And bear in mind I say that as someone who favours what is usually referred to as a soft Brexit and so would be happy with genuine Parliamentary agreement. I just don't think that is what this is about.
One thing it should be about is ensuring that the government has the broadest possible scope going into the negotiations where nothing is off the table. If the EU wants a quick Brexit, then giving up the card that says 'we're staying as long as we need to' significantly weakens our position.
Silly UKIP fantasies on here. If May loses in Lords (probably) she'd most likely go to country on Hard Brexit, Labour on Soft Brexit, Lib Dems on No Brexit. Lords would be forced to respect outcome as it'd be a manifesto commitment.
As has been mentioned, the only person elected on a UKIP banner last year is a man the party wants rid of (Great White Hope having been humiliated), and they can't throw a cheese and wine party without some poor bugger being glassed.
Talk of UKIP landslides is fanciful but do you not think it's possible that an "emergency" election after the Commons and HoL have voted down A50 might see 50 UKIP MP's holding the balance of power?
That's all it will take for the cohesion of the country to shatter...
Any Labour, LD or Tory MP who voted down A50 and who represents a Leave voting constituency would almost certainly lose their seat to UKIP
.
72% voted in EUref, more than any other election since 1992, I am sorry but the EU and immigration ARE the main political issues at the moment, only the NHS gets an occasional look-in alongside them. You are a middle class Labour voter, not at all typical of the white working class Labour voters who were the bulk of the Labour Leave vote
You are only speaking for yourself - and really cannot transfer your opinion to the electorate at large. Most people were utterly sick to death of Brexit by the time we arrived at June 23rd. The idea that they would look forward to a five-week General Election focussed on Brexit and ignoring almost everything else is pie in the sky. If TM tried to call an election on that basis she might well come to regret it. Her support - as it is - appears to be a mile wide and an inch thick.
I can speak for the 17 million who voted Leave, for the record I voted Remain. The sheer complacency of some Labour supporters like you on this is breathtaking, in white working class Labour seats more voters voted in EU ref than have voted in a general election for decades, if Parliament and their MP then throws their vote back in their faces expect them to throw those MPs out of their seats in response!
You call me a Labour voter despite the fact that I have only voted Labour at one of the last five General Elections. You are assuming far too much -as reflected in your claim to 'speak for 17 million who voted Leave'. I voted Leave and you certainly do not speak for me. How many of those 17 million have you canvassed?
Silly UKIP fantasies on here. If May loses in Lords (probably) she'd most likely go to country on Hard Brexit, Labour on Soft Brexit, Lib Dems on No Brexit. Lords would be forced to respect outcome as it'd be a manifesto commitment.
As has been mentioned, the only person elected on a UKIP banner last year is a man the party wants rid of (Great White Hope having been humiliated), and they can't throw a cheese and wine party without some poor bugger being glassed.
Talk of UKIP landslides is fanciful but do you not think it's possible that an "emergency" election after the Commons and HoL have voted down A50 might see 50 UKIP MP's holding the balance of power?
That's all it will take for the cohesion of the country to shatter...
Any Labour, LD or Tory MP who voted down A50 and who represents a Leave voting constituency would almost certainly lose their seat to UKIP
UKIP are on their death bed . Their candidates for the 2 Welsh by elections today have had to be drafted in from Swindon and Skegness .
The danger is that this could resurrect UKIP. In my opinion there is a lot of excitable discussion tonight but in the end a vote on A50 will be taken and passed. The HOL cannot stop the legislation but can delay it and generally mess around with it.
However that would result in an unstoppable demand for the abolition of the HOL and TM could appoint sufficient conservatives peers to see this happen.
When push comes to shove I do not think the HOL will obstruct the will of the people and the HOC and that A50 will be served though maybe somewhat delayed.
That would be the sensible outcome but I'm really not sure. I think there are a LOT of REMAIN MP's and Lords who are not thinking rationally and will actually vote this down even if it was to mean possible abolition of HoL and other potential disasters...
Are there enough to stop A50 being implemented? We'll see...
Labour leader in the HOL has said they do not want to wreck the serving of A50 and will act responsibly, if that is possible with labour.
Indeed - and I think Lab Peers are pretty independent of Corbyn.
Baroness Margaret Prosser - a very down to earth sensible Lab Peer - said very clearly on Daily Politics a few days ago that the House of Lords would not block Brexit as it would lead to "chaos" in her words.
Sky poll tonight - 48 - 45 in favour of TM serving A50
Fantastic. And put to Parliament I'm sure there would be a larger majority than that. What is everyone getting so het up about? Parliament agreeing to serve A50 must be the least contentious issue in decades.
Will Brexiters please take yes for an answer.
I agree but there has been so much anti A50 from remainer's and vested interests that there is genuine concern that this is a back door attempt at frustrating the verdict of the people.
Tomorrow's paper headlines are furious and it is not with Theresa May
Anti A50 from Remainers??
Most (including me) were amazed it wasn't triggered at 8am on June 24th. Although it made sense to wait a short while.
Sky poll tonight - 48 - 45 in favour of TM serving A50
Fantastic. And put to Parliament I'm sure there would be a larger majority than that. What is everyone getting so het up about? Parliament agreeing to serve A50 must be the least contentious issue in decades.
Will Brexiters please take yes for an answer.
I think it's just an excuse to get excited about something in the midst of all the dullness of the US election.
Silly UKIP fantasies on here. If May loses in Lords (probably) she'd most likely go to country on Hard Brexit, Labour on Soft Brexit, Lib Dems on No Brexit. Lords would be forced to respect outcome as it'd be a manifesto commitment.
As has been mentioned, the only person elected on a UKIP banner last year is a man the party wants rid of (Great White Hope having been humiliated), and they can't throw a cheese and wine party without some poor bugger being glassed.
Talk of UKIP landslides is fanciful but do you not think it's possible that an "emergency" election after the Commons and HoL have voted down A50 might see 50 UKIP MP's holding the balance of power?
That's all it will take for the cohesion of the country to shatter...
Any Labour, LD or Tory MP who voted down A50 and who represents a Leave voting constituency would almost certainly lose their seat to UKIP
UKIP are on their death bed . Their candidates for the 2 Welsh by elections today have had to be drafted in from Swindon and Skegness .
The danger is that this could resurrect UKIP. In my opinion there is a lot of excitable discussion tonight but in the end a vote on A50 will be taken and passed. The HOL cannot stop the legislation but can delay it and generally mess around with it.
However that would result in an unstoppable demand for the abolition of the HOL and TM could appoint sufficient conservatives peers to see this happen.
When push comes to shove I do not think the HOL will obstruct the will of the people and the HOC and that A50 will be served though maybe somewhat delayed.
That would be the sensible outcome but I'm really not sure. I think there are a LOT of REMAIN MP's and Lords who are not thinking rationally and will actually vote this down even if it was to mean possible abolition of HoL and other potential disasters...
Are there enough to stop A50 being implemented? We'll see...
I don't see why May doesn't just make the vote on A50 a confidence vote on her negotiating approach.
If it fails, General Election.
A general election would leave May in a much stronger position.
I agree with the pair of you...and hopefully we can get rid of Corbyn to boot...
And bear in mind I say that as someone who favours what is usually referred to as a soft Brexit and so would be happy with genuine Parliamentary agreement. I just don't think that is what this is about.
One thing it should be about is ensuring that the government has the broadest possible scope going into the negotiations where nothing is off the table. If the EU wants a quick Brexit, then giving up the card that says 'we're staying as long as we need to' significantly weakens our position.
If May is given limited scope in the negotiations the EU will offer nothing in an attempt to get the UK to stay in the EU. Hard Brexit has to be a realistic threat. Cameron made that mistake going into the renegotiation with the EU aware that he intended to campaign to back Remain regardless and was unsurprisingly offered nothing.
If you imagine, for a moment, the circumstances where Parliament blocks A50, you realise it could never happen. The government would fall, May would go. There would be a national government and an election.
Donald Trump is more likely to become POTUS and Jeremy Corbyn is more likely to lead the Labour Party.
*It was Ed Balls joking, but let us be honest, who wouldn't want to give Laura Whitmore a massage?
Look at the headline next to our Nigel "Posh folk in Brexit betrayal". WTFF?
As someone who is a remainer and is described as a posh, member of the metropolitan elite, and a Muslim, some more 'passionate' Leavers think they've hit the jackpot with me.
*It was Ed Balls joking, but let us be honest, who wouldn't want to give Laura Whitmore a massage?
Look at the headline next to our Nigel "Posh folk in Brexit betrayal". WTFF?
As someone who is a remainer and is described as a posh, member of the metropolitan elite, and a Muslim, some more 'passionate' Leavers think they've hit the jackpot with me.
Don't forget AV-loving. We all know your dirty secret around here
And bear in mind I say that as someone who favours what is usually referred to as a soft Brexit and so would be happy with genuine Parliamentary agreement. I just don't think that is what this is about.
One thing it should be about is ensuring that the government has the broadest possible scope going into the negotiations where nothing is off the table. If the EU wants a quick Brexit, then giving up the card that says 'we're staying as long as we need to' significantly weakens our position.
If May is given limited scope in the negotiations the EU will offer nothing in an attempt to get the UK to stay in the EU. Hard Brexit has to be a realistic threat. Cameron made that mistake going into the renegotiation with the EU aware that he intended to campaign to back Remain regardless and was unsurprisingly offered nothing.
I think one thing has been accepted these past few days and that is we are out of the single market.
Have you read the text? It starts, "Today this country faces a crisis as grave as anything since the dark days when Churchill vowed we would fight them on the beaches."
*It was Ed Balls joking, but let us be honest, who wouldn't want to give Laura Whitmore a massage?
Look at the headline next to our Nigel "Posh folk in Brexit betrayal". WTFF?
As someone who is a remainer and is described as a posh, member of the metropolitan elite, and a Muslim, some more 'passionate' Leavers think they've hit the jackpot with me.
Imagine the Express headline if you'd been the one to launch the court case. Actually, don't.
*It was Ed Balls joking, but let us be honest, who wouldn't want to give Laura Whitmore a massage?
Look at the headline next to our Nigel "Posh folk in Brexit betrayal". WTFF?
As someone who is a remainer and is described as a posh, member of the metropolitan elite, and a Muslim, some more 'passionate' Leavers think they've hit the jackpot with me.
Imagine the Express headline if you'd been the one to launch the court case. Actually, don't.
Actually I might launch a Brexit case just for that reason.
Silly UKIP fantasies on here. If May loses in Lords (probably) she'd most likely go to country on Hard Brexit, Labour on Soft Brexit, Lib Dems on No Brexit. Lords would be forced to respect outcome as it'd be a manifesto commitment.
As has been mentioned, the only person elected on a UKIP banner last year is a man the party wants rid of (Great White Hope having been humiliated), and they can't throw a cheese and wine party without some poor bugger being glassed.
Talk of UKIP landslides is fanciful but do you not think it's possible that an "emergency" election after the Commons and HoL have voted down A50 might see 50 UKIP MP's holding the balance of power?
That's all it will take for the cohesion of the country to shatter...
Any Labour, LD or Tory MP who voted down A50 and who represents a Leave voting constituency would almost certainly lose their seat to UKIP
UKIP are on their death bed . Their candidates for the 2 Welsh by elections today have had to be drafted in from Swindon and Skegness .
Correction, UKIP were no longer making much progress after the UK voted Leave, however that was before the judiciary and Remainers in Parliament began the process of throwing back the votes of 17 million Leave voters in their face
So we will see sweeping gains for UKIP tonight as all these disgruntled Leavers rush out in anger and vote UKIP ?
If triggering Article 50 is delayed beyond May's intended March date of course you will see a boost for UKIP
Translate to No then , the UKIP vote will be down again tonight and come next May:s CC elections they will lose 70% plus of the seats they won in 2013
If Article 50 has not been triggered by May's County Council elections expect UKIP to see an increase in their number of seats
They have already lost 25% of them in by elections and through defections .
*It was Ed Balls joking, but let us be honest, who wouldn't want to give Laura Whitmore a massage?
Look at the headline next to our Nigel "Posh folk in Brexit betrayal". WTFF?
As someone who is a remainer and is described as a posh, member of the metropolitan elite, and a Muslim, some more 'passionate' Leavers think they've hit the jackpot with me.
You forgot to say TSE...but you are a true, blue blooded CamBorner...the ultimate Dave and George groupie. That must be worth an additional 5 million remain black marks.
Silly UKIP fantasies on here. If May loses in Lords (probably) she'd most likely go to country on Hard Brexit, Labour on Soft Brexit, Lib Dems on No Brexit. Lords would be forced to respect outcome as it'd be a manifesto commitment.
As has been mentioned, the only person elected on a UKIP banner last year is a man the party wants rid of (Great White Hope having been humiliated), and they can't throw a cheese and wine party without some poor bugger being glassed.
Talk of UKIP landslides is fanciful but do you not think it's possible that an "emergency" election after the Commons and HoL have voted down A50 might see 50 UKIP MP's holding the balance of power?
That's all it will take for the cohesion of the country to shatter...
Any Labour, LD or Tory MP who voted down A50 and who represents a Leave voting constituency would almost certainly lose their seat to UKIP
UKIP are on their death bed . Their candidates for the 2 Welsh by elections today have had to be drafted in from Swindon and Skegness .
The danger is that this could resurrect UKIP. In my opinion there is a lot of excitable discussion tonight but in the end a vote on A50 will be taken and passed. The HOL cannot stop the legislation but can delay it and generally mess around with it.
However that would result in an unstoppable demand for the abolition of the HOL and TM could appoint sufficient conservatives peers to see this happen.
When push comes to shove I do not think the HOL will obstruct the will of the people and the HOC and that A50 will be served though maybe somewhat delayed.
That would be the sensible outcome but I'm really not sure. I think there are a LOT of REMAIN MP's and Lords who are not thinking rationally and will actually vote this down even if it was to mean possible abolition of HoL and other potential disasters...
Are there enough to stop A50 being implemented? We'll see...
I don't see why May doesn't just make the vote on A50 a confidence vote on her negotiating approach.
If it fails, General Election.
The FPTA doesn't work like that.
If a motion of no confidence is passed, and no motion of confidence passed in the next 14 days, then a GE is held.
Sky poll tonight - 48 - 45 in favour of TM serving A50
Fantastic. And put to Parliament I'm sure there would be a larger majority than that. What is everyone getting so het up about? Parliament agreeing to serve A50 must be the least contentious issue in decades.
Will Brexiters please take yes for an answer.
I agree but there has been so much anti A50 from remainer's and vested interests that there is genuine concern that this is a back door attempt at frustrating the verdict of the people.
Tomorrow's paper headlines are furious and it is not with Theresa May
Anti A50 from Remainers??
Most (including me) were amazed it wasn't triggered at 8am on June 24th. Although it made sense to wait a short while.
In view of today's ruling it is a good job it wasn't triggered soon after the 24th June otherwise we would be in a constitutional crisis now.
Mind you both Cameron and Corbyn stated on many occassions they would serve A50 immediately
"Tonight I’ve bought Clinton ECVs at 302 because I think that the polling and markets have over reacted to Friday’s FBI move."
I think it is worth reflecting that Clinton's estimated vote percentage (538, polls only) has dropped by precisely 1% since the FBI intervention, to 48.6%. We are five days on from that now, and Nate Silver reckoned the model would be showing the full effect after 5-7 days. I doubt the FBI will succeed in delivering much more than that 1% to the Trump cause.
Before the FBI intervention, Clinton's rating had dropped by just 0.2% from its peak of 49.8% at around the time of the third debate. The narrowing of the race during that period was almost entirely due to a 1% increase in Trump's rating, which coincided with a 1% decrease in Gary Johnson's. Probably in retrospect that shouldn't have been unexpected, but with Johnson now down to a little more than half his peak, I wonder whether there is much more there for Trump to squeeze.
Clinton's lead, according to 538, now stands at 3.5%. I wonder if it's likely to drop much below that by polling day. If it doesn't, we are back to Trump needing a large systematic error in the polls (albeit one only half as big as he would have needed at the height of Clinton's dominance).
Given that so much in this election hasn't made much sense, I'm mildly surprised to find that I wasn't too far off the mark in what I wrote last night. Currently Clinton's lead according to 538 is a little lower at 3.2% than it was when I wrote that. But compared to last night's "close", the estimate of her vote share is unchanged at 48.5%, and the only development is that Trump has gone up and Johnson has gone down by 0.1% (though earlier today Johnson was actually up 0.1%, with a rating the same as four days ago, which I thought was some confirmation of the view that there isn't much more support there that Trump can squeeze).
So I'm encouraged to stick my neck out and say that - barring any further surprises - by election day the 538 average is likely still to show a Clinton lead of 3% or so. In which case the likelihood of a Trump victory will hinge on how likely it is that there's a systematic error of 3% in the polls.
Who knows? But 538's 34% for a Trump victory seems a bit high, if we accept that a systematic error in each direction is equally likely. Because it would mean 34% for an error of that size in Trump's favour, and 34% for an error in Clinton's, and only 32% that the polls are essentially right.
This isn't the first piece in the Torygraph that's made me wonder whether they haven't changed their tune and decided to follow in the steps of their former owner, fraudster Conrad Black, and support Trump. Richards wants a coalition with Russia. The Torygraph archly point out that he "spoke as the Foreign Secretary condemned Russia for shielding Mr Assad".
The Daily Telegraph receives £900,000 each year to include the supplement Russia Beyond the Headlines, sponsored by the Russian government's newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta.
So if you see someone reading the Daily Telegraph, you know where to tell them to get back to
Brexiters hold your nerve and stop bleating like Corporal Jones.
We're still leaving just that Parliament will endorse the process. May should have done this ages ago which would have avoided the general PB Leaver self-wetting today.
I agree that this is the only right way to do it. But I do not share your confidence that as a result we will get Brexit. That doesn't mean we should condemn the decision of the courts but we should be clear on the consequences.
I think the next challenge (not this procedural judgement) will be to avoid the trap you have just fallen into.
"We will get Brexit."
But what on earth is Brexit? I don't think May will be able to hold out too much longer on spelling it out.
I think you need to accept that whilst you might be willing to accept the basic premise behind the referendum result, many are not. There will be those - and they may even be a majority in Parliament - who do not see this as a means to refine what Brexit means but a means to stop it completely. We have already seen plenty of comments along those lines from the political classes and more will be emboldened by this decision.
That does not in any way mean the decision was wrong. But there will be a great deal of work being done to ensure this becomes a means to stop the UK leaving the EU at all rather than simply defining the nature of Brexit.
And bear in mind I say that as someone who favours what is usually referred to as a soft Brexit and so would be happy with genuine Parliamentary agreement. I just don't think that is what this is about.
It's very obvious that Remainers (although also enjoying doing a good bit of goading) are really interested in stopping Brexit using Parliament, or watering it down so much that it's practically meaningless.
I think they should be very careful what they wish for.
Silly UKIP fantasies on here. If May loses in Lords (probably) she'd most likely go to country on Hard Brexit, Labour on Soft Brexit, Lib Dems on No Brexit. Lords would be forced to respect outcome as it'd be a manifesto commitment.
As has been mentioned, the only person elected on a UKIP banner last year is a man the party wants rid of (Great White Hope having been humiliated), and they can't throw a cheese and wine party without some poor bugger being glassed.
Talk of UKIP landslides is fanciful but do you not think it's possible that an "emergency" election after the Commons and HoL have voted down A50 might see 50 UKIP MP's holding the balance of power?
That's all it will take for the cohesion of the country to shatter...
Any Labour, LD or Tory MP who voted down A50 and who represents a Leave voting constituency would almost certainly lose their seat to UKIP
.
72% voted in EUref, more than any other election since 1992, I am sorry but the EU and immigration ARE the main political issues at the moment, only the NHS gets an occasional look-in alongside them. You are a middle class Labour voter, not at all typical of the white working class Labour voters who were the bulk of the Labour Leave vote
You are only speaking for yourself - and really cannot transfer your opinion to the electorate at large. Most people were utterly sick to death of Brexit by the time we arrived at June 23rd. The blockquote>
I can speak for the 17 million who voted Leave, for the record I voted Remain. The sheer complacency of some Labour supporters like you on this is breathtaking, in white working class Labour seats more voters voted in EU ref than have voted in a general election for decades, if Parliament and their MP then throws their vote back in their faces expect them to throw those MPs out of their seats in response!
You call me a Labour voter despite the fact that I have only voted Labour at one of the last five General Elections. You are assuming far too much -as reflected in your claim to 'speak for 17 million who voted Leave'. I voted Leave and you certainly do not speak for me. How many of those 17 million have you canvassed?
Well you certainly did not vote Tory or UKIP did you? Not voting for Blair when Labour is now led by Corbyn probably makes you a moral icon in the eyes of the present Labour leadership. 17 million voted to leave the EU, canvassed or not you cannot dispute those votes, if Parliament seeks to block and obstruct their votes there will be consequences
*It was Ed Balls joking, but let us be honest, who wouldn't want to give Laura Whitmore a massage?
Look at the headline next to our Nigel "Posh folk in Brexit betrayal". WTFF?
As someone who is a remainer and is described as a posh, member of the metropolitan elite, and a Muslim, some more 'passionate' Leavers think they've hit the jackpot with me.
You forgot to say TSE...but you are a true, blue blooded CamBorner...the ultimate Dave and George groupie. That must be worth an additional 5 million remain black marks.
Also, I work in the Financial Services Sector, which some translate as 'Banker Lawyer'
Sky poll tonight - 48 - 45 in favour of TM serving A50
Fantastic. And put to Parliament I'm sure there would be a larger majority than that. What is everyone getting so het up about? Parliament agreeing to serve A50 must be the least contentious issue in decades.
Will Brexiters please take yes for an answer.
I agree but there has been so much anti A50 from remainer's and vested interests that there is genuine concern that this is a back door attempt at frustrating the verdict of the people.
Tomorrow's paper headlines are furious and it is not with Theresa May
Anti A50 from Remainers??
Most (including me) were amazed it wasn't triggered at 8am on June 24th. Although it made sense to wait a short while.
In view of today's ruling it is a good job it wasn't triggered soon after the 24th June otherwise we would be in a constitutional crisis now.
Mind you both Cameron and Corbyn stated on many occassions they would serve A50 immediately
Which takes us back to the central mystery of how a bunch of people obsessed for decades with leaving the EU never gave much thought to how we would or should go about it.
The problem with lawyers is they often can't see the wood for the trees. They get so bound up in the minutiae of particular clauses, and their cleverness with them, they miss out on basic justice.
Whether these judges are technically correct or not is irrelevant. The political optics are horrible, and it will stoke a lot of anger.
I believe Brexit needs to happen. It will be neither as bleak as PB remainers wish it to be, nor as chock full of milk and honey as PB leavers expect. If it doesn't happen, then I think the country will be fecked and we'll be even more divided a nation than we are now.
*It was Ed Balls joking, but let us be honest, who wouldn't want to give Laura Whitmore a massage?
Look at the headline next to our Nigel "Posh folk in Brexit betrayal". WTFF?
As someone who is a remainer and is described as a posh, member of the metropolitan elite, and a Muslim, some more 'passionate' Leavers think they've hit the jackpot with me.
You forgot to say TSE...but you are a true, blue blooded CamBorner...the ultimate Dave and George groupie. That must be worth an additional 5 million remain black marks.
Also, I work in the Financial Services Sector, which some translate as 'Banker Lawyer'
Silly UKIP fantasies on here. If May loses in Lords (probably) she'd most likely go to country on Hard Brexit, Labour on Soft Brexit, Lib Dems on No Brexit. Lords would be forced to respect outcome as it'd be a manifesto commitment.
As has been mentioned, the only person elected on a UKIP banner last year is a man the party wants rid of (Great White Hope having been humiliated), and they can't throw a cheese and wine party without some poor bugger being glassed.
Talk of UKIP landslides is fanciful but do you not think it's possible that an "emergency" election after the Commons and HoL have voted down A50 might see 50 UKIP MP's holding the balance of power?
That's all it will take for the cohesion of the country to shatter...
Any Labour, LD or Tory MP who voted down A50 and who represents a Leave voting constituency would almost certainly lose their seat to UKIP
UKIP are on their death bed . Their candidates for the 2 Welsh by elections today have had to be drafted in from Swindon and Skegness .
Correction, UKIP were no longer making much progress after the UK voted Leave, however that was before the judiciary and Remainers in Parliament began the process of throwing back the votes of 17 million Leave voters in their face
So we will see sweeping gains for UKIP tonight as all these disgruntled Leavers rush out in anger and vote UKIP ?
If triggering Article 50 is delayed beyond May's intended March date of course you will see a boost for UKIP
Translate to No then , the UKIP vote will be down again tonight and come next May:s CC elections they will lose 70% plus of the seats they won in 2013
If Article 50 has not been triggered by May's County Council elections expect UKIP to see an increase in their number of seats
They have already lost 25% of them in by elections and through defections .
They will win them all back and more if Parliament delays triggering Article 50 into the spring
Desperate Remainers may be gloating about a technical victory today but the Daily Mail front page will resonate with the majority of the public. The elite conspiring to frustrate the democratic will of the people will not end well. The people spoke decisively in the referendum and their will should be respected.
The problem with lawyers is they often can't see the wood for the trees. They get so bound up in the minutiae of particular clauses, and their cleverness with them, they miss out on basic justice.
Whether these judges are technically correct or not is irrelevant. The political optics are horrible, and it will stoke a lot of anger.
So you want a country where judges ignore the law?
The problem with lawyers is they often can't see the wood for the trees. They get so bound up in the minutiae of particular clauses, and their cleverness with them, they miss out on basic justice.
Whether these judges are technically correct or not is irrelevant. The political optics are horrible, and it will stoke a lot of anger.
Their job is to judge the law, not play politics. The government fucked it up. The referendum bill should have granted authority. It didn't.
The problem with lawyers is they often can't see the wood for the trees. They get so bound up in the minutiae of particular clauses, and their cleverness with them, they miss out on basic justice.
Whether these judges are technically correct or not is irrelevant. The political optics are horrible, and it will stoke a lot of anger.
It. Is. The. Law. The law of a sovereign, democratic country. Thank God we have an independent judiciary.
Silly UKIP fantasies on here. If May loses in Lords (probably) she'd most likely go to country on Hard Brexit, Labour on Soft Brexit, Lib Dems on No Brexit. Lords would be forced to respect outcome as it'd be a manifesto commitment.
As has been mentioned, the only person elected on a UKIP banner last year is a man the party wants rid of (Great White Hope having been humiliated), and they can't throw a cheese and wine party without some poor bugger being glassed.
Talk of UKIP landslides is fanciful but do you not think it's possible that an "emergency" election after the Commons and HoL have voted down A50 might see 50 UKIP MP's holding the balance of power?
That's all it will take for the cohesion of the country to shatter...
Any Labour, LD or Tory MP who voted down A50 and who represents a Leave voting constituency would almost certainly lose their seat to UKIP
UKIP are on their death bed . Their candidates for the 2 Welsh by elections today have had to be drafted in from Swindon and Skegness .
Correction, UKIP were no longer making much progress after the UK voted Leave, however that was before the judiciary and Remainers in Parliament began the process of throwing back the votes of 17 million Leave voters in their face
So we will see sweeping gains for UKIP tonight as all these disgruntled Leavers rush out in anger and vote UKIP ?
If triggering Article 50 is delayed beyond May's intended March date of course you will see a boost for UKIP
Translate to No then , the UKIP vote will be down again tonight and come next May:s CC elections they will lose 70% plus of the seats they won in 2013
If Article 50 has not been triggered by May's County Council elections expect UKIP to see an increase in their number of seats
They have already lost 25% of them in by elections and through defections .
They will win them all back and more if Parliament delays triggering Article 50 into the spring
Dear mother of God, the Express has gone full-on mental:
The editors probably think they were EU judges.
Have you read the text? It starts, "Today this country faces a crisis as grave as anything since the dark days when Churchill vowed we would fight them on the beaches."
Mad.
Ahem. If I can go all SeanT for a moment.
I wrote this just last night "The Express, on the other hand, has no value whatsoever, and I'd happily throw it down a mine shaft."
Have you read the text? It starts, "Today this country faces a crisis as grave as anything since the dark days when Churchill vowed we would fight them on the beaches."
Desperate Remainers may be gloating about a technical victory today but the Daily Mail front page will resonate with the majority of the public. The elite conspiring to frustrate the democratic will of the people will not end well. The people spoke decisively in the referendum and their will should be respected.
I hesitate to put myself in the same camp as Alastair Meeks (particularly when he's been so royally pompous, rude and condescending these past few months) but I've never taken The Express seriously.
The Daily Mail however, I do take far more seriously, and that headline makes me worry*.
(*before Remainers get excited thinking I'm agreeing with them, I don't, and I won't, but this is the sort of thing that risks being unleashed if Brexit is gleefully frustrated, or the substance of it is, even if I agree the Mail is bang out of order in stoking it)
Desperate Remainers may be gloating about a technical victory today but the Daily Mail front page will resonate with the majority of the public. The elite conspiring to frustrate the democratic will of the people will not end well. The people spoke decisively in the referendum and their will should be respected.
This post was brought to you by the Nigebot.
No, I'm just an ordinary bloke in Yorkshire who believes in democracy and resents the sneering elite that think they know best. Your arrogant post suggests you are one such.
I hesitate to put myself in the same camp as Alastair Meeks (particularly when he's been so royally pompous, rude and condescending these past few months) but I've never taken The Express seriously.
The Daily Mail however, I do take far more seriously, and that headline makes me worry*.
(*before Remainers get excited thinking I'm agreeing with them, I don't, and I won't, but this is the sort of thing that risks being unleashed if Brexit is gleefully frustrated, or the substance of it is, even if I agree the Mail is bang out of order in stoking it)
I've never seen Alistair make any specific, personal insults on other posters. But, by golly, he's taken some....
If the judges had wanted to find the ruling the other way, I bet they would have found arguments in favour of it.
You only have to look at the Supreme Court decisions in the US to see how the political viewpoint decides the outcome, then they make perfectly rational and logical arguments to justify it, even though they contradict the other judges. They probably totally believe themselves too.
I believe Brexit needs to happen. It will be neither as bleak as PB remainers wish it to be, nor as chock full of milk and honey as PB leavers expect. If it doesn't happen, then I think the country will be fecked and we'll be even more divided a nation than we are now.
It is bloody dangerous if it doesn't happen.
Many Remainers will see that as entirely the fault of the Leavers, but Remainers are just as bad with the racist/stupid lines peddled onto Leavers too.
It's nasty and it's ugly. We are now well beyond rational debate on this. I don't want a political civil war to turn into something worse.
If the judges had wanted to find the ruling the other way, I bet they would have found arguments in favour of it.
You only have to look at the Supreme Court decisions in the US to see how the political viewpoint decides the outcome, then they make perfectly rational and logical arguments to justify it, even though they contradict each other. They probably totally believe themselves too.
You know nothing, read DavidL's astute observation earlier on today about the inept of the Government Lawyers, and their arguments therein.
Silly UKIP fantasies on here. If May loses in Lords (probably) she'd most likely go to country on Hard Brexit, Labour on Soft Brexit, Lib Dems on No Brexit. Lords would be forced to respect outcome as it'd be a manifesto commitment.
As has been mentioned, the only person elected on a UKIP banner last year is a man the party wants rid of (Great White Hope having been humiliated), and they can't throw a cheese and wine party without some poor bugger being glassed.
Talk of UKIP landslides is fanciful but do you not think it's possible that an "emergency" election after the Commons and HoL have voted down A50 might see 50 UKIP MP's holding the balance of power?
That's all it will take for the cohesion of the country to shatter...
Any Labour, LD or Tory MP who voted down A50 and who represents a Leave voting constituency would almost certainly lose their seat to UKIP
UKIP are on their death bed . Their candidates for the 2 Welsh by elections today have had to be drafted in from Swindon and Skegness .
Correction, UKIP were no longer making much progress after the UK voted Leave, however that was before the judiciary and Remainers in Parliament began the process of throwing back the votes of 17 million Leave voters in their face
So we will see sweeping gains for UKIP tonight as all these disgruntled Leavers rush out in anger and vote UKIP ?
If triggering Article 50 is delayed beyond May's intended March date of course you will see a boost for UKIP
Translate to No then , the UKIP vote will be down again tonight and come next May:s CC elections they will lose 70% plus of the seats they won in 2013
If Article 50 has not been triggered by May's County Council elections expect UKIP to see an increase in their number of seats
They have already lost 25% of them in by elections and through defections .
They will win them all back and more if Parliament delays triggering Article 50 into the spring
Dream On
17 million angry Leave voters, easy targets for UKIP
I believe Brexit needs to happen. It will be neither as bleak as PB remainers wish it to be, nor as chock full of milk and honey as PB leavers expect. If it doesn't happen, then I think the country will be fecked and we'll be even more divided a nation than we are now.
It is bloody dangerous if it doesn't happen.
Many Remainers will see that as entirely the fault of the Leavers, but Remainers are just as bad with the racist/stupid lines peddled onto Leavers too.
It's nasty and it's ugly. We are now well beyond rational debate on this. I don't want a political civil war to turn into something worse.
I will criticise either side that stokes it.
Well said. Brexit is dangerous either way precisely because of this sort of hyperbolic nonsense.
I hesitate to put myself in the same camp as Alastair Meeks (particularly when he's been so royally pompous, rude and condescending these past few months) but I've never taken The Express seriously.
The Daily Mail however, I do take far more seriously, and that headline makes me worry*.
(*before Remainers get excited thinking I'm agreeing with them, I don't, and I won't, but this is the sort of thing that risks being unleashed if Brexit is gleefully frustrated, or the substance of it is, even if I agree the Mail is bang out of order in stoking it)
I've never seen Alistair make any specific, personal insults on other posters. But, by golly, he's taken some....
I believe Brexit needs to happen. It will be neither as bleak as PB remainers wish it to be, nor as chock full of milk and honey as PB leavers expect. If it doesn't happen, then I think the country will be fecked and we'll be even more divided a nation than we are now.
It is bloody dangerous if it doesn't happen.
Many Remainers will see that as entirely the fault of the Leavers, but Remainers are just as bad with the racist/stupid lines peddled onto Leavers too.
It's nasty and it's ugly. We are now well beyond rational debate on this. I don't want a political civil war to turn into something worse.
I will criticise either side that stokes it.
Well said. Brexit is dangerous either way precisely because of this sort of hyperbolic nonsense.
If the judges had wanted to find the ruling the other way, I bet they would have found arguments in favour of it.
You only have to look at the Supreme Court decisions in the US to see how the political viewpoint decides the outcome, then they make perfectly rational and logical arguments to justify it, even though they contradict each other. They probably totally believe themselves too.
You know nothing, read DavidL's astute observation earlier on today about the inept of the Government Lawyers, and their arguments therein.
I did, and it was very good. But if you don't think judges are biased by their prejudices and beliefs then you know nothing about human nature.
The problem with lawyers is they often can't see the wood for the trees. They get so bound up in the minutiae of particular clauses, and their cleverness with them, they miss out on basic justice.
Whether these judges are technically correct or not is irrelevant. The political optics are horrible, and it will stoke a lot of anger.
Their job is to judge the law, not play politics. The government fucked it up. The referendum bill should have granted authority. It didn't.
Maybe that was the cunning plan laid against the wrong outcome, which is why no other contingency plans were needed. Was it that master strategist, Mr Osborne?
Will somebody please get a waaaaaaahmbulance for the leavers.
Their behaviour (in general - there are some notable exceptions) has been utterly pathetic and counter to the democratic ideals they (supposedly) hold most dear: - the primacy of UK courts - the independence of the judiciary - the checks and balances between the legislature and the executive
If the judges in question have indeed erred (and they might have), then the Supreme Court will overturn. This is how it works, and has done since before the EU was founded. Stop shrieking and wailing about "the will of the people will not be frustrated" and "liberal elites". You're effectively suggesting that politicians should act without accountability. Like in Brussels, supposedly...
To coin an oft-used phrase: You lost. Deal with it.
TheScreamingEagles - first decision to not deport - cat, appeal court says of couse the cat is not important - of course you can stay and live off the taxpayer like we do.
Comments
Baroness Margaret Prosser - a very down to earth sensible Lab Peer - said very clearly on Daily Politics a few days ago that the House of Lords would not block Brexit as it would lead to "chaos" in her words.
Most (including me) were amazed it wasn't triggered at 8am on June 24th. Although it made sense to wait a short while.
I agree with the pair of you...and hopefully we can get rid of Corbyn to boot...
Donald Trump is more likely to become POTUS and Jeremy Corbyn is more likely to lead the Labour Party.
Oh wait.
How much harder do you want?
I brung you a massage: I was bruising the threads and saw that a voot in Porliament is requeered to trigger Brixit.
Mad.
I suspect this may be getting rather bigger than just about Brexit, now.
The government AND the remain side told us our decision would be implemented. No going back. No second chance.
That manifestly is not the case.
Mind you both Cameron and Corbyn stated on many occassions they would serve A50 immediately
So I'm encouraged to stick my neck out and say that - barring any further surprises - by election day the 538 average is likely still to show a Clinton lead of 3% or so. In which case the likelihood of a Trump victory will hinge on how likely it is that there's a systematic error of 3% in the polls.
Who knows? But 538's 34% for a Trump victory seems a bit high, if we accept that a systematic error in each direction is equally likely. Because it would mean 34% for an error of that size in Trump's favour, and 34% for an error in Clinton's, and only 32% that the polls are essentially right.
Still four points ahead of you in the nationals.
after this decision, it;ll be more like fourteen.
This isn't the first piece in the Torygraph that's made me wonder whether they haven't changed their tune and decided to follow in the steps of their former owner, fraudster Conrad Black, and support Trump. Richards wants a coalition with Russia. The Torygraph archly point out that he "spoke as the Foreign Secretary condemned Russia for shielding Mr Assad".
The Daily Telegraph receives £900,000 each year to include the supplement Russia Beyond the Headlines, sponsored by the Russian government's newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta.
So if you see someone reading the Daily Telegraph, you know where to tell them to get back to
I think they should be very careful what they wish for.
But I know, parliamentary democracy is a bitch.
The problem with lawyers is they often can't see the wood for the trees. They get so bound up in the minutiae of particular clauses, and their cleverness with them, they miss out on basic justice.
Whether these judges are technically correct or not is irrelevant. The political optics are horrible, and it will stoke a lot of anger.
Govt lost by 29 - with Crossbenchers splitting almost exactly 50:50.
Lab + LD have 55 more Peers than Con - Con cut that deficit with higher turnout but they lose without Crossbenchers breaking in their favour.
But it's getting tighter - if Crossbenchers had split 2:1 with Govt then it's neck and neck.
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/business-papers/lords/lords-divisions/?date=2016-Nov-02&itemId=1&session=2016-May-18
Well it is a view I suppose.
Happy now?
I wrote this just last night "The Express, on the other hand, has no value whatsoever, and I'd happily throw it down a mine shaft."
I'm ace. You may kneel whenever you like.
The Daily Mail however, I do take far more seriously, and that headline makes me worry*.
(*before Remainers get excited thinking I'm agreeing with them, I don't, and I won't, but this is the sort of thing that risks being unleashed if Brexit is gleefully frustrated, or the substance of it is, even if I agree the Mail is bang out of order in stoking it)
https://twitter.com/DouglasCarswell/status/794136296277110784
If the judges had wanted to find the ruling the other way, I bet they would have found arguments in favour of it.
You only have to look at the Supreme Court decisions in the US to see how the political viewpoint decides the outcome, then they make perfectly rational and logical arguments to justify it, even though they contradict the other judges. They probably totally believe themselves too.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/
Many Remainers will see that as entirely the fault of the Leavers, but Remainers are just as bad with the racist/stupid lines peddled onto Leavers too.
It's nasty and it's ugly. We are now well beyond rational debate on this. I don't want a political civil war to turn into something worse.
I will criticise either side that stokes it.
Logging off now. Depressing.
I did, and it was very good. But if you don't think judges are biased by their prejudices and beliefs then you know nothing about human nature.
(c) Steve Wright (the American one....)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
Their behaviour (in general - there are some notable exceptions) has been utterly pathetic and counter to the democratic ideals they (supposedly) hold most dear:
- the primacy of UK courts
- the independence of the judiciary
- the checks and balances between the legislature and the executive
If the judges in question have indeed erred (and they might have), then the Supreme Court will overturn. This is how it works, and has done since before the EU was founded. Stop shrieking and wailing about "the will of the people will not be frustrated" and "liberal elites". You're effectively suggesting that politicians should act without accountability. Like in Brussels, supposedly...
To coin an oft-used phrase: You lost. Deal with it.
https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/794230287655956480