Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » By the end of the week we just might have a better idea of whi

1235

Comments

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    sarissa said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    sarissa said:

    Just as an aside, the BBC's ridiculous. Apparently marathon news and American gymnastics come ahead of F1...

    Nobody seem so be mentioning that the 2 hour marathon was as contrived as Bannister's 4 minute mile in 1954
    You must be fun at parties.

    Could you outline the ways in which the kipchoge marathon was "contrived" in a way, that, say, the moon landings were not?
    " To reduce aerodynamic resistance for Kipchoge, event organizers decided there would be a group of five pacemakers running in front of him in a V formation, according to Reuters. Kipchoge would run behind them, with two more runners following behind.

    The pacers worked in teams, rotating in twice during each of the course’s 9.6-km (6-mile) laps. An electric car preceded the runners, projecting a system of lasers to show where the pacers should run."

    Athletic feat, yes. Competitive event? Hardly.
    Yes, it's fine not being an official world record, no big deal, it was about proving the possible
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,720

    If 'Steps will be taken to protect the integrity of democracy' does that mean an electoral system like that in Scotland?

    No it means Fay, H and Lisa armed and guarding polling booths
    What a tragedy.
    That quip is better best forgotten.
    Causing offence was the Last Thing On My Mind.
    You're always been one for sorrow.
  • If 'Steps will be taken to protect the integrity of democracy' does that mean an electoral system like that in Scotland?

    No it means Fay, H and Lisa armed and guarding polling booths
    What a tragedy.
    That quip is better best forgotten.
    Causing offence was the Last Thing On My Mind.
    If today was a pre-election broadcast will it result in us getting a Deeper Shade of Blue?
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    Anorak said:

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    Frankly, every public engagement she does is poor compensation for inflicting Prince Andrew on the nation.
    He is inflicted on us? I have not seen him in decades. Is he still here or has he emigrated? :D
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,720

    Charles said:

    I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)

    So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
    I do but sadly the Scots didn't want to be an independent country.
    That is such a perverse answer. We should decide as England, but only if Scotland lets us?
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited October 2019
    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    edited October 2019

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    Possibly because its her job?

    She gets to live in a luxurious palace and has to work one day a year and for that you wonder why she bothers?
    Yes. She could work zero days a year and still live in a luxurious palace.

    I am beginning to wonder why we bother.

    [Edit: BTW - it is not a job. It is not like she applied and sat an interview]
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,597

    mwadams said:

    nico67 said:

    What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .

    What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.

    And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .

    Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn.
    If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them ;)
    What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".

    Parliament should revoke A50 and say "OK, we need to go back to the drawing board and work out how to leave, then."
    Its amazing how many people seem to be unconcerned about Parliament being burnt to the ground.
    If the "crash out with no deal which is explicitly not what people were promised during the campaign" *doesn't* lead to Parliament being burned down, but "hang on a minute, we clearly needed more time to work out how to leave in an orderly fashion rather than blundering into chaos" *does* lead to Parliament being burned down, then I'd suggest that the supporters of the latter position are the problem.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    Brexit didnt demonstrate that, everyone already knew but for sone reason people pretend it is new information.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Ishmael_Z said:

    sarissa said:

    Just as an aside, the BBC's ridiculous. Apparently marathon news and American gymnastics come ahead of F1...

    Nobody seem so be mentioning that the 2 hour marathon was as contrived as Bannister's 4 minute mile in 1954
    You must be fun at parties.

    Could you outline the ways in which the kipchoge marathon was "contrived" in a way, that, say, the moon landings were not?
    I don't get that either. No matter the technology, the lad still had to run it.
    I guess the use of pacemakers?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    Well I never. I’ll have to go back and correct my homophobic insults on other forums!
  • Charles said:

    I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)

    So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
    I do but sadly the Scots didn't want to be an independent country.
    That is such a perverse answer. We should decide as England, but only if Scotland lets us?
    I hope to see the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish be brave enough to go off on their own and take responsibility for themselves but if they're too frit to do so as the Scots were in 2014 don't want to shove the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish away if they still want to cling to us. They're like little siblings, they can tag along if they want to but hopefully they'll grow up and leave us to ourselves eventually.
  • kle4 said:

    sarissa said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    sarissa said:

    Just as an aside, the BBC's ridiculous. Apparently marathon news and American gymnastics come ahead of F1...

    Nobody seem so be mentioning that the 2 hour marathon was as contrived as Bannister's 4 minute mile in 1954
    You must be fun at parties.

    Could you outline the ways in which the kipchoge marathon was "contrived" in a way, that, say, the moon landings were not?
    " To reduce aerodynamic resistance for Kipchoge, event organizers decided there would be a group of five pacemakers running in front of him in a V formation, according to Reuters. Kipchoge would run behind them, with two more runners following behind.

    The pacers worked in teams, rotating in twice during each of the course’s 9.6-km (6-mile) laps. An electric car preceded the runners, projecting a system of lasers to show where the pacers should run."

    Athletic feat, yes. Competitive event? Hardly.
    Yes, it's fine not being an official world record, no big deal, it was about proving the possible
    Also, he also holds the official WR at around 2.02....so it isnt like he is trying to claim fastest ever while also not also being the official fastest ever.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163

    mwadams said:

    nico67 said:

    What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .

    What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.

    And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .

    Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn.
    If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them ;)
    What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".

    Parliament should revoke A50 and say "OK, we need to go back to the drawing board and work out how to leave, then."
    Its amazing how many people seem to be unconcerned about Parliament being burnt to the ground.
    It is amazing how quick you are to offer scenarios of violence if you do not get your way.
  • kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    Possibly because its her job?

    She gets to live in a luxurious palace and has to work one day a year and for that you wonder why she bothers?
    Yes. She could work zero days a year and still live in a luxurious palace.

    I am beginning to wonder why we bother.

    [Edit: BTW - it is not a job. It is not like she applied and sat an interview]
    It is a job. She was born to inherit it, but she could abdicate at any time and if she screws up she could be fired.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    Well I never. I’ll have to go back and correct my homophobic insults on other forums!
    And here was me thinking your lovely rainbow avatar made you woke.
  • Seems to be remarkably little talk about how the talks are going with Barnier? What odds us getting a deal agreed this week?
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    mwadams said:

    nico67 said:

    What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .

    What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.

    And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .

    Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn.
    If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them ;)
    What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".

    Parliament should revoke A50 and say "OK, we need to go back to the drawing board and work out how to leave, then."
    Its amazing how many people seem to be unconcerned about Parliament being burnt to the ground.
    It is amazing how quick you are to offer scenarios of violence if you do not get your way.
    It's a bit like my 5 year old stamping her feet and chucking things around when she can't have another ice cream.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405

    mwadams said:

    nico67 said:

    What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .

    What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.

    And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .

    Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn.
    If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them ;)
    What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".

    Parliament should revoke A50 and say "OK, we need to go back to the drawing board and work out how to leave, then."
    Its amazing how many people seem to be unconcerned about Parliament being burnt to the ground.
    If it burnt to the ground we would probably save a £1bn or so on rebuilding costs and create a building more fit for purpose.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    Brexit didnt demonstrate that, everyone already knew but for sone reason people pretend it is new information.
    It merely cast the information into sharp relief, a bit like all the other inadequacies of our "Constitution" - the major flaw being that it only works if used by reasonable people. Megalomanics and wreckers work on a different principle.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    Anorak said:

    mwadams said:

    nico67 said:

    What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .

    What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.

    And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .

    Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn.
    If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them ;)
    What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".

    Parliament should revoke A50 and say "OK, we need to go back to the drawing board and work out how to leave, then."
    Its amazing how many people seem to be unconcerned about Parliament being burnt to the ground.
    It is amazing how quick you are to offer scenarios of violence if you do not get your way.
    It's a bit like my 5 year old stamping her feet and chucking things around when she can't have another ice cream.
    That is a remarkably accurate analogy :D
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    Possibly because its her job?

    She gets to live in a luxurious palace and has to work one day a year and for that you wonder why she bothers?
    Yes. She could work zero days a year and still live in a luxurious palace.

    I am beginning to wonder why we bother.

    [Edit: BTW - it is not a job. It is not like she applied and sat an interview]
    It is a job. She was born to inherit it, but she could abdicate at any time and if she screws up she could be fired.
    How do you fire her? Report her to the HR dept and issue written warnings?
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    You're having a lovely morning watching the events at parliament then your ex phones you cos their partner has gone on holiday without them and they are bored. Now I'm as grouchy as Skinner on a State occasion
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    eek said:

    mwadams said:

    nico67 said:

    What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .

    What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.

    And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .

    Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn.
    If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them ;)
    What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".

    Parliament should revoke A50 and say "OK, we need to go back to the drawing board and work out how to leave, then."
    Its amazing how many people seem to be unconcerned about Parliament being burnt to the ground.
    If it burnt to the ground we would probably save a £1bn or so on rebuilding costs and create a building more fit for purpose.
    I am sure our public servants could find a way to spend several billion on it. If only there was a way to save, say, £350m a week....
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163

    You're having a lovely morning watching the events at parliament then your ex phones you cos their partner has gone on holiday without them and they are bored. Now I'm as grouchy as Skinner on a State occasion

    At least Brexit will stop them going abroad as it will take 4 months to get all the visa and International Driving Permits sorted. Assuming the planes are flying... or that Dover is not a lorry park so you can actually get on a ferry.

    ;)
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    Possibly because its her job?

    She gets to live in a luxurious palace and has to work one day a year and for that you wonder why she bothers?
    Yes. She could work zero days a year and still live in a luxurious palace.

    I am beginning to wonder why we bother.

    [Edit: BTW - it is not a job. It is not like she applied and sat an interview]
    It is a job. She was born to inherit it, but she could abdicate at any time and if she screws up she could be fired.
    How do you fire her? Report her to the HR dept and issue written warnings?
    Get Lady Hale to declare her reign to be of null effect and install Gina Miller and Jo Maugham as first couple
  • mwadams said:

    nico67 said:

    What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .

    What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.

    And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .

    Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn.
    If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them ;)
    What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".

    Parliament should revoke A50 and say "OK, we need to go back to the drawing board and work out how to leave, then."
    Its amazing how many people seem to be unconcerned about Parliament being burnt to the ground.
    It is amazing how quick you are to offer scenarios of violence if you do not get your way.
    The place does want burning down. Claim on the insurance and build something fit for purpose elsewhere. Flog off the cleared land for a car park or student accommodation like every other owner of a listed building that they can't sell or afford to do up does.....
  • StreeterStreeter Posts: 684
    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    Nissan Leafs, not Nissan Leaves...




    ...will be the post-Brexit headline.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    You're having a lovely morning watching the events at parliament then your ex phones you cos their partner has gone on holiday without them and they are bored. Now I'm as grouchy as Skinner on a State occasion

    At least Brexit will stop them going abroad as it will take 4 months to get all the visa and International Driving Permits sorted. Assuming the planes are flying... or that Dover is not a lorry park so you can actually get on a ferry.

    ;)
    If she could see her way clear to Dyedexiting properly it would be a start, I was offered no deal at the time!
  • kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    Possibly because its her job?

    She gets to live in a luxurious palace and has to work one day a year and for that you wonder why she bothers?
    Yes. She could work zero days a year and still live in a luxurious palace.

    I am beginning to wonder why we bother.

    [Edit: BTW - it is not a job. It is not like she applied and sat an interview]
    It is a job. She was born to inherit it, but she could abdicate at any time and if she screws up she could be fired.
    How do you fire her? Report her to the HR dept and issue written warnings?
    An Act of Parliament abolishing her job or removing her from the post.
  • Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    But roof has a long "oo" but poof has a short "oo", correct?
  • RobCRobC Posts: 398
    8/1 on no deal. Presumably Hungary or any other country in the 27 can still block a further extension so maybe some small value? Maybe that's the nub of the evil Johnsonian/Cummings masterplan.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Fair to say from Skys public panel in Leeds 'get Brexit done' is resonating
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,773

    You're having a lovely morning watching the events at parliament then your ex phones you cos their partner has gone on holiday without them and they are bored. Now I'm as grouchy as Skinner on a State occasion

    You know thats basically an offer for 'Netflix and Chill' right?
  • Fair to say from Skys public panel in Leeds 'get Brexit done' is resonating

    If there is an extension and a general election the 'get Brexit done' will be a fantastic slogan for the government. Clear and simple.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131

    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    But roof has a long "oo" but poof has a short "oo", correct?
    So does "hoof", so is the plural of "hoof" "hooves" or "hoofs"?
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    edited October 2019

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    Possibly because its her job?

    She gets to live in a luxurious palace and has to work one day a year and for that you wonder why she bothers?
    Yes. She could work zero days a year and still live in a luxurious palace.

    I am beginning to wonder why we bother.

    [Edit: BTW - it is not a job. It is not like she applied and sat an interview]
    It is a job. She was born to inherit it, but she could abdicate at any time and if she screws up she could be fired.
    How do you fire her? Report her to the HR dept and issue written warnings?
    Frame her as incapable under the Regency Ac

    www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Edw8and1Geo6/1/16/section/2
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405

    Fair to say from Skys public panel in Leeds 'get Brexit done' is resonating

    They are going to be really annoyed when they discover we have left but still have 10 years of work to do...
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,337
    edited October 2019

    Seems to be remarkably little talk about how the talks are going with Barnier? What odds us getting a deal agreed this week?


    Queen's speech = "squirrel"
  • eek said:

    Fair to say from Skys public panel in Leeds 'get Brexit done' is resonating

    They are going to be really annoyed when they discover we have left but still have 10 years of work to do...
    Not really. There will always be work to do on something. If we remain this wouldn't end, we'd still have work to do.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    viewcode said:

    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    But roof has a long "oo" but poof has a short "oo", correct?
    So does "hoof", so is the plural of "hoof" "hooves" or "hoofs"?
    Both.

    "The horse had four hooves, one in each corner"
    "A panicking defender usually just hoofs the ball upfield"
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    edited October 2019

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    Possibly because its her job?

    She gets to live in a luxurious palace and has to work one day a year and for that you wonder why she bothers?
    Yes. She could work zero days a year and still live in a luxurious palace.

    I am beginning to wonder why we bother.

    [Edit: BTW - it is not a job. It is not like she applied and sat an interview]
    It is a job. She was born to inherit it, but she could abdicate at any time and if she screws up she could be fired.
    How do you fire her? Report her to the HR dept and issue written warnings?
    Frame her as incapable under the Regency Act.

    www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Edw8and1Geo6/1/16/section/2
    I did not know that, thank you. I figured they'd have to do another Abdication Act, like the one they did for Edward.

    Incidentally, does the Regency Act cover the whole Commonwealth or just the UK? She is Queen of more than one place.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    You're having a lovely morning watching the events at parliament then your ex phones you cos their partner has gone on holiday without them and they are bored. Now I'm as grouchy as Skinner on a State occasion

    You know thats basically an offer for 'Netflix and Chill' right?
    I do. I'm also not going there. She is well aware of my position on subscription services and relaxation
  • ozymandiasozymandias Posts: 1,503

    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    But roof has a long "oo" but poof has a short "oo", correct?
    If you speak like Mystic Meg it's a very long "oooo"
  • Pulpstar said:

    Boris and Swinson make a lovely couple at the front there Corbyn has fucked off by the looks of BBC coverage

    Edit: Got my Sturgeons and Swinsons mixed up - nevertheless I'll let the next thought stand ;)

    Sturgeon seems to have remembered she is leading the Scottish Nationalist Party, not "remains little helpers in Scotland" recently. She's been reminding Blackford of the same slowly recently.
    For the sake of precision I hope she's remembered that she's leading the Scottish National Party, don't want the 'patriots not nationalists' brigade too worked up.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    eek said:

    Fair to say from Skys public panel in Leeds 'get Brexit done' is resonating

    They are going to be really annoyed when they discover we have left but still have 10 years of work to do...
    They are yes, although they will be relieved that the immediacy and all consuming nature has subsided
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    Anorak said:

    viewcode said:

    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    But roof has a long "oo" but poof has a short "oo", correct?
    So does "hoof", so is the plural of "hoof" "hooves" or "hoofs"?
    Both.

    "The horse had four hooves, one in each corner"
    "A panicking defender usually just hoofs the ball upfield"
    Thank you. I was worried I was making a goof. :):)
  • StreeterStreeter Posts: 684
    Anorak said:

    viewcode said:

    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    But roof has a long "oo" but poof has a short "oo", correct?
    So does "hoof", so is the plural of "hoof" "hooves" or "hoofs"?
    Both.

    "The horse had four hooves, one in each corner"
    "A panicking defender usually just hoofs the ball upfield"
    The third person singular verb form is not a plural.
  • Charles said:

    I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)

    So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
    https://twitter.com/mattwoose/status/1183616870781476864?s=20
  • Charles said:

    I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)

    So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
    https://twitter.com/mattwoose/status/1183616870781476864?s=20
    Is there an English independence party that I've missed?
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    edited October 2019
    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    Possibly because its her job?

    She gets to live in a luxurious palace and has to work one day a year and for that you wonder why she bothers?
    Yes. She could work zero days a year and still live in a luxurious palace.

    I am beginning to wonder why we bother.

    [Edit: BTW - it is not a job. It is not like she applied and sat an interview]
    It is a job. She was born to inherit it, but she could abdicate at any time and if she screws up she could be fired.
    How do you fire her? Report her to the HR dept and issue written warnings?
    Frame her as incapable under the Regency Act.

    www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Edw8and1Geo6/1/16/section/2
    I did not know that, thank you. I figured they'd have to do another Abdication Act, like the one they did for Edward.

    Incidentally, does the Regency Act cover the whole Commonwealth or just the UK? She is Queen of more than one place.
    I think they would have to do another Act. That one does not seem to apply if she just says "Sod it. I cannot be bothered". You need physicians to say that she is actually ill.

    "... shall include the evidence of physicians that the Sovereign is by reason of infirmity of mind or body incapable for the time being of performing the royal functions or that they are satisfied by evidence that the Sovereign is for some definite cause not available for the performance of those functions, then, until it is declared in like manner that His Majesty has so far recovered His health as to warrant His resumption of the royal functions or has become available for the performance thereof, as the case may be, those functions shall be performed in the name and on behalf of the Sovereign by a Regent."

    [Edit: Also - very sexist language as it assumes the sovereign is a bloke]
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Streeter said:

    Anorak said:

    viewcode said:

    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    But roof has a long "oo" but poof has a short "oo", correct?
    So does "hoof", so is the plural of "hoof" "hooves" or "hoofs"?
    Both.

    "The horse had four hooves, one in each corner"
    "A panicking defender usually just hoofs the ball upfield"
    The third person singular verb form is not a plural.
    It is if he kicks it twice :tongue:
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    edited October 2019

    Charles said:

    I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)

    So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
    https://twitter.com/mattwoose/status/1183616870781476864?s=20
    Is there an English independence party that I've missed?
    English Democrats
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    This isn’t news. The monarchy has been apolitical for hundreds of years now.

    Ultra-Remainers main objection is that it wasn’t political enough: they wanted HMQ to tell Boris where to go, and cared nothing for the constitutional consequences of that.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163

    You're having a lovely morning watching the events at parliament then your ex phones you cos their partner has gone on holiday without them and they are bored. Now I'm as grouchy as Skinner on a State occasion

    At least Brexit will stop them going abroad as it will take 4 months to get all the visa and International Driving Permits sorted. Assuming the planes are flying... or that Dover is not a lorry park so you can actually get on a ferry.

    ;)
    If she could see her way clear to Dyedexiting properly it would be a start, I was offered no deal at the time!
    :(
  • Charles said:

    I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)

    So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
    https://twitter.com/mattwoose/status/1183616870781476864?s=20
    Is there an English independence party that I've missed?
    English Democrats
    They'd be relevant when they form a government or even have MPs.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    viewcode said:

    Anorak said:

    viewcode said:

    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    But roof has a long "oo" but poof has a short "oo", correct?
    So does "hoof", so is the plural of "hoof" "hooves" or "hoofs"?
    Both.

    "The horse had four hooves, one in each corner"
    "A panicking defender usually just hoofs the ball upfield"
    Thank you. I was worried I was making a goof. :):)
    If you make two of them is it a goove? If you made a series of them you would obviously in the goove!

    Oh dear - hat and coat time again.. :D:D
  • StreeterStreeter Posts: 684
    Anorak said:

    Streeter said:

    Anorak said:

    viewcode said:

    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    But roof has a long "oo" but poof has a short "oo", correct?
    So does "hoof", so is the plural of "hoof" "hooves" or "hoofs"?
    Both.

    "The horse had four hooves, one in each corner"
    "A panicking defender usually just hoofs the ball upfield"
    The third person singular verb form is not a plural.
    It is if he kicks it twice :tongue:
    Ah yes. Two hooves at the ball.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    GIN1138 said:

    HMQ on her way to Parliament.

    Half expected to see Gina Millar in the carriage! :D

    Shes at court trying to get Lady Hale to arrest black rod
    Felt up?

    Nah not going there 😂
  • Charles said:

    I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)

    So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
    https://twitter.com/mattwoose/status/1183616870781476864?s=20
    Is there an English independence party that I've missed?
    https://www.englishdemocrats.party/about

    These guys just like ranting impotently on Twitter, they may appeal.

    https://twitter.com/englishindparty?lang=en

    An EIP will only get traction once enough English folk make the necessary psychological transition from British to English nationalism, or rather learn to differentiate between the two.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    GIN1138 said:

    How come the Extinction Rebellion morons have suddenly been cleared from the streets just because Her Majesty is travelling around London?

    It's almost like when Parliament/Government/Police wants ER out of the way they can get them out of the way? ;)

    Why would they want Elizabeth R out of the way... what’s going on at Buck House 😝
  • Charles said:

    I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)

    So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
    https://twitter.com/mattwoose/status/1183616870781476864?s=20
    Is there an English independence party that I've missed?
    English Democrats
    They'd be relevant when they form a government or even have MPs.
    Like The Brexit Party?
  • kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    This isn’t news. The monarchy has been apolitical for hundreds of years now.

    Ultra-Remainers main objection is that it wasn’t political enough: they wanted HMQ to tell Boris where to go, and cared nothing for the constitutional consequences of that.
    Would Cromwell have been a Leaver or Remainer?
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    edited October 2019

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    This isn’t news. The monarchy has been apolitical for hundreds of years now.

    Ultra-Remainers main objection is that it wasn’t political enough: they wanted HMQ to tell Boris where to go, and cared nothing for the constitutional consequences of that.
    No. My objection is much simpler. From watching those who wanted her to do something political, I have learned that she is not so apolitical as politcally impotent. She literally has to approve whatever the PM tells her.

    I thought she had limited powers. It appears she either has none or, like nuclear weapons, cannot use ever them without destroying everything around her.

    So... what is the point? If she has to rubberstamp everything a PM tells her (and has actually given the Royal Assent power to the govt) then she is nothing more than a gilded rubberstamp.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    This isn’t news. The monarchy has been apolitical for hundreds of years now.

    Ultra-Remainers main objection is that it wasn’t political enough: they wanted HMQ to tell Boris where to go, and cared nothing for the constitutional consequences of that.
    I seem to recall that the people over the past few months complaining about the Queen were Leavers. Didn't Lilico or Toby Young tweet something stupid about it?
  • viewcode said:

    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    But roof has a long "oo" but poof has a short "oo", correct?
    So does "hoof", so is the plural of "hoof" "hooves" or "hoofs"?
    Hooves, I would think.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    This isn’t news. The monarchy has been apolitical for hundreds of years now.

    Ultra-Remainers main objection is that it wasn’t political enough: they wanted HMQ to tell Boris where to go, and cared nothing for the constitutional consequences of that.
    Would Cromwell have been a Leaver or Remainer?
    A leaver, with a very hard line on the Irish
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,337
    Owen holding the barrel for *everyone on Twitter* to shoot the (his) fish...

    https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1183711205229301761?s=20
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    CatMan said:

    GIN1138 said:

    How come the Extinction Rebellion morons have suddenly been cleared from the streets just because Her Majesty is travelling around London?

    It's almost like when Parliament/Government/Police wants ER out of the way they can get them out of the way? ;)

    ER are morons? or ER is a moron?
    HMQ's mode of transport is very eco-friendly. They shouldn't have a problem with it. And they can take home the horse sh*t to upscale into a table-lamp or vase.
    Makes good compost (apparently, I have no personal knowledge of this...)
    It is great (we had a big pile of horse dung at home when I was growing up that we used to give away to friends and neighbours)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,215

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    This isn’t news. The monarchy has been apolitical for hundreds of years now.

    Ultra-Remainers main objection is that it wasn’t political enough: they wanted HMQ to tell Boris where to go, and cared nothing for the constitutional consequences of that.
    Would Cromwell have been a Leaver or Remainer?
    A leaver, with a very hard line on the Irish
    No backstop for Cromwell
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    Pullback Leaves Green Berets Feeling ‘Ashamed,’ and Kurdish Allies Describing ‘Betrayal’

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/13/world/middleeast/kurds-syria-turkey-trump.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708

    Fair to say from Skys public panel in Leeds 'get Brexit done' is resonating

    If there is an extension and a general election the 'get Brexit done' will be a fantastic slogan for the government. Clear and simple.
    Hmm, not sure about that. It sounded good during the initial blaze of activity when Boris first took over but once he's spent a few weeks in the negotiating morass that characterizes actually trying to get Brexit done some of the voters may remember that the Conservatives have been promising that for the last three and a half years and still haven't delivered it.
  • Charles said:

    I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)

    So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
    https://twitter.com/mattwoose/status/1183616870781476864?s=20
    Is there an English independence party that I've missed?
    English Democrats
    They'd be relevant when they form a government or even have MPs.
    Like The Brexit Party?
    Indeed. Irrelevant nonsense those guys, although they do at least have MEPs though hopefully soon that will no longer be the case.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    This isn’t news. The monarchy has been apolitical for hundreds of years now.

    Ultra-Remainers main objection is that it wasn’t political enough: they wanted HMQ to tell Boris where to go, and cared nothing for the constitutional consequences of that.
    No. My objection is much simpler. From watching those who wanted her to do something political, I have learned that she is not so apolitical as politcally impotent. She literally has to approve whatever the PM tells her.

    I thought she had limited powers. It appears she either has none or, like nuclear weapons, cannot use ever them without destroying everything around her.
    Again, this isn’t news. It last reared its ugly head during the Suez Crisis.

    The monarch acts on the advice of her PM. If he (or she) turns out to subsequently have been iffy and landed the Palace in a political splat then the monarch will first be ‘very concerned’ (code for DefCon One) and will wait impatiently for the political or judicial process to do its work.

    She does have an important constitutional role: through her right to be consulted, advised and to warn she can act as an effective private counsellor to every PM. Which is valuable.

    But, she cannot decide. And she certainly wouldn’t touch any aspect of the politics of Brexit with a barge pole, or it’d blow up the monarchy too.
  • Fair to say from Skys public panel in Leeds 'get Brexit done' is resonating

    If there is an extension and a general election the 'get Brexit done' will be a fantastic slogan for the government. Clear and simple.
    Hmm, not sure about that. It sounded good during the initial blaze of activity when Boris first took over but once he's spent a few weeks in the negotiating morass that characterizes actually trying to get Brexit done some of the voters may remember that the Conservatives have been promising that for the last three and a half years and still haven't delivered it.
    Quite right. Boris will go down with Theresa as yet another politician hopelessly out of their depth amid the complexities and contortions of leaving the EU. Worse for Boris was that he advocated it with an airy complacency. He will look frivolous and a bit of a twit.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491
    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    This isn’t news. The monarchy has been apolitical for hundreds of years now.

    Ultra-Remainers main objection is that it wasn’t political enough: they wanted HMQ to tell Boris where to go, and cared nothing for the constitutional consequences of that.
    I seem to recall that the people over the past few months complaining about the Queen were Leavers. Didn't Lilico or Toby Young tweet something stupid about it?
    Lilico certainly did.

    I unfollowed him as I got tired of his ravings.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Is that plural of “poof”?

    If so it’s really great how far we’ve come as a society in the last 50 years
  • kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    This isn’t news. The monarchy has been apolitical for hundreds of years now.

    Ultra-Remainers main objection is that it wasn’t political enough: they wanted HMQ to tell Boris where to go, and cared nothing for the constitutional consequences of that.
    Quite
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1183702529403695104

    Has he any idea what is actually happening?
  • Charles said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Is that plural of “poof”?

    If so it’s really great how far we’ve come as a society in the last 50 years
    Only if you pronounce "poof" with a long "oo" (like hoof and roof). "Poofs" seems more accurate to me.
  • viewcode said:

    Anorak said:

    viewcode said:

    Anorak said:

    isam said:

    Anorak said:

    CatMan said:

    dr_spyn said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wouldn't if be wonderful if Her Majesty said **** this crap, tore up Boris's QS and read out Cromwells speech instead?

    That would be a surreal experience indeed.

    I think itd be funny if they gave an old draft of the speech and, being committed to following the rules, she read a passage like 'my government is committed to insert law and order spiel here, and will introduce insert nonsense measure here.

    From 1964 Private Eye Cover No 75.

    https://www.private-eye.co.uk/covers/cover-75
    So how many "pooves" are there in Wilson's government?
    Wait. Putting aside the offensive and outdated homophobia for a moment, is that really the plural of poof?

    Like hoof and hooves?
    4 Poofs and a Piano don’t think so!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Poofs_and_a_Piano
    Hah! It is a valid plural. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/poof

    I think it's gone the same way as 'rooves', which is approaching obsolescence and has been replaced by the inelegant 'roofs'.
    But roof has a long "oo" but poof has a short "oo", correct?
    So does "hoof", so is the plural of "hoof" "hooves" or "hoofs"?
    Both.

    "The horse had four hooves, one in each corner"
    "A panicking defender usually just hoofs the ball upfield"
    Thank you. I was worried I was making a goof. :):)
    If you make two of them is it a goove? If you made a series of them you would obviously in the goove!

    Oh dear - hat and coat time again.. :D:D
    Aren't multiple goofs a Gove ?
  • Fair to say from Skys public panel in Leeds 'get Brexit done' is resonating

    If there is an extension and a general election the 'get Brexit done' will be a fantastic slogan for the government. Clear and simple.
    Hmm, not sure about that. It sounded good during the initial blaze of activity when Boris first took over but once he's spent a few weeks in the negotiating morass that characterizes actually trying to get Brexit done some of the voters may remember that the Conservatives have been promising that for the last three and a half years and still haven't delivered it.
    The bigger problem however is that anything but Revoke means just the end of the beginning of the Brexit process. In reality, it would never be really done and we would certainly face decades of wrangling.

    That would become increasingly obvious through a GE campaign.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)

    So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
    The U.K. is our demos
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Owen holding the barrel for *everyone on Twitter* to shoot the (his) fish...

    https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1183711205229301761?s=20

    Owen Jones is such an idiot.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Charles said:

    CatMan said:

    GIN1138 said:

    How come the Extinction Rebellion morons have suddenly been cleared from the streets just because Her Majesty is travelling around London?

    It's almost like when Parliament/Government/Police wants ER out of the way they can get them out of the way? ;)

    ER are morons? or ER is a moron?
    HMQ's mode of transport is very eco-friendly. They shouldn't have a problem with it. And they can take home the horse sh*t to upscale into a table-lamp or vase.
    Makes good compost (apparently, I have no personal knowledge of this...)
    It is great (we had a big pile of horse dung at home when I was growing up that we used to give away to friends and neighbours)
    These days lots of it is contaminated with Grazon Pro selective broadleaf weedkiller (used on docks in grass fields) which persists like hell. OK on established shrubs, kills some sorts of seedling stone dead.
  • kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    This isn’t news. The monarchy has been apolitical for hundreds of years now.

    Ultra-Remainers main objection is that it wasn’t political enough: they wanted HMQ to tell Boris where to go, and cared nothing for the constitutional consequences of that.
    No. My objection is much simpler. From watching those who wanted her to do something political, I have learned that she is not so apolitical as politcally impotent. She literally has to approve whatever the PM tells her.

    I thought she had limited powers. It appears she either has none or, like nuclear weapons, cannot use ever them without destroying everything around her.
    Again, this isn’t news. It last reared its ugly head during the Suez Crisis.

    The monarch acts on the advice of her PM. If he (or she) turns out to subsequently have been iffy and landed the Palace in a political splat then the monarch will first be ‘very concerned’ (code for DefCon One) and will wait impatiently for the political or judicial process to do its work.

    She does have an important constitutional role: through her right to be consulted, advised and to warn she can act as an effective private counsellor to every PM. Which is valuable.

    But, she cannot decide. And she certainly wouldn’t touch any aspect of the politics of Brexit with a barge pole, or it’d blow up the monarchy too.
    "The Monarchy - an EU import since 1066"?
  • https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1183702529403695104

    Has he any idea what is actually happening?

    Can anybody make sense of that? He's a war criminal, in substance in not in fact.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    kle4 said:

    Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.

    Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
    This isn’t news. The monarchy has been apolitical for hundreds of years now.

    Ultra-Remainers main objection is that it wasn’t political enough: they wanted HMQ to tell Boris where to go, and cared nothing for the constitutional consequences of that.
    Would Cromwell have been a Leaver or Remainer?
    A leaver, with a very hard line on the Irish
    But willing to work with european partners on a case by case basis whilst reaching out, so to speak, in other areas.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,003
    edited October 2019
    Europe: That UK, eh? It's a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma, all swaddled in a load of Ruritanian pish.

    https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1183673365359411200?s=20
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708

    nico67 said:

    What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .

    What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.

    And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .

    Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn.
    If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them ;)
    What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".

    That would seem uncharacteristically reckless, since not only does it rely on the *British* parliament to pass something they've barely had time to read and with the risk of their own PM playing silly buggers to crash out with No Deal, it also needs to be passed by the *EU* parliament, and IIUC they're not even sitting during most of the last week of October.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1183702529403695104

    Has he any idea what is actually happening?

    Can anybody make sense of that? He's a war criminal, in substance in not in fact.
    We're going to need to make deals with this imbecile fairly quickly to replace what we are losing in Europe.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    Noo said:

    Owen holding the barrel for *everyone on Twitter* to shoot the (his) fish...

    https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1183711205229301761?s=20

    Owen Jones is such an idiot.
    Maybe, but cheap a gag as it was I still chuckled
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,488
    CatMan said:

    More convinced than ever that Putin has dirt on Trump:

    https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1183608565162004480?s=20

    It isn't the first time. Many of the Syrian 'freedom fighters' that the US has worked with up till now have had close ties with Al Qaeda or been virtually indistinguishable. The worrying thing about this current instance is that Turkish politicians have in the past spoken warmly about recognising the Islamic State - I doubt they will be at all perturbed by the release of thousands of IS prisoners to wreak havoc on Syria.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,772
    Noo said:

    Owen holding the barrel for *everyone on Twitter* to shoot the (his) fish...

    https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1183711205229301761?s=20

    Owen Jones is such an idiot.
    Johnson has just told him there will definitely be a GE this autumn.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    nico67 said:

    What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .

    What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.

    And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .

    Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn.
    If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them ;)
    What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".

    That would seem uncharacteristically reckless, since not only does it rely on the *British* parliament to pass something they've barely had time to read and with the risk of their own PM playing silly buggers to crash out with No Deal, it also needs to be passed by the *EU* parliament, and IIUC they're not even sitting during most of the last week of October.
    They wont risk it. The benefit of a conclusion would not be worth it.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)

    So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
    The U.K. is our demos
    Do you think Wales will stick with us if Scotland and NI choose the EU over the UK?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1183702529403695104

    Has he any idea what is actually happening?

    Can anybody make sense of that?
    In the sense that he is rapidly losing his mental faculties and should be relieved of office as soon as possible, yes.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,488

    moonshine said:

    Has “People’s Vote” been officially dropped for “Confirmatory Referendum”?

    Can’t we just call a spade a spade and call it the Losers Revote?

    The basic problem Leavers have is that the more the public have seen of their plans, the less they like them. They have abjectly failed to create a consensus.

    Their lack of introspection about this failure is the most enduring mystery of Brexit for me.
    Contrast with the response of SNP, Green and other Yes campaigners who have never stopped trying to convert wavering No-ers to the Yes side since 2014. Change can only be achieved by converting previous opponents to your arguments. It is a basic, enduring truth of public life. Leavers totally fail to understand that. They think they will win by bullying, intimidation and bending the law. They won’t. The entire edifice is built on very shoddy foundations. It takes decades to build the solid base on which to advance. Leavers have been lazy, negligent and arrogant. There is no consensus to leave, and there never will be until the Leave side is lead by pleasant, trustworthy and persuasive people.
    But there no pleasant, trustworthy or pleasant people in the SNP.
    Whilst I wouldn't go that far, the whole critique is so thuddingly lacking in self-awareness, it's hard to know where to begin.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Europe: That UK, eh? It's a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma, all swaddled in a load of Ruritanian pish.

    https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1183673365359411200?s=20

    Antiquated "Ruritanian pish" is oddly comforting in a time of rapid change and scary news. Bring on the Beefeaters.
This discussion has been closed.