answer to the valid question then.
To be honest Richard I have spent all day in the pub (and am still here)!
Today's papers are strange. Peter Hitchens sounds like a leftie, bemoaning the possible rise of a Donald Trump figure in Britain. On the other hand Dan Hodges is claiming Brexit is going to be betrayed.
Hitch is just strange full stop. And despite saying years ago we should leave the EU he's always been lukewarm about the whole thing.
Dan is one of those Remainers that's gone to the dark side over the past three years as William would say.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
I don't know why you or the likes of Casino on the other side get so worked up by this. You're literally jizzing yer pants every time you mention it .People I know on either side have barely mentioned it, apart from a good friend who posts pro EU stuff on Faceache a lot. If there is a second referendum, I reckon remain will edge it by not much more than leave edged it last time. The country is split down the middle, always has been, always will be.
If people are forced into a straight choice between Revoke A50/ No Deal, Survation suggests the result would be 51/49, which I think is plausible.
I am still struggling to understand why Theresa May (or the Cabinet, since they now seem to be in control) don;t take the obvious way out and put the Deal to a HoC vote subject to a confirmatory referendum (Deal versus Revoke).
That would surely be worth a try. Bercow would accept it. Labour would find it difficult (not impossible) to whip against but many Labour MPs would abstain or vote for it anyway imho.
Although it wouldn't be my desired outcome, I suspect Deal would win that referendum.
Why should Remain get two chances? The decision to leave was in 2016.
Yawn.
So no answer to the valid question then.
The answer is manifold and been addressed on PB ad nauseam.
Example answers include:
Leave have been unable to agree an approach amongst themselves. Leaving has not been as straightforward as promised; we don't hold all the cards, the EU are not falling over themselves to do a deal. Prominent Leavers proposed a confirmatory referendum. Times change.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
And probably 3 to 5 times that number who would gladly take part in the the demo, but live too far away to take part or have other obligations that they just can't avoid.
There are other factors too. There is a physical limit to the number of people Central London can take. I got as far as Whitehall before I turned back because of the people-jam. Many others were doing the same.
Concerns about violence would have put some off too. I dissuaded my other half and her dog from coming because from past experience I know these things can spin out of control and I didn't want her exposed to the risk. We were sitting targets for any would-be terrorist, but happily it all seems to have passed off without incident.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
And probably 3 to 5 times that number who would gladly take part in the the demo, but live too far away to take part or have other obligations that they just can't avoid.
It's a good point. If there is a further demo I'd hope it is run as a series of parallel demos in major cities across the UK. I doubt London can really cope with much more than a million protesrs on the streets; a protes spread over, say, London, Edinburgh, Cardiff, Belfast, Manchester, Birmingham and Bristol could easily see 2-3 million on the streets.
(Apologies if I've missed your preferred city out!)
Anyway, my daughter has just traced our family to 1765 in Dyserth in North Wales and remarkably his great grandfather, (so many times removed), christian name was Benjamin, just as her son is, and we had no idea at all
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
And probably 3 to 5 times that number who would gladly take part in the the demo, but live too far away to take part or have other obligations that they just can't avoid.
It's a good point. If there is a further demo I'd hope it is run as a series of parallel demos in major cities across the UK. I doubt London can really cope with much more than a million protesrs on the streets; a protes spread over, say, London, Edinburgh, Cardiff, Belfast, Manchester, Birmingham and Bristol could easily see 2-3 million on the streets.
(Apologies if I've missed your preferred city out!)
Wouldn't be very representative though. The big cities were mostly pro-Remain.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
And probably 3 to 5 times that number who would gladly take part in the the demo, but live too far away to take part or have other obligations that they just can't avoid.
There are other factors too. There is a physical limit to the number of people Central London can take. I got as far as Whitehall before I turned back because of the people-jam. Many others were doing the same.
Concerns about violence would have put some off too. I dissuaded my other half and her dog from coming because from past experience I know these things can spin out of control and I didn't want her exposed to the risk. We were sitting targets for any would-be terrorist, but happily it all seems to have passed off without incident.
What would it matter if every single Remain voter from 2016 marched in London as well as signed the petition? I wouldn't see a reason for people who want the referendum vote overturned to get excited about it, nor Leave voters who want it respected to be worried.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
And probably 3 to 5 times that number who would gladly take part in the the demo, but live too far away to take part or have other obligations that they just can't avoid.
It's a good point. If there is a further demo I'd hope it is run as a series of parallel demos in major cities across the UK. I doubt London can really cope with much more than a million protesrs on the streets; a protes spread over, say, London, Edinburgh, Cardiff, Belfast, Manchester, Birmingham and Bristol could easily see 2-3 million on the streets.
(Apologies if I've missed your preferred city out!)
If the vast majority of those marching/signing voted remain anyway, what does it really achieve? Sure, it's a great effort, but really, why? I say this as an enthusiastic FBU marcher. It makes you feel good and is a cracking day out, but I was never under the illusion it meant anything.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
And probably 3 to 5 times that number who would gladly take part in the the demo, but live too far away to take part or have other obligations that they just can't avoid.
There are other factors too. There is a physical limit to the number of people Central London can take. I got as far as Whitehall before I turned back because of the people-jam. Many others were doing the same.
Concerns about violence would have put some off too. I dissuaded my other half and her dog from coming because from past experience I know these things can spin out of control and I didn't want her exposed to the risk. We were sitting targets for any would-be terrorist, but happily it all seems to have passed off without incident.
What would it matter if every single Remain voter from 2016 marched in London as well as signed the petition? I wouldn't see a reason for people who want the referendum vote overturned to get excited about it, nor Leave voters who want it respected to be worried.
Are you Theresa May in disguise? You seem to have her knack for catching the zeitgeist.
If she announced a general election tomorrow could 2nd May still be viable?
And how does that help the decision that has to be taken by the 12th April, just 19 days away
I thought 22nd May was the deadline if a new plan emerged... and further extensions would be possible.
Still trying to catch up so I may be wrong.
Yes 22nd May is the main date... But even that isn't totally definitive.
That's why everyone said on Friday night that the EU had blinked for the first time as they removed the "cliff edge" associated with A50 (something they said they'd never do)
If she announced a general election tomorrow could 2nd May still be viable?
And how does that help the decision that has to be taken by the 12th April, just 19 days away
12th April is not a definitive cut off date like 29th March was supposed to be....
It is without agreeing to taking part in the EU elections in May. That is the reason for the date
I am somewhat surprised how few posters have taken on this essential part of the new date and few have even commented on how the populace would take to agreeing to and participating in the EU campaigns in just three weeks time
There is no real answer to the question, which is valid. Sure, Brexit has been utterly discredited as a project. The vote was won on a false prospectus and the margin of victory was narrow. The execution has been utterly, unbelievably, hopeless. Public opinion has almost certainly shifted against it. Proceeding with Brexit will probably destroy whichever party implements it for a generation, which is why the Tories now look so terrified. But the vote was won, and if you think that is the most important thing then the point is unanswerable. Personally I think the arguments against proceeding with Brexit now narrowly outweigh the powerful democratic case for proceeding, but I am under no illusion about how fucked we are now no matter what we do.
I'm not sure I follow his point. Is he suggesting that physically going to vote for something is more meaningful? If so, I agree with him
His point is that if between one and two million people are prepared to turn up in central London for a demo, it isn't unrealistic to think that two or three times that many are prepared to click and sign an online petition.
And probably 3 to 5 times that number who would gladly take part in the the demo, but live too far away to take part or have other obligations that they just can't avoid.
There are other factors too. There is a physical limit to the number of people Central London can take. I got as far as Whitehall before I turned back because of the people-jam. Many others were doing the same.
Concerns about violence would have put some off too. I dissuaded my other half and her dog from coming because from past experience I know these things can spin out of control and I didn't want her exposed to the risk. We were sitting targets for any would-be terrorist, but happily it all seems to have passed off without incident.
What would it matter if every single Remain voter from 2016 marched in London as well as signed the petition? I wouldn't see a reason for people who want the referendum vote overturned to get excited about it, nor Leave voters who want it respected to be worried.
Are you Theresa May in disguise? You seem to have her knack for catching the zeitgeist.
I'm not. But what is the zeitgeist? People who never wanted to leave, still dont want to. So what? Votes aren't worth more than 1 if you say you'll sulk when you lose
If she announced a general election tomorrow could 2nd May still be viable?
And how does that help the decision that has to be taken by the 12th April, just 19 days away
12th April is not a definitive cut off date like 29th March was supposed to be....
It is without agreeing to taking part in the EU elections in May. That is the reason for the date
I am somewhat surprised how few posters have taken on this essential part of the new date and few have even commented on how the populace would take to agreeing to and participating in the EU campaigns in just three weeks time
Granted the EU elections are a complicating factor...
If she announced a general election tomorrow could 2nd May still be viable?
And how does that help the decision that has to be taken by the 12th April, just 19 days away
I thought 22nd May was the deadline if a new plan emerged... and further extensions would be possible.
Still trying to catch up so I may be wrong.
No. Further extensions require our participation in the EU elections commencing th 12th April otherwise the EU elections would be void. The date was chosen by the EU for this reason. The 22nd May is the new 29th March date should TM deal pass
The only way to test whether shenanigans are involved in this petition is to create a petition against bots and then bot it to h*ll, just to see what happens.
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse Act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
You can use the same email address to register at least two signatures. I've done it (albeit on a different petition).
I have 3 e mail addreses and my wife has 2 and no doubt I could create many more if I could have wanted to try to influence the petition. But I just could not be bothered
I suspect the software used to detect fraudulent activity is more sophisticated than I thought - more akin to the software techniques used by banks to block fraudulent transactions. Not perfect but pretty good at detecting abuse.
Checks could include names, emails, postcodes, IP addresses, timing of signature requests, etc. etc. And specifically, looking at combinations of all of these.
If so it means the HoC Petitions Committee would be unwise to release details of their checking process as that just helps the Russians fraudsters.
Doorstep anecdata after two 3-hour stints this weekend: Brexit is really cutting through as the decisive issue in the utterly unrelated local council elections here in deepest Surrey. Every third voter spontaneously mentions it as influencing their votes, and virtually nobody is talking about local issues. I had three switchers today from the Tories purely on this issue; conversely I lost a lifelong Labour voter who will only vote UKIP/Brexit in future. Overall it's clearly hurting the Tories more, though if they make a convincing Brexit happen they might well pull these people back.
It's a pity as local issues deserve consideration, but as things stand the locals (here, anyway) are going to be a displacement referendum.
If she announced a general election tomorrow could 2nd May still be viable?
And how does that help the decision that has to be taken by the 12th April, just 19 days away
12th April is not a definitive cut off date like 29th March was supposed to be....
It is without agreeing to taking part in the EU elections in May. That is the reason for the date
I am somewhat surprised how few posters have taken on this essential part of the new date and few have even commented on how the populace would take to agreeing to and participating in the EU campaigns in just three weeks time
Granted the EU elections are a complicating factor...
The EU would be barmy to allow us to vote in the elections before we have resolved the next few months. There would be a massive vote for anyone but the establishment parties. Hell, I'll vote for the most batshit crazy candidate I can find. I honestly think the EU must be a bit queasy about us participating.
If she announced a general election tomorrow could 2nd May still be viable?
As I understand it under the FTPA if there is a 2/3 majority in the HOC for an election by Tuesday then May 2 is viable but if the government loses a VONC then there are 2 weeks for an alternative to be formed before the election can be called, which means May 16 is the earliest. But I'd be interested if anyone knows different. I've got tickets for Hamilton on May 9 so I hope I'm right!
Doorstep anecdata after two 3-hour stints this weekend: Brexit is really cutting through as the decisive issue in the utterly unrelated local council elections here in deepest Surrey. Every third voter spontaneously mentions it as influencing their votes, and virtually nobody is talking about local issues. I had three switchers today from the Tories purely on this issue; conversely I lost a lifelong Labour voter who will only vote UKIP/Brexit in future. Overall it's clearly hurting the Tories more, though if they make a convincing Brexit happen they might well pull these people back.
It's a pity as local issues deserve consideration, but as things stand the locals (here, anyway) are going to be a displacement referendum.
I’m up the road in Woking and will be voting Lib Dem due to “local issues.”
If she announced a general election tomorrow could 2nd May still be viable?
And how does that help the decision that has to be taken by the 12th April, just 19 days away
I thought 22nd May was the deadline if a new plan emerged... and further extensions would be possible.
Still trying to catch up so I may be wrong.
Yes 22nd May is the main date... But even that isn't totally definitive.
That's why everyone said on Friday night that the EU had blinked for the first time as they removed the "cliff edge" associated with A50 (something they said they'd never do)
They have not removed the cliff edge. It happens on the 12th April unless we agree to take part in the EU elections and mandated by the HOC or TM deal passes in which case we leave on the 22nd May
If she announced a general election tomorrow could 2nd May still be viable?
And how does that help the decision that has to be taken by the 12th April, just 19 days away
I thought 22nd May was the deadline if a new plan emerged... and further extensions would be possible.
Still trying to catch up so I may be wrong.
Yes 22nd May is the main date... But even that isn't totally definitive.
That's why everyone said on Friday night that the EU had blinked for the first time as they removed the "cliff edge" associated with A50 (something they said they'd never do)
They have not removed the cliff edge. It happens on the 12th April unless we agree to take part in the EU elections and mandated by the HOC or TM deal passes in which case we leave on the 22nd May
But they have moved the cliff edge, which is significant in itself.
If she announced a general election tomorrow could 2nd May still be viable?
And how does that help the decision that has to be taken by the 12th April, just 19 days away
12th April is not a definitive cut off date like 29th March was supposed to be....
It is without agreeing to taking part in the EU elections in May. That is the reason for the date
I am somewhat surprised how few posters have taken on this essential part of the new date and few have even commented on how the populace would take to agreeing to and participating in the EU campaigns in just three weeks time
Granted the EU elections are a complicating factor...
I am afraid they are much more than that and are sliding under the radar of the media who should be explaining it everytime they talk of the new dates. But why should we be surprised, the media and journalists have a lot to answer for in this debacle
If she announced a general election tomorrow could 2nd May still be viable?
And how does that help the decision that has to be taken by the 12th April, just 19 days away
12th April is not a definitive cut off date like 29th March was supposed to be....
It is without agreeing to taking part in the EU elections in May. That is the reason for the date
I am somewhat surprised how few posters have taken on this essential part of the new date and few have even commented on how the populace would take to agreeing to and participating in the EU campaigns in just three weeks time
Granted the EU elections are a complicating factor...
The EU would be barmy to allow us to vote in the elections before we have resolved the next few months. There would be a massive vote for anyone but the establishment parties. Hell, I'll vote for the most batshit crazy candidate I can find. I honestly think the EU must be a bit queasy about us participating.
And for much the same reason, they want us to leave.
Imagine if we do remain. It will be your comment about voting for the most batshit crazy candidate, repeated, ad infinitum. If we end up remaining the UK will be a most recalcitrant member, putting hardline anti EU types into positions of power in Westminster and Brussels. Why on earth would the EU want that?
If she announced a general election tomorrow could 2nd May still be viable?
And how does that help the decision that has to be taken by the 12th April, just 19 days away
I thought 22nd May was the deadline if a new plan emerged... and further extensions would be possible.
Still trying to catch up so I may be wrong.
No. Further extensions require our participation in the EU elections commencing th 12th April otherwise the EU elections would be void. The date was chosen by the EU for this reason. The 22nd May is the new 29th March date should TM deal pass
Yes, well, I think it highly likely now that we will be participating in the EU elections.
Could be interesting if the #PeoplesVote organisation flex their muscles in any UK EU elections; no party won 5 million votes in the last election.
The Tories didn’t get a majority so their manjfesto wasn’t endorsed , the same for Labour .
Individual MPs made individual promises in their campaign literature. Anna Soubry and Dominic Grieve both promised to abide by the result of the referendum. So this is nothing to do with the party manifesto (although they were happy enough to campaign under it) but to do with their personal trustworthiness.
Comments
Crossed the Biscay southbound in the tail of Storm Gareth which was interesting but we found the ship very stable considering the seas. I certainly felt for the passengers and crew on the Viking Sky when I saw the footage of that a few hours ago.
Re my susgestion - is it a tabled amendment do you know?
Taking a longer view it is hard to see that you wont make money buying £s for $1.30.
And your evidence for that is?....
I'd do it but I don't particularly want to meet with the Computer Misuse Act as it might be career limiting. :-)
I suspect that what might be happening is that people are registering their vote two or three times using different emails rather than massive bot abuse, although the number of votes during the night is a little suspicious.
Quite something that you can go 1-0 down and be more than 500/1 on Betfair!
currently LREM ( Macron ) and RN ( Lepen) are neck and neck in the european elections
gilets jaunes not really impacting either party
http://www.lefigaro.fr/elections/europeennes/europeennes-le-duel-entre-lrem-et-rn-se-consolide-dans-l-opinion-20190324
https://odileeds.org/projects/petitions/241584
I agree there will be an amount of people using multiple email addresses. Hard to see what else could be done to prevent fraud though. (Require your NI number? Introduce a national ID?)
Instead he and his shadow cabinet concentrated on driving the news agenda so that in the last year New Labour really was the government in waiting. The news and the political interviews were often focussed on what New Labour will do not what the Major government should not be doing. I feel most people now remember how rudderless the second Major government was, but have forgotten how much the sucessful shadow cabinet was. The current LOTO and shadow cabinet is absolutely hopeless in this respect.
They are going to be disabused of that notion.
I note your points, namely:
* US stocks/global tracker fund via an ISA might be better
* Buying dollars at £1=$1.32 is not an unambiguous good, and may even be bad
* Betfair Exchange has a good bet on "not in 2019" which may be better
I have to run to catch a train so I cannot respond in more detail now but will do so later tonight. If you or anybody else wishes to make suggestions, please do so.
The cunning plan of Revoke versus the May deal has an obvious flaw. Those leavers who prefer a softer Brexit or a harder Brexit have no obvious choice, but that is the aim isn't it? Whereas if it were a straight re-run, they could all vote Leave.
I know this is bleeding obvious, verging on childish, but I'll join in the fun and propose an alternative. How about the MPs keeping their word? Sorry, now I'm being silly, but you started it.
Whatever your imaginative options, many MPs lied about honouring the referendum result. How will they explain that to Leavers during canvassing next time? At least the LDs were openly refusing to honour the vote.
If it comes to another referendum, I won't bother voting. There's absolutely no point. At least, I know for sure now.
Edit: I will be looking out for the first person to say "See I told you leaving the EU would be painless" on Saturday.
I'm sure Theresa May would like the idea of a national ID card, although an actual card seems to have disappeared from the agenda for the moment. Perhaps their database is now good enough without a physical card being needed.
https://twitter.com/lbc/status/1109110453073047553?s=21
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1109848989954920451
As far as I know all options are going to be put into the indicative vote
One of my colleagues confessed he had voted Leave as a protest safe in the knowledge that it wouldn't count because his constituency was overwhelmingly Remain. He was genuinely shocked and surprised when I told him his constituency was irrelevant.
"but it would probably just about pass muster."
Only to those determined to be persuaded.
https://twitter.com/rorymeakin/status/1106746250379055104
https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/1106850006240243714
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/introducing-govuk-verify/introducing-govuk-verify
I am only speculating, if someone knows better it would interesting to hear from them.
They can just about wriggle their way round it now, as I indicated, but as you rightly suggest, only the more gullible will be taken in.
Labour's position on this historic matter is hardly more defensible than the Government's.
The Tories didn’t get a majority so their manjfesto wasn’t endorsed , the same for Labour .
So, I suppose, the answer is no!
Dan is one of those Remainers that's gone to the dark side over the past three years as William would say.
Example answers include:
Leave have been unable to agree an approach amongst themselves.
Leaving has not been as straightforward as promised; we don't hold all the cards, the EU are not falling over themselves to do a deal.
Prominent Leavers proposed a confirmatory referendum.
Times change.
I could go on but no answers will satisfy you.
Concerns about violence would have put some off too. I dissuaded my other half and her dog from coming because from past experience I know these things can spin out of control and I didn't want her exposed to the risk. We were sitting targets for any would-be terrorist, but happily it all seems to have passed off without incident.
(Apologies if I've missed your preferred city out!)
What a strange world we live in
Still trying to catch up so I may be wrong.
That's why everyone said on Friday night that the EU had blinked for the first time as they removed the "cliff edge" associated with A50 (something they said they'd never do)
I am somewhat surprised how few posters have taken on this essential part of the new date and few have even commented on how the populace would take to agreeing to and participating in the EU campaigns in just three weeks time
I'd be bloody terrified.
I suspect the software used to detect fraudulent activity is more sophisticated than I thought - more akin to the software techniques used by banks to block fraudulent transactions. Not perfect but pretty good at detecting abuse.
Checks could include names, emails, postcodes, IP addresses, timing of signature requests, etc. etc. And specifically, looking at combinations of all of these.
If so it means the HoC Petitions Committee would be unwise to release details of their checking process as that just helps the Russians fraudsters.
The hint is here...
https://twitter.com/HoCpetitions/status/1109153741180227584
(feel free to add your own punchlines....)
It's a pity as local issues deserve consideration, but as things stand the locals (here, anyway) are going to be a displacement referendum.
Imagine if we do remain. It will be your comment about voting for the most batshit crazy candidate, repeated, ad infinitum. If we end up remaining the UK will be a most recalcitrant member, putting hardline anti EU types into positions of power in Westminster and Brussels. Why on earth would the EU want that?
Could be interesting if the #PeoplesVote organisation flex their muscles in any UK EU elections; no party won 5 million votes in the last election.