As an aside, the Queens Benh judgment on prorogation that went in favour of the Government last week comprised some very senior judges. If the Supreme Court decides to overturn that bench then the judiciary is as broken as everything else.
They won't do that. If betfair put it up and there was 1.05 offered on the SC disagreeing with the Scottish court I would stick £20 on and I would immediately start planning how to spend my £1 winnings. Probably a Dairy Milk.
It will not be easy for them - since they will be presented with compelling evidence that the PM lied about the reason for suspending democracy - but they will find a way. The alternative of a massive constitutional crisis will be deemed unappealing in the extreme.
And finding that the Scottish courts are incorrect in finding that the PM lied isn’t going to course a bigger problem within our justice system. Sorry I can’t see the Supreme Court disagreeing with the Scottish court given the evidence made available since
Politicians don't do the lie direct nearly as often as people think. Much more often they have more than one motive simultaneously for actions, and emphasise one but not the other in public. If courts intervened on such a basis they would be clogged up. This progation is just such a case to my mind. It is indisputable that this session has been long and a Queen's speech is overdue. Indisputable that most of the time prorogation is effective would be taken up with already planned party conferences. Indisputable that the commons has faffed around for three years. Indisputable that there won't be a new deal to consider until after prorogation ends. And finally indisputable that prorogation at this moment is a piece of opportunistic low politics (which may well deservedly backfire). The SC should consider the case carefully and chuck it out, hoping that hubris and nemesis will perform their traditional roles for them.
Three of your indisputables are eminently disputable. One is demonstrably wrong.
You are mostly correct I'm afraid. All indisputables are eminently disputable. I shall await some contrarian to disagree with both of us.
The one that is demonstrably wrong is the suggestion that the Commons have faffed around for three years. The deal has only been on the table for ten months. Since then the government has repeatedly unsuccessfully tried to strongarm the Commons. All the possible progress has been made by the Commons itself.
The government has faffed around for three years. That, however, is not the Commons’ fault.
There has been polling evidence that women are not as keen on Boris as men, and the row with Carrie a few weeks back will not have helped. With this in mind probably Boris was not over-impressed by the party's new knighthoods for wifebeaters campaign.
My wife cannot stand the man. Neither can my sister. And my mother hates him. I have just one niece and she is none too keen. Thinks he's a dick. So does my son's girlfriend. I also have a couple of close female friends and they reckon he's pretty ghastly.
That's 100% of my close female F&F and it's 100% negative. Boris has no chance with any of them. Neither will he get their votes in the upcoming election.
The latest Yougov has 33% of women voting Tory but only 31% of men, though the LDs have the highest percentage of female voters of the main parties.
Labour and the Brexit Party have more male than female voters
Ps was subjected to listening to a loud and lengthy phone conversation in a coffee shop yesterday. What Boris was called was everything but a gentleman.. Cant recall such vitriol even in the Thatcher years. Ps apart from myself, my wife, daughter and son in law think Johnson is an idiot. Am working on my 4 year old grandson!
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
On behalf of which party ?
I hope for a One Nation Conservative Party that used to exit up until 2016.
Reversing this sort of change, presumably?
"The foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, has lifted a ban on UK embassies and high commissions flying the rainbow flag during gay pride events. In one of his first policy shifts since coming to office, Johnson overturned the decision of predecessor, Philip Hammond, who insisted that only the Union flag, the EU’s blue-and-gold flag and the flags of the nations and overseas territories of the United Kingdom could be flown from Foreign Office buildings. The decision on whether and when to raise the gay pride banner will be for individual ambassadors and high commissioners, taking into account local conditions.... While still foreign secretary, Hammond last month rejected a call from the House of Commons foreign affairs committee to drop his opposition to use of the rainbow flag."
Boris is a bigger spender than Cameron and Osborne were just more of a tax cutter than May as well as being more socially liberal than she was too on the whole
'One nation' should mean governing for all parts of the nation (Union), and all social classes.
However, it came to mean "wet" because those who described themselves as such baulked at monetarism in the early 1980s, and were far too ready for the UK to roll over in foreign affairs.
By the way how is saying Corbyn will damage the UK any difference to criticising Brexit? If we are told to ignore 'project fear' on Brexit why not ignore project fear on Corbyn? I suppose it is the Bankers fear their wealth is confisicated by Corbyn. The same Bankers who bankrolled Leave and the Tories as well as TBP. Talking of Farage and Tice: There profession is Bankers!
But third, and most interestingly, Sir Oliver today reveals that he thinks “we need to resolve this issue of Brexit before there is a general election”.
If that cannot be achieved through a deal to leave, then there will have to be a referendum. This is a crucial new development.
The Tory high command have assumed that if they can’t have a general election on their preferred timetable before October 31, they could have one in November or December — and they could still cast it as a “Parliament versus the people” contest. But Sir Oliver is one step ahead of them.
He is confident that there is a majority in Parliament for dealing with Brexit first and having an election after.
So if the Commons doesn’t support a deal — and all the evidence of the last year suggests it won’t — then it will vote to delay an election until 2020, and have a referendum before that.
Whether Mr Johnson is still imprisoned in Downing Street while this happens is a secondary question.
There has been polling evidence that women are not as keen on Boris as men, and the row with Carrie a few weeks back will not have helped. With this in mind probably Boris was not over-impressed by the party's new knighthoods for wifebeaters campaign.
My wife cannot stand the man. Neither can my sister. And my mother hates him. I have just one niece and she is none too keen. Thinks he's a dick. So does my son's girlfriend. I also have a couple of close female friends and they reckon he's pretty ghastly.
That's 100% of my close female F&F and it's 100% negative. Boris has no chance with any of them. Neither will he get their votes in the upcoming election.
The latest Yougov has 33% of women voting Tory but only 31% of men, though the LDs have the highest percentage of female voters of the main parties.
Labour and the Brexit Party have more male than female voters
Ps was subjected to listening to a loud and lengthy phone conversation in a coffee shop yesterday. What Boris was called was everything but a gentleman.. Cant recall such vitriol even in the Thatcher years. Ps apart from myself, my wife, daughter and son in law think Johnson is an idiot. Am working on my 4 year old grandson!
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
I really hate canvassing. Never enjoyed it.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
Mr Meeks, I take your point, but the Commons had the opportunity since 2016 to seek a common mind on the best way of putting the referendum vote into effect and in all that time has failed to find even a majority for any significant affirmative position. It also agreed to trigger Art 50 without any attempt to reach a common mind. But I agree of course that government faffed.
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
I really hate canvassing. Never enjoyed it.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
I do it out of duty.
To be honest what I won't miss is those snapback letterboxes that guillotine your fingers.
Oliver Letwin’s interview must be read by anyone betting for or against a 2019 election.
That'll be me then.
I've said a couple of times over the last few days that I think this Parliament won't ever cobble together enough votes to pass a Deal, except in extremis with an imminent No Deal looming, and that given a further GE would be likely indecisive, a referendum to 're-instruct' the Commons what to do is the only way forward.
So, yes, I expect an extension to June (earliest) to December (latest) next year, with a referendum in the Spring or early Summer. The WA to pass or Brexit to be revoked and, then, a GE2020.
But third, and most interestingly, Sir Oliver today reveals that he thinks “we need to resolve this issue of Brexit before there is a general election”.
If that cannot be achieved through a deal to leave, then there will have to be a referendum. This is a crucial new development.
The Tory high command have assumed that if they can’t have a general election on their preferred timetable before October 31, they could have one in November or December — and they could still cast it as a “Parliament versus the people” contest. But Sir Oliver is one step ahead of them.
He is confident that there is a majority in Parliament for dealing with Brexit first and having an election after.
So if the Commons doesn’t support a deal — and all the evidence of the last year suggests it won’t — then it will vote to delay an election until 2020, and have a referendum before that.
Whether Mr Johnson is still imprisoned in Downing Street while this happens is a secondary question.
Why on earth would cancelling Brexit, either through revocation or another refernedum be a "resolution" ?
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
I really hate canvassing. Never enjoyed it.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
I do it out of duty.
To be honest what I won't miss is those snapback letterboxes that guillotine your fingers.
...And the unspeakable curs who place their letterboxes at the very bottom of the door.
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
I really hate canvassing. Never enjoyed it.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
I do it out of duty.
To be honest what I won't miss is those snapback letterboxes that guillotine your fingers.
In one of my ill-fated local council elections, I had my finger bitten by a dog while pushing one of my obligatory 'candidate points at pothole' newsletters through one of those that closed on me.
Went to A&E and the nurse told me never to do that again.
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
I really hate canvassing. Never enjoyed it.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
I do it out of duty.
+1 I hate it. I don't enjoy the occasional confrontation and from a personal point of view my gut tells me it is none of my business. Fortunately I am considered a bit of a demon deliverer so that gets me out of it most of the time. Sadly age is telling and I'm not as good as I used to be.
By the way how is saying Corbyn will damage the UK any difference to criticising Brexit? If we are told to ignore 'project fear' on Brexit why not ignore project fear on Corbyn? I suppose it is the Bankers fear their wealth is confisicated by Corbyn. The same Bankers who bankrolled Leave and the Tories as well as TBP. Talking of Farage and Tice: There profession is Bankers!
'There' employment before being politicians were commodities trader and property management boss, respectively. Banks almost universally backed remain, the only exception being Arron.
As an aside, the Queens Benh judgment on prorogation that went in favour of the Government last week comprised some very senior judges. If the Supreme Court decides to overturn that bench then the judiciary is as broken as everything else.
They won't do that. If betfair put it up and there was 1.05 offered on the SC disagreeing with the Scottish court I would stick £20 on and I would immediately start planning how to spend my £1 winnings. Probably a Dairy Milk.
It will not be easy for them - since they will be presented with compelling evidence that the PM lied about the reason for suspending democracy - but they will find a way. The alternative of a massive constitutional crisis will be deemed unappealing in the extreme.
And finding that the Scottish courts are incorrect in finding that the PM lied isn’t going to course a bigger problem within our justice system. Sorry I can’t see the Supreme Court disagreeing with the Scottish court given the evidence made available since
Politicians don't do the lie direct nearly as often as people think. Much more often they have more than one motive simultaneously for actions, and emphasise one but not the other in public. If courts intervened on such a basis they would be clogged up. This progation is just such a case to my mind. It is indisputable that this session has been long and a Queen's speech is overdue. Indisputable that most of the time prorogation is effective would be taken up with already planned party conferences. Indisputable that the commons has faffed around for three years. Indisputable that there won't be a new deal to consider until after prorogation ends. And finally indisputable that prorogation at this moment is a piece of opportunistic low politics (which may well deservedly backfire). The SC should consider the case carefully and chuck it out, hoping that hubris and nemesis will perform their traditional roles for them.
Three of your indisputables are eminently disputable. One is demonstrably wrong.
You are mostly correct I'm afraid. All indisputables are eminently disputable. I shall await some contrarian to disagree with both of us.
I'm afraid you're wrong. What you've said is so obviously true that no contrarian could possibly disagree with either of you.
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
But third, and most interestingly, Sir Oliver today reveals that he thinks “we need to resolve this issue of Brexit before there is a general election”.
If that cannot be achieved through a deal to leave, then there will have to be a referendum. This is a crucial new development.
The Tory high command have assumed that if they can’t have a general election on their preferred timetable before October 31, they could have one in November or December — and they could still cast it as a “Parliament versus the people” contest. But Sir Oliver is one step ahead of them.
He is confident that there is a majority in Parliament for dealing with Brexit first and having an election after.
So if the Commons doesn’t support a deal — and all the evidence of the last year suggests it won’t — then it will vote to delay an election until 2020, and have a referendum before that.
Whether Mr Johnson is still imprisoned in Downing Street while this happens is a secondary question.
Why on earth would cancelling Brexit, either through revocation or another refernedum be a "resolution" ?
But third, and most interestingly, Sir Oliver today reveals that he thinks “we need to resolve this issue of Brexit before there is a general election”.
If that cannot be achieved through a deal to leave, then there will have to be a referendum. This is a crucial new development.
The Tory high command have assumed that if they can’t have a general election on their preferred timetable before October 31, they could have one in November or December — and they could still cast it as a “Parliament versus the people” contest. But Sir Oliver is one step ahead of them.
He is confident that there is a majority in Parliament for dealing with Brexit first and having an election after.
So if the Commons doesn’t support a deal — and all the evidence of the last year suggests it won’t — then it will vote to delay an election until 2020, and have a referendum before that.
Whether Mr Johnson is still imprisoned in Downing Street while this happens is a secondary question.
Why on earth would cancelling Brexit, either through revocation or another refernedum be a "resolution" ?
Because it would be over with there won’t be large scale riots in the streets but life can get back to normal and those that worry about irrelevant intrusion by the Eu into our lives can keep on worrying about it
As an aside, the Queens Benh judgment on prorogation that went in favour of the Government last week comprised some very senior judges. If the Supreme Court decides to overturn that bench then the judiciary is as broken as everything else.
They won't do that. If betfair put it up and there was 1.05 offered on the SC disagreeing with the Scottish court I would stick £20 on and I would immediately start planning how to spend my £1 winnings. Probably a Dairy Milk.
It will not be easy for them - since they will be presented with compelling evidence that the PM lied about the reason for suspending democracy - but they will find a way. The alternative of a massive constitutional crisis will be deemed unappealing in the extreme.
And finding that the Scottish courts are incorrect in finding that the PM lied isn’t going to course a bigger problem within our justice system. Sorry I can’t see the Supreme Court disagreeing with the Scottish court given the evidence made available since
Politicians
Three of your indisputables are eminently disputable. One is demonstrably wrong.
You are mostly correct I'm afraid. All indisputables are eminently disputable. I shall await some contrarian to disagree with both of us.
The one that is demonstrably wrong is the suggestion that the Commons have faffed around for three years. The deal has only been on the table for ten months. Since then the government has repeatedly unsuccessfully tried to strongarm the Commons. All the possible progress has been made by the Commons itself.
The government has faffed around for three years. That, however, is not the Commons’ fault.
I don't quite agree. I'd say the Government faffed around for two and half years, then dumped it on the Commons, after a protracted delay and didn't bother to explain it. Then, most of the Commons didn't bother to come to a considered view on it anyway, but instead tried to exploit it for either party political advantage, or for their own preferred Brexit outcome, refusing to touch it like a scorching hot potato, and otherwise just can kicking it down the road.
It's only in the last month or two that I've seen signs of dawning realisation. It remains to be seen whether that's too little, too late.
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
But third, and most interestingly, Sir Oliver today reveals that he thinks “we need to resolve this issue of Brexit before there is a general election”.
If that cannot be achieved through a deal to leave, then there will have to be a referendum. This is a crucial new development.
The Tory high command have assumed that if they can’t have a general election on their preferred timetable before October 31, they could have one in November or December — and they could still cast it as a “Parliament versus the people” contest. But Sir Oliver is one step ahead of them.
He is confident that there is a majority in Parliament for dealing with Brexit first and having an election after.
So if the Commons doesn’t support a deal — and all the evidence of the last year suggests it won’t — then it will vote to delay an election until 2020, and have a referendum before that.
Whether Mr Johnson is still imprisoned in Downing Street while this happens is a secondary question.
Why on earth would cancelling Brexit, either through revocation or another refernedum be a "resolution" ?
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
Indeed. We're going to end up with PM Farage or something far, far worse the way they are going...
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
There has been polling evidence that women are not as keen on Boris as men, and the row with Carrie a few weeks back will not have helped. With this in mind probably Boris was not over-impressed by the party's new knighthoods for wifebeaters campaign.
My wife cannot stand the man. Neither can my sister. And my mother hates him. I have just one niece and she is none too keen. Thinks he's a dick. So does my son's girlfriend. I also have a couple of close female friends and they reckon he's pretty ghastly.
That's 100% of my close female F&F and it's 100% negative. Boris has no chance with any of them. Neither will he get their votes in the upcoming election.
The latest Yougov has 33% of women voting Tory but only 31% of men, though the LDs have the highest percentage of female voters of the main parties.
Labour and the Brexit Party have more male than female voters
Ps was subjected to listening to a loud and lengthy phone conversation in a coffee shop yesterday. What Boris was called was everything but a gentleman.. Cant recall such vitriol even in the Thatcher years. Ps apart from myself, my wife, daughter and son in law think Johnson is an idiot. Am working on my 4 year old grandson!
But third, and most interestingly, Sir Oliver today reveals that he thinks “we need to resolve this issue of Brexit before there is a general election”.
If that cannot be achieved through a deal to leave, then there will have to be a referendum. This is a crucial new development.
The Tory high command have assumed that if they can’t have a general election on their preferred timetable before October 31, they could have one in November or December — and they could still cast it as a “Parliament versus the people” contest. But Sir Oliver is one step ahead of them.
He is confident that there is a majority in Parliament for dealing with Brexit first and having an election after.
So if the Commons doesn’t support a deal — and all the evidence of the last year suggests it won’t — then it will vote to delay an election until 2020, and have a referendum before that.
Whether Mr Johnson is still imprisoned in Downing Street while this happens is a secondary question.
Why on earth would cancelling Brexit, either through revocation or another refernedum be a "resolution" ?
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
Indeed. We're going to end up with PM Farage or something far, far worse the way they are going...
Yup - if Brexit is blocked by judges, Lib Dems, Tony Blair and other cretins I’ll be voting Brexit Party for the forseeable.
But third, and most interestingly, Sir Oliver today reveals that he thinks “we need to resolve this issue of Brexit before there is a general election”.
If that cannot be achieved through a deal to leave, then there will have to be a referendum. This is a crucial new development.
The Tory high command have assumed that if they can’t have a general election on their preferred timetable before October 31, they could have one in November or December — and they could still cast it as a “Parliament versus the people” contest. But Sir Oliver is one step ahead of them.
He is confident that there is a majority in Parliament for dealing with Brexit first and having an election after.
So if the Commons doesn’t support a deal — and all the evidence of the last year suggests it won’t — then it will vote to delay an election until 2020, and have a referendum before that.
Whether Mr Johnson is still imprisoned in Downing Street while this happens is a secondary question.
Why on earth would cancelling Brexit, either through revocation or another refernedum be a "resolution" ?
Because it would be over with there won’t be large scale riots in the streets but life can get back to normal and those that worry about irrelevant intrusion by the Eu into our lives can keep on worrying about it
Did the Scottish seperatism just melt away like snow on a June day when IN won in 2014?
Within 12 months Labour was wiped out, the SNP won a majority and the path to Scottish Independence became inevitable.
The FTPA has caused a crisis. Or if it hasn't, a PM who can't call an election despite losing a vote of confidence and is held hostage by a house that can only rush through negative legislation of its own proposition will do until the crisis gets here.
The correct check on the executive's power to sideline the body that scrutinises it is an action of that body itself.
The fundamental problem is, surely, that we have somebody who claims to be prime minister, but who lacks a majority of the votes in the House of Commons. The same applies to Mrs May, of course, because bribing people with taxpayers`money to give their support is not really playing fair.
Johnson should never have been allowed to take the position in the first place. Parliament is absolutely correct in not letting him get away with murder as well.
Before the FTPA that was no problem. VoNC or dissolution for election. Now the exec has no such power. The FTPA has only notionally increased the power of the legislature but has very seriously denuded the executive.
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Leavers have found their prospectus undeliverable. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
Well if Remainers would stop playing games we could have an election to either endorse Boris or reject him.
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Leavers have found their prospectus undeliverable. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
It’s time for a rethink.
It isn't undeliverable. Far from it. But there isn't a majority in the Commons to pass a Deal. Probably any Deal.
It's my belief that with a properly run campaign the electorate would provide those instructions to vote for one back to the Commons very clearly.
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Who is going to complain revoke get it over with return to normal and sort out real problems there is very little that has any negative impact on most people as a result of being in the Eu
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
I really hate canvassing. Never enjoyed it.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
I do it out of duty.
To be honest what I won't miss is those snapback letterboxes that guillotine your fingers.
...And the unspeakable curs who place their letterboxes at the very bottom of the door.
..with a silent predator with razor sharp teeth just inches away, and perfectly camouflaged.
Oliver Letwin’s interview must be read by anyone betting for or against a 2019 election.
That'll be me then.
I've said a couple of times over the last few days that I think this Parliament won't ever cobble together enough votes to pass a Deal, except in extremis with an imminent No Deal looming, and that given a further GE would be likely indecisive, a referendum to 're-instruct' the Commons what to do is the only way forward.
So, yes, I expect an extension to June (earliest) to December (latest) next year, with a referendum in the Spring or early Summer. The WA to pass or Brexit to be revoked and, then, a GE2020.
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Who is going to complain revoke get it over with return to normal and sort out real problems there is very little that has any negative impact on most people as a result of being in the Eu
Not sure i understand what youre trying to say here,
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
Well if Remainers would stop playing games we could have an election to either endorse Boris or reject him.
Why should a man installed by the Conservative party without reference to anyone else who has yet to win a vote in the Commons be entitled to an election at a time of his convenience?
Is not getting a knighthood a form of punishment? What have I done to deserve my not-a-knighthood then? Has he ever admitted to doing it? Or shown the slightest remorse? Has he even been, actually, er punished for it? (All QTWTAIN, apparently).
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Leavers have found their prospectus undeliverable. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
It’s interesting that possibly Johnson didn’t lie to Brenda because she said ok boris whatever you want
I have been thinking about this. Prorogation is automatic. Government decides; Queen requires. But there will be a formulaic justification. A bit like those "business justification" boxes you have to fill in on a purchase order. As long as it makes sense you can write in more or less what you want.
So the government asks the Queen for prorogation. She or her advisor asks, what's the basis? So Johnson or whoever it was explains, it's time for a new Queens Speech, which means prorogation. It goes over the conference season, making the prorogation a bit longer than usual. It passes the plausibility test and no-one is interested because it's an automatic act.
However, Johnson didn't in this scenario explain to the Queen that conference breaks are managed through recess, which is under the control of parliament, who were intending to sit throughout. When the fuss kicks up the Queen feels Johnson deliberately misled her by withholding material information. It won't come out into the public but there's a serious breach of trust.
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Leavers have found their prospectus undeliverable. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
It’s time for a rethink.
It isn't undeliverable. Far from it. But there isn't a majority in the Commons to pass a Deal. Probably any Deal.
It's my belief that with a properly run campaign the electorate would provide those instructions to vote for one back to the Commons very clearly.
I am glad that you have seen the light, I recall you being quite scathing when I suggested a #peoplesvote was needed, and quite winnable by Leave.
There has been polling evidence that women are not as keen on Boris as men, and the row with Carrie a few weeks back will not have helped. With this in mind probably Boris was not over-impressed by the party's new knighthoods for wifebeaters campaign.
My wife cannot stand the man. Neither can my sister. And my mother hates him. I have just one niece and she is none too keen. Thinks he's a dick. So does my son's girlfriend. I also have a couple of close female friends and they reckon he's pretty ghastly.
That's 100% of my close female F&F and it's 100% negative. Boris has no chance with any of them. Neither will he get their votes in the upcoming election.
The latest Yougov has 33% of women voting Tory but only 31% of men, though the LDs have the highest percentage of female voters of the main parties.
Labour and the Brexit Party have more male than female voters
Ps was subjected to listening to a loud and lengthy phone conversation in a coffee shop yesterday. What Boris was called was everything but a gentleman.. Cant recall such vitriol even in the Thatcher years. Ps apart from myself, my wife, daughter and son in law think Johnson is an idiot. Am working on my 4 year old grandson!
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Leavers have found their prospectus undeliverable. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
Keep your hair on. I called you a dipstick as I thought it a fairly mild indicator of someone who is being rather silly. I am sure I would say it to your face, or is that a typically Neanderthal macho threat from the type that has taken over my ex-party?
The rule of law is one of the most fundamental principles of a free society. The far right that has taken over the Conservative Party cares not a jot for it. the fact that we have a PM who encourages people to think he shares such an outrageous position is dangerous indeed. The fact that anyone who can write their name thinks it is OK for a PM to break the law in such a way I a sad indictment of our education system.
Actually an insult is an insult. Criticising what I or anyone has to say is fair comment. However I have found, unfailingly, that people who insult you personally on the internet are people who hide behind their keyboards. I did not threaten you. I don’t threaten people. Nor am I macho or a Neanderthal. I am not a member of your ex party and have no intention of becoming one. Frankly what it has done since Maastricht has only served to make it a very weird club with the majority of MPs and MEPs talking euroscepticism whilst being europhile. I have dealt with and known quite a few and I have seen at first hand their attitudes to the grassroots. The party membership has therefore expected its Government to negotiate a reasonable exit from the EU. This it failed to do. Therefore they reacted as people do when thwarted. If you have, as I expect you have, been to conference then you would have seen that the most popular speakers at fringe events are generally those who are now called europhobes by the Clarkite wing of the party. There is a good reason for this. The Conservative Party sold itself as a party of euroscepticism and attracted eurosceptics.
Now they are paying the price. They have the leader who told them he would stand up to the EU. They rejected the candidate who they thought was no different to previous incumbents. Perhaps your ex party should have elected a leader who voted leave in the first place.
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Leavers have found their prospectus undeliverable. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
It’s time for a rethink.
It isn't undeliverable. Far from it. But there isn't a majority in the Commons to pass a Deal. Probably any Deal.
It's my belief that with a properly run campaign the electorate would provide those instructions to vote for one back to the Commons very clearly.
This is what happens when a referendum is won with a campaign of xenophobic lies. No one is interested in compromise afterwards.
No one is making the case for a deal. It’s hard to see who will now.
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
I really hate canvassing. Never enjoyed it.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
I do it out of duty.
To be honest what I won't miss is those snapback letterboxes that guillotine your fingers.
...And the unspeakable curs who place their letterboxes at the very bottom of the door.
..with a silent predator with razor sharp teeth just inches away, and perfectly camouflaged.
So you too have encountered vicious semi-deranged gerbils: it ain't pleasant.
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
I really hate canvassing. Never enjoyed it.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
I do it out of duty.
To be honest what I won't miss is those snapback letterboxes that guillotine your fingers.
In one of my ill-fated local council elections, I had my finger bitten by a dog while pushing one of my obligatory 'candidate points at pothole' newsletters through one of those that closed on me.
Went to A&E and the nurse told me never to do that again.
There endeth my political career.
Yeesh. I hope it was at least an important pothole that you nearly lost a finger for.
I presume people really do like canvassing though - I know people who are still pounding the streets after decades of party service, and I just cannot imagine duty alone compeling them to do it.
Is not getting a knighthood a form of punishment? What have I done to deserve my not-a-knighthood then? Has he ever admitted to doing it? Or shown the slightest remorse? Has he even been, actually, er punished for it? (All QTWTAIN, apparently).
Boycott got a substantial fine and a three month suspended sentence, so it is fair to say he has been punished. Remorse, however, or even acknowledgement, has been lacking.
Well it is certainly true that everyone knows the real reason for the prorogation, it's presumably just a question of whether being shifty about the real reason is indeed unlawful as the scottish judges think.
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
I really hate canvassing. Never enjoyed it.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
I do it out of duty.
To be honest what I won't miss is those snapback letterboxes that guillotine your fingers.
...And the unspeakable curs who place their letterboxes at the very bottom of the door.
Haven't they recently passed a law to prevent that in future?
Who says politicians only focus on Brexit?
Edit: Turns out it is not law yet - best hold off that election until late next year.
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
I really hate canvassing. Never enjoyed it.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
I do it out of duty.
To be honest what I won't miss is those snapback letterboxes that guillotine your fingers.
...And the unspeakable curs who place their letterboxes at the very bottom of the door.
Haven't they recently passed a law to prevent that in future?
Who says politicians only focus on Brexit?
Edit: Turns out it is not law yet - best hold off that election until late next year.
Can you really be claiming that the data is from after March 2019, given that the chart in the header that you published with your thread states "Source: BES Internet Panel Wave 15 (March 2019)"?
No, I'm pointing out the previous other waves show similar things, so that covers periods with huge Tory leads, and no Tory leads whatsoever
So, what you're saying is that your BES March 2019 data shows little appetite for 2017 Labour voters to vote Tory (which I accept), you accept my point that the data is well out of date, but you're saying that that doesn't matter because (you claim that) even earlier data showed much the same pattern and the data set is therefore inherently stable. Hence you infer that the current position must still be much the same, although there is no recent BES data available to test that.
The only problem with your conclusion is that current data contradicts it, and moreover shows big shifts over the past 6 months.
Compare the pattern in the Opinium data from March 2019, with that from September 2019. In March, only 4% of 2017 Labour Leave voters (and only 2% of 2017 Labour Remain voters) had switched to the Conservatives. Now, in September 2019, 22% of 2019 Labour Leave (and 1% of Labour Remain voters) have switched to Conservative.
That is a big recent switch of Labour Leave voters to the Conservatives, and it is even more significant when you consider that back in March there was no Brexit Party to hoover up their disaffection as an alternative to the Tories. Taken as a group, in a forced choice Labour Leavers as a whole also now prefer Johnson to Corbyn as PM by 36% to 24%, so there is plenty to infer that the 19% who have switched to the BXP are just as likely to eventually vote Con as they are to vote Lab. Again that's in complete contrast to March 2019, when only 11% of Labour Leavers preferred May and 30% preferred Corbyn in the same two way choice.
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
I really hate canvassing. Never enjoyed it.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
I do it out of duty.
To be honest what I won't miss is those snapback letterboxes that guillotine your fingers.
...And the unspeakable curs who place their letterboxes at the very bottom of the door.
..with a silent predator with razor sharp teeth just inches away, and perfectly camouflaged.
So you too have encountered vicious semi-deranged gerbils: it ain't pleasant.
But at least these UKIP fanatics are almost extinct ....
Is not getting a knighthood a form of punishment? What have I done to deserve my not-a-knighthood then? Has he ever admitted to doing it? Or shown the slightest remorse? Has he even been, actually, er punished for it? (All QTWTAIN, apparently).
Boycott got a substantial fine and a three month suspended sentence, so it is fair to say he has been punished. Remorse, however, or even acknowledgement, has been lacking.
I didn't know about the fine, I knew he hadn't spent any time in the nick. I have seen photos of his partner's face, it is pretty hard to imagine you could get that from falling over, as he claims, and the absence of a custodial sentence seems generous, considering. (Edit: but not as generous as a fucking knighthood, obvs).
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Leavers have found their prospectus undeliverable. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
It’s time for a rethink.
Says who?
Say the arrogant fucks like Meeks who only believe in democracy when they are winning.
Well it is certainly true that everyone knows the real reason for the prorogation, it's presumably just a question of whether being shifty about the real reason is indeed unlawful as the scottish judges think.
I thought the Government in response to the stop the prorogation of parliament petetion said it was due to leaving the EU on 31st October. People even tweeted about it showing the quote! I wonder if it will be commented in the SC next week.
Yep. We need to know how she is voting and also Mrs Duffy.
That gives us the result of the election - perhaps even the seat totals.
You can stick your yougovs up your arse.
Nah, we need David Herdson to go canvassing.
I really hate canvassing. Never enjoyed it.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
I do it out of duty.
To be honest what I won't miss is those snapback letterboxes that guillotine your fingers.
In one of my ill-fated local council elections, I had my finger bitten by a dog while pushing one of my obligatory 'candidate points at pothole' newsletters through one of those that closed on me.
Went to A&E and the nurse told me never to do that again.
There endeth my political career.
Yeesh. I hope it was at least an important pothole that you nearly lost a finger for.
I presume people really do like canvassing though - I know people who are still pounding the streets after decades of party service, and I just cannot imagine duty alone compeling them to do it.
TMay is said to really like canvassing and even when she was PM would be out on the knocker at local elections in her constituency
I have a feeling that most efforts to trigger full selection for Labour MPs are going to fail. I recently attended a ward meeting that voted overwhelmingly to reselect our sitting MP, following a massive turnout of usually inactive, centrist dad (and mum) style members like me. Apparently it was the biggest ward meeting (>100 people) in living memory.
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Leavers have found their prospectus undeliverable. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
It’s time for a rethink.
It isn't undeliverable. Far from it. But there isn't a majority in the Commons to pass a Deal. Probably any Deal.
It's my belief that with a properly run campaign the electorate would provide those instructions to vote for one back to the Commons very clearly.
This is what happens when a referendum is won with a campaign of xenophobic lies. No one is interested in compromise afterwards.
No one is making the case for a deal. It’s hard to see who will now.
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Leavers have found their prospectus undeliverable. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
It’s time for a rethink.
It isn't undeliverable. Far from it. But there isn't a majority in the Commons to pass a Deal. Probably any Deal.
It's my belief that with a properly run campaign the electorate would provide those instructions to vote for one back to the Commons very clearly.
This is what happens when a referendum is won with a campaign of xenophobic lies. No one is interested in compromise afterwards.
No one is making the case for a deal. It’s hard to see who will now.
"Xenophobic lies".
This is the language of the kindergarden.
No.
It’s the language of the spoiled kids corner of the kindergarten.
I suspect many people will see any such revocation as "advisory". Indeed there is a case for seeing the appointment of an interim government as solely "advisory" (no one voted for an interim government led by Ken Clarke, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter..)
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
No one voted for Boris Johnson.
As you have said. More than once. But what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Leavers have found their prospectus undeliverable. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
It’s time for a rethink.
It isn't undeliverable. Far from it. But there isn't a majority in the Commons to pass a Deal. Probably any Deal.
It's my belief that with a properly run campaign the electorate would provide those instructions to vote for one back to the Commons very clearly.
This is what happens when a referendum is won with a campaign of xenophobic lies. No one is interested in compromise afterwards.
No one is making the case for a deal. It’s hard to see who will now.
"Xenophobic lies".
This is the language of the kindergarden.
I've heard 'lies' used in a kindergarten, albeit rarely. Never 'xenophobic'.
Comments
Copy and pasted tweets aren’t automatically endorsements in my case
Another thing I agree with Hitchens about!
It really is bonkers that this hasn’t been seriously advanced as an option.
The government has faffed around for three years. That, however, is not the Commons’ fault.
Ps apart from myself, my wife, daughter and son in law think Johnson is an idiot. Am working on my 4 year old grandson!
https://twitter.com/msmithsonpb/status/1172213753938665478?s=21
However, it came to mean "wet" because those who described themselves as such baulked at monetarism in the early 1980s, and were far too ready for the UK to roll over in foreign affairs.
By the way how is saying Corbyn will damage the UK any difference to criticising Brexit? If we are told to ignore 'project fear' on Brexit why not ignore project fear on Corbyn? I suppose it is the Bankers fear their wealth is confisicated by Corbyn. The same Bankers who bankrolled Leave and the Tories as well as TBP. Talking of Farage and Tice: There profession is Bankers!
But third, and most interestingly, Sir Oliver today reveals that he thinks “we need to resolve this issue of Brexit before there is a general election”.
If that cannot be achieved through a deal to leave, then there will have to be a referendum. This is a crucial new development.
The Tory high command have assumed that if they can’t have a general election on their preferred timetable before October 31, they could have one in November or December — and they could still cast it as a “Parliament versus the people” contest. But Sir Oliver is one step ahead of them.
He is confident that there is a majority in Parliament for dealing with Brexit first and having an election after.
So if the Commons doesn’t support a deal — and all the evidence of the last year suggests it won’t — then it will vote to delay an election until 2020, and have a referendum before that.
Whether Mr Johnson is still imprisoned in Downing Street while this happens is a secondary question.
I mean, there's something frightfully un-British about hassling someone on the doorstep. Now and again, I have a very interesting conversation. Other times people are very rude. It's terrifying ringing the doorbell.
I do it out of duty.
Mr Meeks, I take your point, but the Commons had the opportunity since 2016 to seek a common mind on the best way of putting the referendum vote into effect and in all that time has failed to find even a majority for any significant affirmative position. It also agreed to trigger Art 50 without any attempt to reach a common mind. But I agree of course that government faffed.
"Why Geoffrey Boycott should keep his knighthood
In a civilised society, we don’t punish people forever for their past mistakes.
Brendan O'Neill"
https://www.spiked-online.com/author/brendan-oneill/
I've said a couple of times over the last few days that I think this Parliament won't ever cobble together enough votes to pass a Deal, except in extremis with an imminent No Deal looming, and that given a further GE would be likely indecisive, a referendum to 're-instruct' the Commons what to do is the only way forward.
So, yes, I expect an extension to June (earliest) to December (latest) next year, with a referendum in the Spring or early Summer. The WA to pass or Brexit to be revoked and, then, a GE2020.
That leaves quite a scope.
Went to A&E and the nurse told me never to do that again.
There endeth my political career.
I can see good reason for considering any votes within (or indeed acts of) Parliament from now on as being "advisory". I shall consider at some length with Mrs Basicbridge which ones i feel are worthy of support (as reflected by opinion polls carried out in mr and Mrs Bascicbridge's residence) and may also consider abiding (or not abiding) by them subject to that endorsement.
Remainers are sowing dragons' teeth...
It's only in the last month or two that I've seen signs of dawning realisation. It remains to be seen whether that's too little, too late.
I would be more inclined to be sympathetic if Boycott had shown the slightest remorse and repentance.
Parliament is at odds with the largest national vote in the UKs history and has reneged on its undertaking to respect that. All else is sophistry.
Within 12 months Labour was wiped out, the SNP won a majority and the path to Scottish Independence became inevitable.
It’s time for a rethink.
It's my belief that with a properly run campaign the electorate would provide those instructions to vote for one back to the Commons very clearly.
It might calculate an interim PM that would do the most damage to the Conservative cause would be a Conservative.
Perhaps it is "advisory".
So the government asks the Queen for prorogation. She or her advisor asks, what's the basis? So Johnson or whoever it was explains, it's time for a new Queens Speech, which means prorogation. It goes over the conference season, making the prorogation a bit longer than usual. It passes the plausibility test and no-one is interested because it's an automatic act.
However, Johnson didn't in this scenario explain to the Queen that conference breaks are managed through recess, which is under the control of parliament, who were intending to sit throughout. When the fuss kicks up the Queen feels Johnson deliberately misled her by withholding material information. It won't come out into the public but there's a serious breach of trust.
See you on the march, Oct 19th
Both are equally irrelevant.
Keep your hair on. I called you a dipstick as I thought it a fairly mild indicator of someone who is being rather silly. I am sure I would say it to your face, or is that a typically Neanderthal macho threat from the type that has taken over my ex-party?
The rule of law is one of the most fundamental principles of a free society. The far right that has taken over the Conservative Party cares not a jot for it. the fact that we have a PM who encourages people to think he shares such an outrageous position is dangerous indeed. The fact that anyone who can write their name thinks it is OK for a PM to break the law in such a way I a sad indictment of our education system.
Actually an insult is an insult. Criticising what I or anyone has to say is fair comment. However I have found, unfailingly, that people who insult you personally on the internet are people who hide behind their keyboards. I did not threaten you. I don’t threaten people. Nor am I macho or a Neanderthal.
I am not a member of your ex party and have no intention of becoming one. Frankly what it has done since Maastricht has only served to make it a very weird club with the majority of MPs and MEPs talking euroscepticism whilst being europhile. I have dealt with and known quite a few and I have seen at first hand their attitudes to the grassroots. The party membership has therefore expected its Government to negotiate a reasonable exit from the EU. This it failed to do. Therefore they reacted as people do when thwarted.
If you have, as I expect you have, been to conference then you would have seen that the most popular speakers at fringe events are generally those who are now called europhobes by the Clarkite wing of the party. There is a good reason for this. The Conservative Party sold itself as a party of euroscepticism and attracted eurosceptics.
Now they are paying the price. They have the leader who told them he would stand up to the EU. They rejected the candidate who they thought was no different to previous incumbents. Perhaps your ex party should have elected a leader who voted leave in the first place.
No one is making the case for a deal. It’s hard to see who will now.
I presume people really do like canvassing though - I know people who are still pounding the streets after decades of party service, and I just cannot imagine duty alone compeling them to do it.
Who says politicians only focus on Brexit?
Edit: Turns out it is not law yet - best hold off that election until late next year.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47457758
NEW THREAD
Always use a posting stick...
The only problem with your conclusion is that current data contradicts it, and moreover shows big shifts over the past 6 months.
Compare the pattern in the Opinium data from March 2019, with that from September 2019. In March, only 4% of 2017 Labour Leave voters (and only 2% of 2017 Labour Remain voters) had switched to the Conservatives. Now, in September 2019, 22% of 2019 Labour Leave (and 1% of Labour Remain voters) have switched to Conservative.
That is a big recent switch of Labour Leave voters to the Conservatives, and it is even more significant when you consider that back in March there was no Brexit Party to hoover up their disaffection as an alternative to the Tories. Taken as a group, in a forced choice Labour Leavers as a whole also now prefer Johnson to Corbyn as PM by 36% to 24%, so there is plenty to infer that the 19% who have switched to the BXP are just as likely to eventually vote Con as they are to vote Lab. Again that's in complete contrast to March 2019, when only 11% of Labour Leavers preferred May and 30% preferred Corbyn in the same two way choice.
(Edit: but not as generous as a fucking knighthood, obvs).
If Leavers are happy to reinvent the 2016 EU referendum why should Remainers like Letwin honour the 2017 manifesto .
As i said earlier, everything else is sophistry.
This is the language of the kindergarden.
It’s the language of the spoiled kids corner of the kindergarten.