If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Thinking it should not have been called strikes me as a very pointless question. I know, as per the header, that the point is to emphasise that it happening means years more stages to go through, but that just seems a more subtle false sell of how stopping things will make everything hunky dory again.
Years ago on here I forwarded the idea that Islamic State would eventually eat itself as it spiralled into deeply divisive internal rivalries and an influx of increasingly diverse fighting base.
Its probable rather than possible that Baghdadi got grassed up by someone on the inside. The increased factionalism that may result is both good, in that the organisation may lack a central philosophical force for a while and bad because what was a relatively devolved outfit becomes even more so and harder to address because of it.
Edit. One of his senior deputies bought it as well. Two of them in one place is unusual.
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
Years ago on here I forwarded the idea that Islamic State would eventually eat itself as it spiralled into deeply divisive internal rivalries and an influx of increasingly diverse fighting base.
Its probable rather than possible that Baghdadi got grassed up by someone on the inside. The increased factionalism that may result is both good, in that the organisation may lack a central philosophical force for a while and bad because what was a relatively devolved outfit becomes even more so and harder to address because of it.
Edit. One of his senior deputies bought it as well. Two of them in one place is unusual.
I would imagine this was the bone that Turkey offered up doe the Syria attack.
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
There wont be
Even if there is not, the Tories will always be a Brexit party now. Their membership demands it. They will get a majority sooner or later.
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
You're 100% correct.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
And I think you would probably be right.
Quite the rallying cry isn't it.
But it might have a parallel effect on people who want to stop Brexit.
If this election really does boil down to a de-facto second referendum (which, after being a sceptic of that idea for so long, now I reluctantly agree with), then, given the Remain and Leave camps are roughly equal in size, a hung parliament is likely IMO. Yes yes, "split votes" etc., but I'm just not convinced that people who hate Boris and his Brexit policy aren't going to default to the best option of stopping him when it comes down to it (though to be fair, for the same reason, I'd expect the Tories to squeeze what remains of the Brexit Party vote, too).
Years ago on here I forwarded the idea that Islamic State would eventually eat itself as it spiralled into deeply divisive internal rivalries and an influx of increasingly diverse fighting base.
Its probable rather than possible that Baghdadi got grassed up by someone on the inside. The increased factionalism that may result is both good, in that the organisation may lack a central philosophical force for a while and bad because what was a relatively devolved outfit becomes even more so and harder to address because of it.
Edit. One of his senior deputies bought it as well. Two of them in one place is unusual.
I would imagine this was the bone that Turkey offered up doe the Syria attack.
Hard to know. At the moment everyone is trying to get on the credit list. Turkish officials claim to have been onboard with this operation. There are stories that Tahrir Al-Sham, what used to be called Al Nusra the Al Qaeda affiliate that underwent a rebrand, was aware Baghdadi was in Idlib and were out to get him. On the other hand, the Kurdish dominated SDF says they were involved and that the Turkish military operation delayed the potential assault on Baghdadi.
It's possible to believe Brexit is the wrong decision and also think we should do it. People with such views are unlikely to vote for Brexit if given the chance though.
If the WAIB does come back then it’s going to still be difficult to get it over the line .
The DUP given their comments over the weekend are going to support any amendments that in their view protect the Union .
So closer alignment with the EU would help that , and so a Customs Union etc .
The Labour Leavers barring the 6 who voted with the government on the programme motion are going to be under huge pressure to support a CU as that’s the Labour manifesto.
One of the Labour MPs , John Mann is moving to the HOL on Tuesday .
It might just be one vote but the government has little room in terms of votes .
The numbers for the second reading are the max available votes . The only way is down from there .
The FT leak is now a huge problem for Labour MPs who are seeking a way of supporting the government.
The second reading is IMO .
AMINO .
A majority in name only !
It might still scrape over the line but who would put money on it .
"Asked to consider the difficulties the government has had in reaching an agreement, 57% of UK adults surveyed said that they believed it would have been better not to have had a public vote in June 2016."
But isn't that first clause a sign that the finding is probably biased? If the question had been phrased "A democracy means that power comes from the people. The public decided by a referendum whether to remain in the Common Market in 1975. Considering that, should the next generation have decided whether to continue our membership of the EU in 2016?", you might have got an entirely different answer. Equally biased, but in the opposite direction.
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
You're 100% correct.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
Because they are more interested in keeping their jobs, than the abstract principle of EU membership.
(When job losses were abstract, it was one thing. When immintent, another.)
(the EU is ) 'a regional arm of the globalisation project. Its unswerving adherence to liberal markets, deregulation and privatisation is to the detriment of working people…
'The EU is a bureaucratic, largely undemocratic organisation with a largely powerless parliament.
'And presently constituted, it cannot and will not serve the people of Europe.'
(the EU is ) 'a regional arm of the globalisation project. Its unswerving adherence to liberal markets, deregulation and privatisation is to the detriment of working people…
'The EU is a bureaucratic, largely undemocratic organisation with a largely powerless parliament.
'And presently constituted, it cannot and will not serve the people of Europe.'
Clue - not Boris Johnson or Nigel Farage.
Probably that Greek guy who did so much to get kids addicted to gambling for real money i video games.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
How are the terms rigged? The terms are the same as they've always been.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
I don't understand how the terms for an election on 12th are 'rigged' but one for the 9th is not. I really think your partisan hatred is leading you to oversell this. I thought the only difference is 9th means no time for Boris to make a game of trying to get the WAIB through as part of, essentially, early campaigning.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
How are the terms rigged? The terms are the same as they've always been.
Aren`t they trying to suppress the vote by means of requiring ID?
Apart from getting round all the rules over expenditure, of course.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
How are the terms rigged? The terms are the same as they've always been.
Aren`t they trying to suppress the vote by means of requiring ID?
Apart from getting round all the rules over expenditure, of course.
There's no way that would be done in time for an election in December. Delay it longer, and perhaps.
It's to be presumed that 100% of political bettors are very pleased that the referendum took place, because it has offered so many betting opportunities.
For example, does anyone really think there is a 1 in 25 chance of our leaving the EU in four days' time? But we can still bet against it on that basis.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
How are the terms rigged? The terms are the same as they've always been.
Aren`t they trying to suppress the vote by means of requiring ID?
Apart from getting round all the rules over expenditure, of course.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
How are the terms rigged? The terms are the same as they've always been.
Aren`t they trying to suppress the vote by means of requiring ID?
Apart from getting round all the rules over expenditure, of course.
No.
I'm also curious how the rules on expenditure are going to be changed/broken.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
How are the terms rigged? The terms are the same as they've always been.
Aren`t they trying to suppress the vote by means of requiring ID?
Apart from getting round all the rules over expenditure, of course.
Like they tried to suppress driving by introducing the breathalyzer.
(the EU is ) 'a regional arm of the globalisation project. Its unswerving adherence to liberal markets, deregulation and privatisation is to the detriment of working people…
'The EU is a bureaucratic, largely undemocratic organisation with a largely powerless parliament.
'And presently constituted, it cannot and will not serve the people of Europe.'
Clue - not Boris Johnson or Nigel Farage.
Probably that Greek guy who did so much to get kids addicted to gambling for real money i video games.
Varoufakis predates lootboxes by quite some distance.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
How are the terms rigged? The terms are the same as they've always been.
Aren`t they trying to suppress the vote by means of requiring ID?
(the EU is ) 'a regional arm of the globalisation project. Its unswerving adherence to liberal markets, deregulation and privatisation is to the detriment of working people…
'The EU is a bureaucratic, largely undemocratic organisation with a largely powerless parliament.
'And presently constituted, it cannot and will not serve the people of Europe.'
Years ago on here I forwarded the idea that Islamic State would eventually eat itself as it spiralled into deeply divisive internal rivalries and an influx of increasingly diverse fighting base.
Its probable rather than possible that Baghdadi got grassed up by someone on the inside. The increased factionalism that may result is both good, in that the organisation may lack a central philosophical force for a while and bad because what was a relatively devolved outfit becomes even more so and harder to address because of it.
Edit. One of his senior deputies bought it as well. Two of them in one place is unusual.
I would imagine this was the bone that Turkey offered up doe the Syria attack.
Hard to know. At the moment everyone is trying to get on the credit list. Turkish officials claim to have been onboard with this operation. There are stories that Tahrir Al-Sham, what used to be called Al Nusra the Al Qaeda affiliate that underwent a rebrand, was aware Baghdadi was in Idlib and were out to get him. On the other hand, the Kurdish dominated SDF says they were involved and that the Turkish military operation delayed the potential assault on Baghdadi.
The Telegraph is reporting that the Iraqi security services captured one of his wives, a nephew and the wife of a courier and one of those gave the details. This of course could be a cover campaign to cover the real source.
It's possible to believe Brexit is the wrong decision and also think we should do it. People with such views are unlikely to vote for Brexit if given the chance though.
That’s me. I think it's a mistake but I think we must do it but I hope we don't - if that makes any sense.
It's possible to believe Brexit is the wrong decision and also think we should do it. People with such views are unlikely to vote for Brexit if given the chance though.
That’s me. I think it's a mistake but I think we must do it but I hope we don't - if that makes any sense.
I used to think I was indecisive myself. Now I'm not so sure.
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
You're 100% correct.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
If you said that and we had a fair PR electoral system then I'd bite your hand off. It's pretty obvious that the Tory's strategy is to push through their Brexit on 35% of the votes because they couldn't get it ratified in a referendum.
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
There wont be
Even if there is not, the Tories will always be a Brexit party now. Their membership demands it. They will get a majority sooner or later.
Agreed. Especially while Farage is still around banging his drum.
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
You're 100% correct.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
If you said that and we had a fair PR electoral system then I'd bite your hand off. It's pretty obvious that the Tory's strategy is to push through their Brexit on 35% of the votes because they couldn't get it ratified in a referendum.
If you're not happy with it then what's to stop you from overturning it on 35% of the votes in the future?
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
You're 100% correct.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
If you said that and we had a fair PR electoral system then I'd bite your hand off. It's pretty obvious that the Tory's strategy is to push through their Brexit on 35% of the votes because they couldn't get it ratified in a referendum.
If you're not happy with it then what's to stop you from overturning it on 35% of the votes in the future?
It takes a shitload more than 35% of the vote to rejoin the EU. They'd have to let us in for starters. Leaving is a cliff edge in more than one sense: you can't fall up a cliff.
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
You're 100% correct.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
If you said that and we had a fair PR electoral system then I'd bite your hand off. It's pretty obvious that the Tory's strategy is to push through their Brexit on 35% of the votes because they couldn't get it ratified in a referendum.
If you're not happy with it then what's to stop you from overturning it on 35% of the votes in the future?
It takes a shitload more than 35% of the vote to rejoin the EU. They'd have to let us in for starters. Leaving is a cliff edge in more than one sense: you can't fall up a cliff.
But you can fly up it on the back of a unicorn. If the unicorn has wings. And if the unicorn isn't ascending so steeply you fall off. And probably under a few other conditions.
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
You're 100% correct.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
If you said that and we had a fair PR electoral system then I'd bite your hand off. It's pretty obvious that the Tory's strategy is to push through their Brexit on 35% of the votes because they couldn't get it ratified in a referendum.
If you're not happy with it then what's to stop you from overturning it on 35% of the votes in the future?
I think that is, in essence, the Liberal Hypocrites election manifesto.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
How are the terms rigged? The terms are the same as they've always been.
Aren`t they trying to suppress the vote by means of requiring ID?
Apart from getting round all the rules over expenditure, of course.
(the EU is ) 'a regional arm of the globalisation project. Its unswerving adherence to liberal markets, deregulation and privatisation is to the detriment of working people…
'The EU is a bureaucratic, largely undemocratic organisation with a largely powerless parliament.
'And presently constituted, it cannot and will not serve the people of Europe.'
Coolly holing out on the 4th as the Bad Guy "died like a dawg" thousands of miles away in an operation that he personally planned in the minutest detail, carried out to precise perfection by a small group of his loyal and magnificent soldiers.
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
It's a big reason Boris should have gone the harder route of trying the WAIB when he could have. A lot of remainers thought it would get through. Instead he got frit, saw it would be tough, and like May gave in to temptation to get a big majority to do it properly, and while he might succeed where she failed, he's opened the door to remain after it was almost shut in their faces.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
You're 100% correct.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
If you said that and we had a fair PR electoral system then I'd bite your hand off. It's pretty obvious that the Tory's strategy is to push through their Brexit on 35% of the votes because they couldn't get it ratified in a referendum.
If you're not happy with it then what's to stop you from overturning it on 35% of the votes in the future?
It takes a shitload more than 35% of the vote to rejoin the EU. They'd have to let us in for starters. Leaving is a cliff edge in more than one sense: you can't fall up a cliff.
52% already voted to leave.
If you're not happy with the form of leave vote for another at the next General Election. Its called taking back control.
Although any future Tory government could remove a customs union amendment etc from the WAIB the optics of going into the election with that there could prove a gift to the Brexit Party.
It would be better for the Tories to pull the bill and go into an election without a deal rather than an amended WAIB.
Labour Remainer MPs must back a CU as a means to wreck the deal . As for Labour Leavers refusing to back the CU and just waving the deal through is likely to mean game over for them .
There are so many moving parts to how things might turn out .
Coolly holing out on the 4th as the Bad Guy "died like a dawg" thousands of miles away in an operation that he personally planned in the minutest detail, carried out to precise perfection by a small group of his loyal and magnificent soldiers.
The base swoon in unison. The legend grows.
He sank one in four shots, while the SEALS did four with one shot....
They probably didn't tell him because he's a fucking liability.
The tweet would have been: "So excited. My special forces will be executing ISIS bad guy and Nancy Pelosi's friend Bag Daddy. Wanted to be part of raid myself stopped by killjoy nonothing Generals."
So - as we're just four days away from No Deal - any advice on stockpiling?
Don't?
Way back in the 80's there were rumours that there would be a sugar shortage. My grandmother proceeded to stockpile 30 bags of sugar and, to be fair, so did all her neighbours. Guess what? There was a sugar shortage!
(the EU is ) 'a regional arm of the globalisation project. Its unswerving adherence to liberal markets, deregulation and privatisation is to the detriment of working people…
'The EU is a bureaucratic, largely undemocratic organisation with a largely powerless parliament.
'And presently constituted, it cannot and will not serve the people of Europe.'
If the GOP were smart they would try harder to win more African Americans. Just winning a few more % of socially conservative blacks, would give them a durable majority, and enough state legislative control for a constitutional amendment.
So the White House released a staged photograph of Trump overseeing the raid from the situation room, taken a couple of hours later.
This does fit a pattern, as there have been multiple reports over the last couple of years of the DoD keeping Trump out of the loop, or even misleading him to counteract some of his stupidest demands.
So - as we're just four days away from No Deal - any advice on stockpiling?
Don't?
Way back in the 80's there were rumours that there would be a sugar shortage. My grandmother proceeded to stockpile 30 bags of sugar and, to be fair, so did all her neighbours. Guess what? There was a sugar shortage!
Had you considered some people would be very pleased with a self induced shortage to point at.
So - as we're just four days away from No Deal - any advice on stockpiling?
Don't?
Way back in the 80's there were rumours that there would be a sugar shortage. My grandmother proceeded to stockpile 30 bags of sugar and, to be fair, so did all her neighbours. Guess what? There was a sugar shortage!
But not in your grandmother's house, by the sound of it.
You don't have to run faster than the lion, only faster than at least one of the other people who are running away from it.
"Asked to consider the difficulties the government has had in reaching an agreement, 57% of UK adults surveyed said that they believed it would have been better not to have had a public vote in June 2016."
But isn't that first clause a sign that the finding is probably biased? If the question had been phrased "A democracy means that power comes from the people. The public decided by a referendum whether to remain in the Common Market in 1975. Considering that, should the next generation have decided whether to continue our membership of the EU in 2016?", you might have got an entirely different answer. Equally biased, but in the opposite direction.
Yes. And also hindsight questions like this are without meaning. I am sure if asked we would row back on the wisdom of the diplomacy which led to the outbreak of WW1, our failing to confront Hitler earlier than we did, permitting the Iraq war, moderate Labour MPs nominating Corbyn in order to be fair to the ultra left and other matters too numerous to mention. So what? You may as well get opinions on counterfactuals like "How would things be now if the pressure for a referendum continued to be resisted by the entire political class, despite public support for one, to this day".
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
What are these "rigged terms"? I genuinely don't know.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
I think Remainers, of all parties, are up for an election... but not on the rigged terms that the slimy Cummings and his puppet ABDPJohnson want to impose.
What are these "rigged terms"? I genuinely don't know.
If we do get another hung parliament, with a majority of MPs elected on manifesto commitments to either a second referendum or cancelling Brexit outright, I wonder if the PBTories will stick to their recent insistence that that election should decide Brexit once and for all.
Also, if the Tories thought it was hard getting Labour MPs to vote for Brexit deals in this parliament, it will be MUCH harder after the next one. Of all the Lab MPs who were considering voting for a deal, either they will be voted out at the election; or they will have just been re-elected on explicit commitments to a new referendum, therefore will feel they have much more of a 'mandate' to point-blank refuse any Tory Brexit deal.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
You're 100% correct.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
.
If you're not happy with it then what's to stop you from overturning it on 35% of the votes in the future?
It takes a shitload more than 35% of the vote to rejoin the EU. They'd have to let us in for starters. Leaving is a cliff edge in more than one sense: you can't fall up a cliff.
If Remainers had accepted the referendum result with good grace, we could then have elected a 35% government post-Brexit on a Rejoin referendum. When Remain won, Leavers would have had to accepted it. The democratic instinct of the British people would have meant they couldn't have got out again without another 50%+ result, and demographics would have prevented this. This is the beauty of having a clear set of rules that everyone abides by. You might not like the result, but you accept the way we got there and democracy can continue.
But instead Remainers have legitimised changing the rules as you go, using every parliamentart subterfuge possible, and ignoring a referendum result with a parliamentary majority, elected under FPTP. The Lib Dems have even been stupid enough to validate it by saying a GE win means no referendum is needed. This has screwed us pro-Europeans as Tories are inevitably going to be able to do this in reverse within 10 years.
It was a childish, short-sighted and emotional response by an economic demographic not being able to cope with loss.
So - as we're just four days away from No Deal - any advice on stockpiling?
Don't?
Way back in the 80's there were rumours that there would be a sugar shortage. My grandmother proceeded to stockpile 30 bags of sugar and, to be fair, so did all her neighbours. Guess what? There was a sugar shortage!
But not in your grandmother's house, by the sound of it.
You don't have to run faster than the lion, only faster than at least one of the other people who are running away from it.
Most people had enough sugar (because they'd hoarded it) or knew someone who had. And - to answer Floater's point - they were all proud that they had listened to the rumours and not been caught out!
So - as we're just four days away from No Deal - any advice on stockpiling?
Don't?
Way back in the 80's there were rumours that there would be a sugar shortage. My grandmother proceeded to stockpile 30 bags of sugar and, to be fair, so did all her neighbours. Guess what? There was a sugar shortage!
But not in your grandmother's house, by the sound of it.
You don't have to run faster than the lion, only faster than at least one of the other people who are running away from it.
Most people had enough sugar (because they'd hoarded it) or knew someone who had. And - to answer Floater's point - they were all proud that they had listened to the rumours and not been caught out!
So essentially you're asking us to be altruistic, and drink our sugarless tea with an upper lip fortified by the knowledge that if we'd bought an extra couple of bags someone else instead of us would be going without?
So - as we're just four days away from No Deal - any advice on stockpiling?
Don't?
Way back in the 80's there were rumours that there would be a sugar shortage. My grandmother proceeded to stockpile 30 bags of sugar and, to be fair, so did all her neighbours. Guess what? There was a sugar shortage!
But not in your grandmother's house, by the sound of it.
You don't have to run faster than the lion, only faster than at least one of the other people who are running away from it.
Most people had enough sugar (because they'd hoarded it) or knew someone who had. And - to answer Floater's point - they were all proud that they had listened to the rumours and not been caught out!
So essentially you're asking us to be altruistic, and drink our sugarless tea with an upper lip fortified by the knowledge that if we'd bought an extra couple of bags someone else instead of us would be going without?
I'm not asking you to do anything. I'm just pointing out that stockpiling is the quickest way to have a shortage of something.
So - as we're just four days away from No Deal - any advice on stockpiling?
Don't?
Way back in the 80's there were rumours that there would be a sugar shortage. My grandmother proceeded to stockpile 30 bags of sugar and, to be fair, so did all her neighbours. Guess what? There was a sugar shortage!
But not in your grandmother's house, by the sound of it.
You don't have to run faster than the lion, only faster than at least one of the other people who are running away from it.
Most people had enough sugar (because they'd hoarded it) or knew someone who had. And - to answer Floater's point - they were all proud that they had listened to the rumours and not been caught out!
So essentially you're asking us to be altruistic, and drink our sugarless tea with an upper lip fortified by the knowledge that if we'd bought an extra couple of bags someone else instead of us would be going without?
I'm not asking you to do anything. I'm just pointing out that stockpiling is the quickest way to have a shortage of something.
Society soon returns to Hobbes' State of Nature when a shortage of bread, milk, sugar or petrol threatens.
If the GOP were smart they would try harder to win more African Americans. Just winning a few more % of socially conservative blacks, would give them a durable majority, and enough state legislative control for a constitutional amendment.
As a general rule, though, supporting neo-Nazis in Charlotteville is not the kind of thing that goes down well with any African Americans, socially conservative or not.
Trump can't pivot to collect socially conservative African Americans, or socially conservative Latinos, because he has chosen the mantle of identity politics for Whites who feel the system is stacked against them.
Labour had 13 years to introduce proportional representation. For some bizarre reason they didn't do so. (There was no need for a referendum IMO).
I think any major constitutional change should have a referendum.
I don’t think so. This country has proven its not politically mature enough to deal with referendums.
Because it gave the wrong answer?
The referendum itself was not the problem. The aftermath however...
The aftermath has been the MPs doing their best to defy the leave vote without looking like they are. Boris just got a deal after they said he wouldn't, he tried to pass it and now they won't.
Pity the voters who have given the instruction, not the establishment who won't listen to it.
Labour had 13 years to introduce proportional representation. For some bizarre reason they didn't do so. (There was no need for a referendum IMO).
I think any major constitutional change should have a referendum.
I don’t think so. This country has proven its not politically mature enough to deal with referendums.
Because it gave the wrong answer?
The referendum itself was not the problem. The aftermath however...
The aftermath has been the MPs doing their best to defy the leave vote without looking like they are. Boris just got a deal after they said he wouldn't, he tried to pass it and now they won't.
Pity the voters who have given the instruction, not the establishment who won't listen to it.
The voters last instructed politicians in 2017 and it produced a clear mandate to do... er, nothing clear. One may as well say that we should hold politicians to the 2015 election result and re-elect David Cameron.
Comments
How many of them in your %, TSE?
Its probable rather than possible that Baghdadi got grassed up by someone on the inside. The increased factionalism that may result is both good, in that the organisation may lack a central philosophical force for a while and bad because what was a relatively devolved outfit becomes even more so and harder to address because of it.
Edit. One of his senior deputies bought it as well. Two of them in one place is unusual.
If there's not a Tory majority in the election, for the first time I'll think Brexit is over.
Up to a point, Lord Copper.....
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1188425761063165952?s=20
Quite the rallying cry isn't it.
If there's not a Tory majority its quite probable that it is over. So why are Remainers not up for an election?
If this election really does boil down to a de-facto second referendum (which, after being a sceptic of that idea for so long, now I reluctantly agree with), then, given the Remain and Leave camps are roughly equal in size, a hung parliament is likely IMO. Yes yes, "split votes" etc., but I'm just not convinced that people who hate Boris and his Brexit policy aren't going to default to the best option of stopping him when it comes down to it (though to be fair, for the same reason, I'd expect the Tories to squeeze what remains of the Brexit Party vote, too).
The DUP given their comments over the weekend are going to support any amendments that in their view protect the Union .
So closer alignment with the EU would help that , and so a Customs Union etc .
The Labour Leavers barring the 6 who voted with the government on the programme motion are going to be under huge pressure to support a CU as that’s the Labour manifesto.
One of the Labour MPs , John Mann is moving to the HOL on Tuesday .
It might just be one vote but the government has little room in terms of votes .
The numbers for the second reading are the max available votes . The only way is down from there .
The FT leak is now a huge problem for Labour MPs who are seeking a way of supporting the government.
The second reading is IMO .
AMINO .
A majority in name only !
It might still scrape over the line but who would put money on it .
In other news
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7617677/Rebel-Labour-MPs-mount-secret-WhatsApp-plot-bring-Jeremy-Corbyn.html
Where have I heard that before?
But isn't that first clause a sign that the finding is probably biased? If the question had been phrased "A democracy means that power comes from the people. The public decided by a referendum whether to remain in the Common Market in 1975. Considering that, should the next generation have decided whether to continue our membership of the EU in 2016?", you might have got an entirely different answer. Equally biased, but in the opposite direction.
(When job losses were abstract, it was one thing. When immintent, another.)
Who said
(the EU is ) 'a regional arm of the globalisation project. Its unswerving adherence to liberal markets, deregulation and privatisation is to the detriment of working people…
'The EU is a bureaucratic, largely undemocratic organisation with a largely powerless parliament.
'And presently constituted, it cannot and will not serve the people of Europe.'
Clue - not Boris Johnson or Nigel Farage.
Apart from getting round all the rules over expenditure, of course.
For example, does anyone really think there is a 1 in 25 chance of our leaving the EU in four days' time? But we can still bet against it on that basis.
https://twitter.com/SunPolitics/status/1188477328659308545?s=20
Interesting question.
https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1188480863622828037?s=20
https://twitter.com/ImpatientCatX1/status/1188473956308787200?s=19
The base swoon in unison. The legend grows.
If you're not happy with the form of leave vote for another at the next General Election. Its called taking back control.
It would be better for the Tories to pull the bill and go into an election without a deal rather than an amended WAIB.
Labour Remainer MPs must back a CU as a means to wreck the deal . As for Labour Leavers refusing to back the CU and just waving the deal through is likely to mean game over for them .
There are so many moving parts to how things might turn out .
https://booknest.eu/component/k2/spfbo/1689-sir-edric-and-the-plague-the-hero-of-hornska-3
I must admit to checking the date :-)
Way back in the 80's there were rumours that there would be a sugar shortage. My grandmother proceeded to stockpile 30 bags of sugar and, to be fair, so did all her neighbours. Guess what? There was a sugar shortage!
Forget it.
Lets hope he never gets any real power
https://mobile.twitter.com/davidshor/status/1188490860536762369
This does fit a pattern, as there have been multiple reports over the last couple of years of the DoD keeping Trump out of the loop, or even misleading him to counteract some of his stupidest demands.
You don't have to run faster than the lion, only faster than at least one of the other people who are running away from it.
Almost as impressive as it is farcical.
But instead Remainers have legitimised changing the rules as you go, using every parliamentart subterfuge possible, and ignoring a referendum result with a parliamentary majority, elected under FPTP. The Lib Dems have even been stupid enough to validate it by saying a GE win means no referendum is needed. This has screwed us pro-Europeans as Tories are inevitably going to be able to do this in reverse within 10 years.
It was a childish, short-sighted and emotional response by an economic demographic not being able to cope with loss.
And Brexit done - with a Deal - before then.
Trump can't pivot to collect socially conservative African Americans, or socially conservative Latinos, because he has chosen the mantle of identity politics for Whites who feel the system is stacked against them.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/27/brexit-poll-found-we-want-to-believe-the-worst-of-ourselves
Pity the voters who have given the instruction, not the establishment who won't listen to it.
Would you like to list those five things that are NOT dangerous for Boris Johnson in your world?
https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1188458334086684673?s=20