Betfair's tipster this morning, as a lesson to all of us on the limitations of punditry:
"Tiger Roll, as last year's winner, who has been visually impressive in his races since, has obvious claims to repeat his victory on Saturday. I have my doubts, though. He has to carry 9lbs more weight than he did last year; he might have looked impressive at the Cheltenham Festival, but that was in a very different type of race against inferior opposition; that race was only three weeks ago, raising concerns over whether he will have fully recovered; and this year sees him switch to wearing blinkers over the cheekpieces he was sporting when winning last year. Now, that last fact may not seem especially significant (what difference can the cut of his headgear make?) but I wouldn't want to take such short odds over a horse, in such a chaotic race, where his vision was being obscured further. Instead of laying him in the win market, though, I'll be doing so in the place market at 2.96, in the expectation that he can be kept out of the first four."
An operable deal was offered. Leavers turned it down. At that point, Remainers can reasonably regard their duty to implement Brexit as discharged.
The key point is whether Brexit is deliverable without that deal, or at least, deliverable without an unacceptable level of disruption.
However, I would have more sympathy with that argument if Remainers had abstained on or voted for the Deal, rather than blocking it.
The key point is that Leavers are clueless about what they actually want. They can’t expect everyone else to indulge them while they cast around for ideas.
Leavers want to leave. I think in time they would have accepted this, and we could have moved on. Of course the ERG and DUP would continue to behave like mad fundies, but they are, so that's no change.
But Remainers trying to stop us leaving - that's more difficult to explain. It isn't a good look. That's not to say we should leave at any price, but if we keep trying to avoid practicable ways of leaving how on Earth are we going to sort this mess out?
There were three different attempts to get the deal through. Leavers hate it. They have no idea what they actively do want.
Brexit has been given its chance. The public is entitled if it so wishes to take it round the back of the garage and humanely put it down.
I don't understand where this accusation that remainers are stopping us leaving comes from. It is possible to want another form of Brexit, avoiding either this deal or no deal. I think this is broadly the position of the labour party.
Moreover it is abundantly clear that if Leavers were united behind this deal, more Remainers would hold their noses and vote for it.
Apparently in new poll, 52 per cent of the public are now in favour of a confirmatory Brexit referendum, according to latest BMG poll, vs. 24 per cent against having one (remainder are "don't know"). Wonder if that drives any of the current negotiating dynamic.
An operable deal was offered. Leavers turned it down. At that point, Remainers can reasonably regard their duty to implement Brexit as discharged.
The key point is whether Brexit is deliverable without that deal, or at least, deliverable without an unacceptable level of disruption.
However, I would have more sympathy with that argument if Remainers had abstained on or voted for the Deal, rather than blocking it.
The key point is that Leavers are clueless about what they actually want. They can’t expect everyone else to indulge them while they cast around for ideas.
Leavers want to leave. I think in time they would have accepted this, and we could have moved on. Of course the ERG and DUP would continue to behave like mad fundies, but they are, so that's no change.
But Remainers trying to stop us leaving - that's more difficult to explain. It isn't a good look. That's not to say we should leave at any price, but if we keep trying to avoid practicable ways of leaving how on Earth are we going to sort this mess out?
There were three different attempts to get the deal through. Leavers hate it. They have no idea what they actively do want.
Brexit has been given its chance. The public is entitled if it so wishes to take it round the back of the garage and humanely put it down.
I don't understand where this accusation that remainers are stopping us leaving comes from. It is possible to want another form of Brexit, avoiding either this deal or no deal. I think this is broadly the position of the labour party.
I can want a date with Margot Robbie tomorrow night. Doesn't mean it would happen.
Apparently in new poll, 52 per cent of the public are now in favour of a confirmatory Brexit referendum, according to latest BMG poll, vs. 24 per cent against having one (remainder are "don't know"). Wonder if that drives any of the current negotiating dynamic.
No my position is clear and always has been. If you ask a question of the electorate and then do not act according to their direction then it is not democracy.
So not bringing in an Australian-style points system for EU citizens would be undemocratic?
Nope because that wasnt the question on the ballot paper. The question was Remain or Leave. As such anything that meant we were no longer legally a member of the EU would fulfill the mandate. Of course you know tnis as you have asked the same question in different forms many times before and always got the same snswer. I do worry about your mental state sometimes. It seems your memory is failing badly.
JRM is trying to get the EU to kick us out next week by refusing an extension - it's a pretty smart tactic from his point of view, if rather desperate.
An operable deal was offered. Leavers turned it down. At that point, Remainers can reasonably regard their duty to implement Brexit as discharged.
The key point is whether Brexit is deliverable without that deal, or at least, deliverable without an unacceptable level of disruption.
However, I would have more sympathy with that argument if Remainers had abstained on or voted for the Deal, rather than blocking it.
The key point is that Leavers are clueless about what they actually want. They can’t expect everyone else to indulge them while they cast around for ideas.
Leavers want to leave. I think in time they would have accepted this, and we could have moved on. Of course the ERG and DUP would continue to behave like mad fundies, but they are, so that's no change.
But Remainers trying to stop us leaving - that's more difficult to explain. It isn't a good look. That's not to say we should leave at any price, but if we keep trying to avoid practicable ways of leaving how on Earth are we going to sort this mess out?
There were three different attempts to get the deal through. Leavers hate it. They have no idea what they actively do want.
Brexit has been given its chance. The public is entitled if it so wishes to take it round the back of the garage and humanely put it down.
I don't understand where this accusation that remainers are stopping us leaving comes from. It is possible to want another form of Brexit, avoiding either this deal or no deal. I think this is broadly the position of the labour party.
Moreover it is abundantly clear that if Leavers were united behind this deal, more Remainers would hold their noses and vote for it.
I don't think it's unreasonable for Remainers to want to avoid no deal and to avoid forcing a deal that Leavers are opposed to onto them. Leavers will have to do their own dirty work.
Apparently in new poll, 52 per cent of the public are now in favour of a confirmatory Brexit referendum, according to latest BMG poll, vs. 24 per cent against having one (remainder are "don't know"). Wonder if that drives any of the current negotiating dynamic.
Apparently in new poll, 52 per cent of the public are now in favour of a confirmatory Brexit referendum, according to latest BMG poll, vs. 24 per cent against having one (remainder are "don't know"). Wonder if that drives any of the current negotiating dynamic.
The ‘people’s vote’ is dead long live the ‘confirmatory public vote’ or confirmatory Brexit referendum. Deal vs no deal would be a CPV but I doubt the people’s vote people would back that? Do you want a vote to CONFIRM Brexit?
The poll didn’t actually ask people what would be on the ballot paper - which is where it gets a bit messier.
What’s the next euphemism we will get for a second referendum? Perhaps someone is focus grouping that....:
An operable deal was offered. Leavers turned it down. At that point, Remainers can reasonably regard their duty to implement Brexit as discharged.
The key point is whether Brexit is deliverable without that deal, or at least, deliverable without an unacceptable level of disruption.
However, I would have more sympathy with that argument if Remainers had abstained on or voted for the Deal, rather than blocking it.
The key point is that Leavers are clueless about what they actually want. They can’t expect everyone else to indulge them while they cast around for ideas.
Leavers want to leave. I think in time they would have accepted this, and we could have moved on. Of course the ERG and DUP would continue to behave like mad fundies, but they are, so that's no change.
But Remainers trying to stop us leaving - that's more difficult to explain. It isn't a good look. That's not to say we should leave at any price, but if we keep trying to avoid practicable ways of leaving how on Earth are we going to sort this mess out?
There were three different attempts to get the deal through. Leavers hate it. They have no idea what they actively do want.
Brexit has been given its chance. The public is entitled if it so wishes to take it round the back of the garage and humanely put it down.
I don't understand where this accusation that remainers are stopping us leaving comes from. It is possible to want another form of Brexit, avoiding either this deal or no deal. I think this is broadly the position of the labour party.
I can want a date with Margot Robbie tomorrow night. Doesn't mean it would happen.
The idea that Brexit can be extended and renegotiated is not at all far fetched.
Also interesting how opinion has moved away from *both* front-bench brexits. TMay correctly interpreted the original referendum as all about immigration and optimized for that, but post-Trump the voters are cool with immigration and they're all about trade deals.
No my position is clear and always has been. If you ask a question of the electorate and then do not act according to their direction then it is not democracy.
So not bringing in an Australian-style points system for EU citizens would be undemocratic?
Nope because that wasnt the question on the ballot paper. The question was Remain or Leave. As such anything that meant we were no longer legally a member of the EU would fulfill the mandate. Of course you know tnis as you have asked the same question in different forms many times before and always got the same snswer. I do worry about your mental state sometimes. It seems your memory is failing badly.
Come on in the good old days we didn’t resort to personal insults although the quality of post always did decline on Saturday as the alcohol went down
No my position is clear and always has been. If you ask a question of the electorate and then do not act according to their direction then it is not democracy.
So not bringing in an Australian-style points system for EU citizens would be undemocratic?
Nope because that wasnt the question on the ballot paper. The question was Remain or Leave. As such anything that meant we were no longer legally a member of the EU would fulfill the mandate. Of course you know tnis as you have asked the same question in different forms many times before and always got the same snswer. I do worry about your mental state sometimes. It seems your memory is failing badly.
You can't resort to arguments like "read the small print" without also acknowledging that the referendum was advisory and did not constitute a mandate for anything in particular.
Democracy allows for further consideration once the first vote has been enacted. Otherwise it is simply Oligarchy.
It would be a YUGE leap forward for mankind if you were to justify that claim rather than just repeating it. Because democracy means letting the people decide things, and your position is that the people must be prevented at all costs from deciding the most pressing question du jour, which looks paradoxicaI to me.
I have pointed you to the fact that ancient Athens, a rather effective direct democracy, was happy to vote on the same substantive issue on two consecutive days.
So what, actually, is your *reasoned* case?
No my position is clear and always has been. If you ask a question of the electorate and then do not act according to their direction then it is not democracy. Any Government can hold votes and then ignore the results. That is not democracy no matter how you might try to spin it. It is no wonder with your attitude that you are in favour of the EU. They have a similar view of democracy; if the electorate gives you the wrong answer just keep asking until they get it right.
A cracking good argument in its day, and one I would have agreed with in the circumstances of an attempt to hold another referendum in 2016-18. But unless you take the insane view that a referendum result must be enacted even if it was made 100 years ago or if subsequent developments mean that its enactment would reduce the country to penury, you have to concede that the passage of time, or changes in circumstances, can in some circumstances justify a second vote. So we are just discussing whether we are at that stage yet. I think we are.
I don't actually think the 2016 result is capable of implementation anyway. It was represented to us that we could leave in a way which would yield a net gain to the country of £350m a week. Do you think that is achievable?
Well clearly I think you are wrong both in terms of effect of Brexit on the country and the ability to implement it. But that is immatetial. Circumstances have not changed. We always had all those warnings of catastrophe before the refetenfum and they turned out to be rubbish. Trying to pull the ssme stunt again just shows how desperate you are to stop our leaving.
An operable deal was offered. Leavers turned it down. At that point, Remainers can reasonably regard their duty to implement Brexit as discharged.
The key point is whether Brexit is deliverable without that deal, or at least, deliverable without an unacceptable level of disruption.
However, I would have more sympathy with that argument if Remainers had abstained on or voted for the Deal, rather than blocking it.
The key point is that Leavers are clueless about what they actually want. They can’t expect everyone else to indulge them while they cast around for ideas.
Leavers want to leave. I think in time they would have accepted this, and we could have moved on. Of course the ERG and DUP would continue to behave like mad fundies, but they are, so that's no change.
But Remainers trying to stop us leaving - that's more difficult to explain. It isn't a good look. That's not to say we should leave at any price, but if we keep trying to avoid practicable ways of leaving how on Earth are we going to sort this mess out?
There were three different attempts to get the deal through. Leavers hate it. They have no idea what they actively do want.
Brexit has been given its chance. The public is entitled if it so wishes to take it round the back of the garage and humanely put it down.
I don't understand where this accusation that remainers are stopping us leaving comes from. It is possible to want another form of Brexit, avoiding either this deal or no deal. I think this is broadly the position of the labour party.
Moreover it is abundantly clear that if Leavers were united behind this deal, more Remainers would hold their noses and vote for it.
The ERG have the ability to legislate, the morons in Birmingham do not.
Do you honestly think reducing LGBTQI rights will be a vote winner for the Tory party?
Nasty Party anyone
I’m not going to think about it because it’s not going to happen.
On topic, the Tory Party isn’t going anywhere. Even if we suffer another 1997, we will still be able to choke anyone trying to replace us on the centre-right, thanks to FPTP.
Scottish Labour say hello.
Who would be the rival that could inflict such a result on the Conservatives?
I don't see UKIP or the Brexit Party being the SNP equivalent.
The fact that there is both the Brexit Party and UKIP rather limits their chances...
You also need to be careful what you wish for: a fracturing on the right might end up letting a surprising number of LibDems in.
An increased proportion of people voting for Brexity parties may lead to more pro-EUites in parliament...
To be honest Robert if we don't leave this time it no longer matters what the makeup of Parliament is.
Does parliament serve no purpose other than to facilitate your nationalist dreams?
If we do not leave then Parliament has lost its democratic legitimacy. (Snip)
I really don't see that.
Extreme Leavers believe that democracy stopped on 23 June 2016.
Nope. The belief is that democracy is based on a basic principle of asking a question and enacting the result. I said on numerous occasions before the referendum that as long as Remain won I would give no further support to another referendum. It is called principle and you singularly lack it as a quality.
Democracy allows for further consideration of the same question. Lord knows enough time has been spent on this one and Leavers have proven themselves singularly clueless about what they actually want, as opposed to what they don’t want.
Democracy allows for further consideration once the first vote has been enacted. Otherwise it is simply Oligarchy.
An operable deal was offered. Leavers turned it down. At that point, Remainers can reasonably regard their duty to implement Brexit as discharged.
No my position is clear and always has been. If you ask a question of the electorate and then do not act according to their direction then it is not democracy.
So not bringing in an Australian-style points system for EU citizens would be undemocratic?
Nope because that wasnt the question on the ballot paper. The question was Remain or Leave. As such anything that meant we were no longer legally a member of the EU would fulfill the mandate. Of course you know tnis as you have asked the same question in different forms many times before and always got the same snswer. I do worry about your mental state sometimes. It seems your memory is failing badly.
You can't resort to arguments like "read the small print" without also acknowledging that the referendum was advisory and did not constitute a mandate for anything in particular.
There was no small print. There was a simple question which people answered. Trying to claim otherwise is intellectually dishonest.
An operable deal was offered. Leavers turned it down. At that point, Remainers can reasonably regard their duty to implement Brexit as discharged.
The key point is whether Brexit is deliverable without that deal, or at least, deliverable without an unacceptable level of disruption.
However, I would have more sympathy with that argument if Remainers had abstained on or voted for the Deal, rather than blocking it.
The key point is that Leavers are clueless about what they actually want. They can’t expect everyone else to indulge them while they cast around for ideas.
Leavers want to leave. I think in time they would have accepted this, and we could have moved on. Of course the ERG and DUP would continue to behave like mad fundies, but they are, so that's no change.
But Remainers trying to stop us leaving - that's more difficult to explain. It isn't a good look. That's not to say we should leave at any price, but if we keep trying to avoid practicable ways of leaving how on Earth are we going to sort this mess out?
There were three different attempts to get the deal through. Leavers hate it. They have no idea what they actively do want.
Brexit has been given its chance. The public is entitled if it so wishes to take it round the back of the garage and humanely put it down.
I don't understand where this accusation that remainers are stopping us leaving comes from. It is possible to want another form of Brexit, avoiding either this deal or no deal. I think this is broadly the position of the labour party.
I can want a date with Margot Robbie tomorrow night. Doesn't mean it would happen.
The idea that Brexit can be extended and renegotiated is not at all far fetched.
We have negotiated a withdrawal agreement. That isn't actually going to change in a meaningful way for a number of reasons. The Political Declaration is not binding and therefore it could be adjusted later. I'm not therefore buying this argument about 'renegotiation.' It's just a deflection strategy. A successful one, perhaps, but a deflection strategy nathless.
Apparently in new poll, 52 per cent of the public are now in favour of a confirmatory Brexit referendum, according to latest BMG poll, vs. 24 per cent against having one (remainder are "don't know"). Wonder if that drives any of the current negotiating dynamic.
Apparently in new poll, 52 per cent of the public are now in favour of a confirmatory Brexit referendum, according to latest BMG poll, vs. 24 per cent against having one (remainder are "don't know"). Wonder if that drives any of the current negotiating dynamic.
I actually think the people haven’t got a clue about what they are expressioning opinions on. That’s why we have a representative democracy so that those we elect can understand he issues involved rather than gut reaction or “let’s kick the bastards in the b*****” approach
Well clearly I think you are wrong both in terms of effect of Brexit on the country and the ability to implement it. But that is immatetial. Circumstances have not changed. We always had all those warnings of catastrophe before the refetenfum and they turned out to be rubbish. Trying to pull the ssme stunt again just shows how desperate you are to stop our leaving.
But I am not and never have been. I voted remain in 2016, but only because I was so undecided that I asked my 17 y.o. what he wanted to do, and voted as his proxy. And if you think this is still about "warnings of catastrophe" you haven't been keeping up with current events. The condition of the country now is a present and actual catastrophe, and you are afraid to admit it because you know you, and a lot of c@@ts like Rees Mogg, got us here by promising what you could not deliver.
No my position is clear and always has been. If you ask a question of the electorate and then do not act according to their direction then it is not democracy.
So not bringing in an Australian-style points system for EU citizens would be undemocratic?
Nope because that wasnt the question on the ballot paper. The question was Remain or Leave. As such anything that meant we were no longer legally a member of the EU would fulfill the mandate. Of course you know tnis as you have asked the same question in different forms many times before and always got the same snswer. I do worry about your mental state sometimes. It seems your memory is failing badly.
Come on in the good old days we didn’t resort to personal insults although the quality of post always did decline on Saturday as the alcohol went down
Given I am on duty most of the time and forbidden from drinking that is yet another very stupid comment. And there have always been insults on here. From both sides of every argument.
An operable deal was offered. Leavers turned it down. At that point, Remainers can reasonably regard their duty to implement Brexit as discharged.
The key point is whether Brexit is deliverable without that deal, or at least, deliverable without an unacceptable level of disruption.
However, I would have more sympathy with that argument if Remainers had abstained on or voted for the Deal, rather than blocking it.
The key point is that Leavers are clueless about what they actually want. They can’t expect everyone else to indulge them while they cast around for ideas.
Leavers want to leave. I think in time they would have accepted this, and we could have moved on. Of course the ERG and DUP would continue to behave like mad fundies, but they are, so that's no change.
But Remainers trying to stop us leaving - that's more difficult to explain. It isn't a good look. That's not to say we should leave at any price, but if we keep trying to avoid practicable ways of leaving how on Earth are we going to sort this mess out?
There were three different attempts to get the deal through. Leavers hate it. They have no idea what they actively do want.
Brexit has been given its chance. The public is entitled if it so wishes to take it round the back of the garage and humanely put it down.
I don't understand where this accusation that remainers are stopping us leaving comes from. It is possible to want another form of Brexit, avoiding either this deal or no deal. I think this is broadly the position of the labour party.
Moreover it is abundantly clear that if Leavers were united behind this deal, more Remainers would hold their noses and vote for it.
Given the former is not the case I don't think the latter can be assumed to be definitely true, even if it seems like it should be.
Apparently in new poll, 52 per cent of the public are now in favour of a confirmatory Brexit referendum, according to latest BMG poll, vs. 24 per cent against having one (remainder are "don't know"). Wonder if that drives any of the current negotiating dynamic.
The ‘people’s vote’ is dead long live the ‘confirmatory public vote’ or confirmatory Brexit referendum. Deal vs no deal would be a CPV but I doubt the people’s vote people would back that? Do you want a vote to CONFIRM Brexit?
The poll didn’t actually ask people what would be on the ballot paper - which is where it gets a bit messier.
What’s the next euphemism we will get for a second referendum? Perhaps someone is focus grouping that....:
JRM is trying to get the EU to kick us out next week by refusing an extension - it's a pretty smart tactic from his point of view, if rather desperate.
Given he did end up voting for the deal I would guess he finally realised that it really was likely to be the deal or no Brexit. For a supposedly smart man it took him a long time to realise that.
No amount of constitutional jiggary pokery from those passionate lovers of the EU that May has surrounded herself with can change the fact that this Parliament cannot bind the hands of another Parliament
Well clearly I think you are wrong both in terms of effect of Brexit on the country and the ability to implement it. But that is immatetial. Circumstances have not changed. We always had all those warnings of catastrophe before the refetenfum and they turned out to be rubbish. Trying to pull the ssme stunt again just shows how desperate you are to stop our leaving.
But I am not and never have been. I voted remain in 2016, but only because I was so undecided that I asked my 17 y.o. what he wanted to do, and voted as his proxy. And if you think this is still about "warnings of catastrophe" you haven't been keeping up with current events. The condition of the country now is a present and actual catastrophe, and you are afraid to admit it because you know you, and a lot of c@@ts like Rees Mogg, got us here by promising what you could not deliver.
You had your chance, Gorman.
Hey, Ishmael, don't worry! Me and my squad of ultimate Brexiteers will protect you! Check it out! Independently targeting particle-beam phalanx. WHAP! Fry half a parliamentary constituency with this puppy. We got tactical smart missiles, phase plasma pulse rifles, RPGs. We got sonic, electronic, ball-breakers! We got nukes, we got knives, sharp sticks...
Democracy allows for further consideration of the same question. Lord knows enough time has been spent on this one and Leavers have proven themselves singularly clueless about what they actually want, as opposed to what they don’t want.
Democracy allows for further consideration once the first vote has been enacted. Otherwise it is simply Oligarchy.
Different people define enacting the first vote in different ways. If May's deal went through and we went into transition, would you regard the first vote as having been enacted? Millions wouldn't, which is why you have no right to set yourself up as the arbiter of this question. It is always legitimate to oppose a policy by democratic means, no matter how many people have voted for it.
LOL. More desperate spinning. I doubt you will find many voters of either camp who think revoking means we have enacted the referendum result even if they are glad that is the outcome. You may fool yourself with that sort of thinking but you wont fool many other people.
An operable deal was offered. Leavers turned it down. At that point, Remainers can reasonably regard their duty to implement Brexit as discharged.
The key point is whether Brexit is deliverable without that deal, or at least, deliverable without an unacceptable level of disruption.
However, I would have more sympathy with that argument if Remainers had abstained on or voted for the Deal, rather than blocking it.
The key point is that Leavers are clueless about what they actually want. They can’t expect everyone else to indulge them while they cast around for ideas.
Leavers want to leave. I think in time they would have accepted this, and we could have moved on. Of course the ERG and DUP would continue to behave like mad fundies, but they are, so that's no change.
But Remainers trying to stop us leaving - that's more difficult to explain. It isn't a good look. That's not to say we should leave at any price, but if we keep trying to avoid practicable ways of leaving how on Earth are we going to sort this mess out?
There were three different attempts to get the deal through. Leavers hate it. They have no idea what they actively do want.
Brexit has been given its chance. The public is entitled if it so wishes to take it round the back of the garage and humanely put it down.
I don't understand where this accusation that remainers are stopping us leaving comes from. It is possible to want another form of Brexit, avoiding either this deal or no deal. I think this is broadly the position of the labour party.
Moreover it is abundantly clear that if Leavers were united behind this deal, more Remainers would hold their noses and vote for it.
Given the former is not the case I don't think the latter can be assumed to be definitely true, even if it seems like it should be.
There is a moral point here. If the Brexit deal were passed by Remainers in the teeth of opposition from Leavers, it would have no legitimacy. Leavers need to subscribe to any final deal that leads to Leave.
So I have been out canvassing in the local elections today in my part of Norfolk - for my own seat. We have boundary changes in our Council so there is less incumbent advantage and I focused on the 'new' part of my ward where I am unknown. I should say that I'm standing for the Conservatives. It's my 5th election campaign so I know a little bit about canvassing. And I know my way around the system.
I was astonished by the response on the doorstep. Contrary to what I was expecting, the response on the doorstep for the LOCAL elections was much warmer, even enthusiastic for the Tories - with no softness at all. There is total disdain for what's going on in London, but as most agreed, there's a world of difference between Wacton [a village in our parts] and Westminster.
Collecting the bins has nothing to do with Brexit. We'll be cleaning the streets, finding homes for the homeless, investing in sports and leisure and ensuring public safety whether Brexit happens or not. This message resonated strongly.
Also notable was, of the five LibDems on my canvass sheet, none said they would be voting LibDem this time. That really surprised me. And the traditional Labour vote in this village location was extraordinarily soft - with half of them saying that they would either stay at home or even consider the Conservatives. Another surprising outcome based on real-life contact with real voters.
Yes, there is a meme that the Conservative Party is finished. Based on my evidence this afternoon, that's bunkum. The electorate is clearly more discriminating and sophisticated than the media will have. And more resiliant to the Conservative message in an environment where the LibDems and Labour have alienated their natural base.
Bunnco - Your Man on the Spot.
I've always thought that in this big round of local elections in the Shires, the number of candidates being fielded is an indication of how parties will do. Labour and the Lib Dems are not contesting seats which they were contesting in the nineties.
Sean, why do you think that is the case now?
Between 1999-2010 the Conservatives made big gains against the Lib Dems in local elections. Ordinarily, many seats would have switched back after 2010 but they did not due to the Lib Dems being in government. Indeed, the Lib Dems fell back further, leaving them without an organisation in a lot of places.
It's harder to understand why Labour is not fielding more candidates, given the influx of new members.
It depends where the members are - if they are predominantly in cities, and momentum types not sure they will go down well in the shires
No amount of constitutional jiggary pokery from those passionate lovers of the EU that May has surrounded herself with can change the fact that this Parliament cannot bind the hands of another Parliament
If it forms part of a devolution settlement then that creates an enormous block to ripping it up
Democracy allows for further consideration of the same question. Lord knows enough time has been spent on this one and Leavers have proven themselves singularly clueless about what they actually want, as opposed to what they don’t want.
Democracy allows for further consideration once the first vote has been enacted. Otherwise it is simply Oligarchy.
Different people define enacting the first vote in different ways. If May's deal went through and we went into transition, would you regard the first vote as having been enacted? Millions wouldn't, which is why you have no right to set yourself up as the arbiter of this question. It is always legitimate to oppose a policy by democratic means, no matter how many people have voted for it.
LOL. More desperate spinning. I doubt you will find many voters of either camp who think revoking means we have enacted the referendum result even if they are glad that is the outcome. You may fool yourself with that sort of thinking but you wont fool many other people.
Presenting a Brexit deal to the public against the option of Remain delivers on the result. If people don't like the reality, that's their choice.
Well clearly I think you are wrong both in terms of effect of Brexit on the country and the ability to implement it. But that is immatetial. Circumstances have not changed. We always had all those warnings of catastrophe before the refetenfum and they turned out to be rubbish. Trying to pull the ssme stunt again just shows how desperate you are to stop our leaving.
But I am not and never have been. I voted remain in 2016, but only because I was so undecided that I asked my 17 y.o. what he wanted to do, and voted as his proxy. And if you think this is still about "warnings of catastrophe" you haven't been keeping up with current events. The condition of the country now is a present and actual catastrophe, and you are afraid to admit it because you know you, and a lot of c@@ts like Rees Mogg, got us here by promising what you could not deliver.
You had your chance, Gorman.
As I have said many times before you are clearly deluded, both about the implications of Brexit and the serious consequences of revoking. I suspect you will come to regret it if you get your way.
I actually think the people haven’t got a clue about what they are expressioning opinions on. That’s why we have a representative democracy so that those we elect can understand he issues involved rather than gut reaction or “let’s kick the bastards in the b*****” approach
Whatever ones views on Brexit I have always found this a very strange argument. So you think we are too stupid to make decisions for ourselves but bright enough to pick the right people to make them for us?
I don't think I even have to articulate the logic against that argument, it is so obvious. And of course the current rabble in Parliament largely make it for me.
There is a moral point here. If the Brexit deal were passed by Remainers in the teeth of opposition from Leavers, it would have no legitimacy. Leavers need to subscribe to any final deal that leads to Leave.
Since they don’t know what they want, they can’t.
I don't know what legitimacy means in this context. It seems to be used to mean whatever people want it to mean. Any deal passed by MPs will involve the votes of a great many who voted Remain, are they still Remainers if despite their previous vote they now passionately believe we should leave in some fashion? How many Leavers would need to vote for it to retain legitimacy?
I don't disagree that a deal which is much more beloved of remainers in the face of opposition from leavers would be problematic (or that ultimately the Leaver contingent are most to blame for rejecting Brexit), and we know many remainers have already voted for May's deal, I just think given the hard core of remainer opposition, and the twisting and turning from supposedly amenable MPs, that it is not guaranteed that a few more Leaver MPs behind it would have seen an appreciably greater number of Remainer MPs back it, or a future deal. Most of the Leaver MPs did back a deal after all, it didn't unlock many other remainer MPs.
Well clearly I think you are wrong both in terms of effect of Brexit on the country and the ability to implement it. But that is immatetial. Circumstances have not changed. We always had all those warnings of catastrophe before the refetenfum and they turned out to be rubbish. Trying to pull the ssme stunt again just shows how desperate you are to stop our leaving.
But I am not and never have been. I voted remain in 2016, but only because I was so undecided that I asked my 17 y.o. what he wanted to do, and voted as his proxy. And if you think this is still about "warnings of catastrophe" you haven't been keeping up with current events. The condition of the country now is a present and actual catastrophe, and you are afraid to admit it because you know you, and a lot of c@@ts like Rees Mogg, got us here by promising what you could not deliver.
You had your chance, Gorman.
As I have said many times before you are clearly deluded, both about the implications of Brexit and the serious consequences of revoking. I suspect you will come to regret it if you get your way.
I’m impressed with you’re self belief, there is no other way than you’re way
Would the Customs Union lock prevent a future second referendum as well? I'm not sure May has the political capital to force this through, essentially committing us to something not a lot of people want.
Well clearly I think you are wrong both in terms of effect of Brexit on the country and the ability to implement it. But that is immatetial. Circumstances have not changed. We always had all those warnings of catastrophe before the refetenfum and they turned out to be rubbish. Trying to pull the ssme stunt again just shows how desperate you are to stop our leaving.
But I am not and never have been. I voted remain in 2016, but only because I was so undecided that I asked my 17 y.o. what he wanted to do, and voted as his proxy. And if you think this is still about "warnings of catastrophe" you haven't been keeping up with current events. The condition of the country now is a present and actual catastrophe, and you are afraid to admit it because you know you, and a lot of c@@ts like Rees Mogg, got us here by promising what you could not deliver.
You had your chance, Gorman.
Hey, Ishmael, don't worry! Me and my squad of ultimate Brexiteers will protect you! Check it out! Independently targeting particle-beam phalanx. WHAP! Fry half a parliamentary constituency with this puppy. We got tactical smart missiles, phase plasma pulse rifles, RPGs. We got sonic, electronic, ball-breakers! We got nukes, we got knives, sharp sticks...
Democracy allows for further consideration of the same question. Lord knows enough time has been spent on this one and Leavers have proven themselves singularly clueless about what they actually want, as opposed to what they don’t want.
Democracy allows for further consideration once the first vote has been enacted. Otherwise it is simply Oligarchy.
Different people define enacting the first vote in different ways. If May's deal went through and we went into transition, would you regard the first vote as having been enacted? Millions wouldn't, which is why you have no right to set yourself up as the arbiter of this question. It is always legitimate to oppose a policy by democratic means, no matter how many people have voted for it.
LOL. More desperate spinning. I doubt you will find many voters of either camp who think revoking means we have enacted the referendum result even if they are glad that is the outcome. You may fool yourself with that sort of thinking but you wont fool many other people.
Presenting a Brexit deal to the public against the option of Remain delivers on the result. If people don't like the reality, that's their choice.
Nope. Presenting the Deal against No Deal would deliver on the result (and also fulfils the apparent desire from Remainers for a confirmatory referendum on the type of Brexit we have since they feel it was not articulated clearly enough).
Asking them about Remain again does not deliver on the result.
No amount of constitutional jiggary pokery from those passionate lovers of the EU that May has surrounded herself with can change the fact that this Parliament cannot bind the hands of another Parliament
Presumably any measures would simply make it politically and in legislative terms harder to take such action as would be necessary. As we know from the referendum and its non-binding status, such things can be pretty powerful.
Sometimes I really wonder about activists. I mean, I've met plenty of local councillors and some are more passionately LD/Lab/Tory than others, but most of them seem to be pretty pragmatic people who can recognise when you need to work even with people you dislike or disagree with on some fundamental ideology. And yet all these activists really seem to think that someone without a majority talking with the only people who can provide a majority on this issue is totally unacceptable. The price for a deal should be what decides that.
Hey, Ishmael, don't worry! Me and my squad of ultimate Brexiteers will protect you! Check it out! Independently targeting particle-beam phalanx. WHAP! Fry half a parliamentary constituency with this puppy. We got tactical smart missiles, phase plasma pulse rifles, RPGs. We got sonic, electronic, ball-breakers! We got nukes, we got knives, sharp sticks...
Democracy allows for further consideration of the same question. Lord knows enough time has been spent on this one and Leavers have proven themselves singularly clueless about what they actually want, as opposed to what they don’t want.
Democracy allows for further consideration once the first vote has been enacted. Otherwise it is simply Oligarchy.
Different people define enacting the first vote in different ways. If May's deal went through and we went into transition, would you regard the first vote as having been enacted? Millions wouldn't, which is why you have no right to set yourself up as the arbiter of this question. It is always legitimate to oppose a policy by democratic means, no matter how many people have voted for it.
LOL. More desperate spinning. I doubt you will find many voters of either camp who think revoking means we have enacted the referendum result even if they are glad that is the outcome. You may fool yourself with that sort of thinking but you wont fool many other people.
Presenting a Brexit deal to the public against the option of Remain delivers on the result. If people don't like the reality, that's their choice.
Nope. Presenting the Deal against No Deal would deliver on the result (and also fulfils the apparent desire from Remainers for a confirmatory referendum on the type of Brexit we have since they feel it was not articulated clearly enough).
Asking them about Remain again does not deliver on the result.
Denying the public the opportunity to vote on an option that is apparently far more popular than either of the options you would offer them would be a travesty of democracy.
She's tried that one before. It didn't work. Or rather, it worked in bringing a large chunk of the ERG on board, but it was not enough, and the Lab 'leavers' didn't come on board despite it so no reason to assume they will from hearing it again, especially as some are happy to revoke.
It is even more true now than it was for MV2.5, but scaring people with no Brexit doesn't work.
Parliament voting on a second referendum would not be a surrender. They've already voted on it several times. If Labour were content with parliament to vote on a referendum and to back some new deal if parliament said no to that, that would be an achievement for May. I don't see Corbyn conceding that though.
Well clearly I think you are wrong both in terms of effect of Brexit on the country and the ability to implement it. But that is immatetial. Circumstances have not changed. We always had all those warnings of catastrophe before the refetenfum and they turned out to be rubbish. Trying to pull the ssme stunt again just shows how desperate you are to stop our leaving.
But I am not and never have been. I voted remain in 2016, but only because I was so undecided that I asked my 17 y.o. what he wanted to do, and voted as his proxy. And if you think this is still about "warnings of catastrophe" you haven't been keeping up with current events. The condition of the country now is a present and actual catastrophe, and you are afraid to admit it because you know you, and a lot of c@@ts like Rees Mogg, got us here by promising what you could not deliver.
You had your chance, Gorman.
As I have said many times before you are clearly deluded, both about the implications of Brexit and the serious consequences of revoking. I suspect you will come to regret it if you get your way.
I’m impressed with you’re self belief, there is no other way than you’re way
Not at all. I am not in favour of the Customs Union as it is stupid idea that will tie our hands and put us at an enormous disadvantage in terms of trade. Nor do I particularly like May's deal in some aspects. But I have been willing to compromise on those because, even if I don't like them, they are still clearly Brexit.
But in the end if we do not leave then the democratic process has failed completely and I do not look forward to the consequences of that which so many Remainers seem to be blind to. .
Parliament voting on a second referendum would not be a surrender. They've already voted on it several times. If Labour were content with parliament to vote on a referendum and to back some new deal if parliament said no to that, that would be an achievement for May. I don't see Corbyn conceding that though.
So I have been out canvassing in the local elections today in my part of Norfolk - for my own seat. We have boundary changes in our Council so there is less incumbent advantage and I focused on the 'new' part of my ward where I am unknown. I should say that I'm standing for the Conservatives. It's my 5th election campaign so I know a little bit about canvassing. And I know my way around the system.
I was astonished by the response on the doorstep. Contrary to what I was expecting, the response on the doorstep for the LOCAL elections was much warmer, even enthusiastic for the Tories - with no softness at all. There is total disdain for what's going on in London, but as most agreed, there's a world of difference between Wacton [a village in our parts] and Westminster.
Collecting the bins has nothing to do with Brexit. We'll be cleaning the streets, finding homes for the homeless, investing in sports and leisure and ensuring public safety whether Brexit happens or not. This message resonated strongly.
Also notable was, of the five LibDems on my canvass sheet, none said they would be voting LibDem this time. That really surprised me. And the traditional Labour vote in this village location was extraordinarily soft - with half of them saying that they would either stay at home or even consider the Conservatives. Another surprising outcome based on real-life contact with real voters.
Yes, there is a meme that the Conservative Party is finished. Based on my evidence this afternoon, that's bunkum. The electorate is clearly more discriminating and sophisticated than the media will have. And more resiliant to the Conservative message in an environment where the LibDems and Labour have alienated their natural base.
Bunnco - Your Man on the Spot.
Conversely, I’m hearing very worrying noises from Tory Towns. North and south alike. Without exiting the EU before you 2nd May I foresee a suburban problem.
LDs are gone, however. I’ll agree entirely with your comment about LD’s tithing making their demise a vicious circle. Our local LD candidates include several who were dislodged from wards in the 00s.
Not much point bolstering support for a zombie PM ,why put your name to it? I'm surprised there were people willing to be made ministers to fill in resignations.
Democracy allows for further consideration of the same question. Lord knows enough time has been spent on this one and Leavers have proven themselves singularly clueless about what they actually want, as opposed to what they don’t want.
Democracy allows for further consideration once the first vote has been enacted. Otherwise it is simply Oligarchy.
Different people define enacting the first vote in different ways. If May's deal went through and we went into transition, would you regard the first vote as having been enacted? Millions wouldn't, which is why you have no right to set yourself up as the arbiter of this question. It is always legitimate to oppose a policy by democratic means, no matter how many people have voted for it.
LOL. More desperate spinning. I doubt you will find many voters of either camp who think revoking means we have enacted the referendum result even if they are glad that is the outcome. You may fool yourself with that sort of thinking but you wont fool many other people.
Presenting a Brexit deal to the public against the option of Remain delivers on the result. If people don't like the reality, that's their choice.
Nope. Presenting the Deal against No Deal would deliver on the result (and also fulfils the apparent desire from Remainers for a confirmatory referendum on the type of Brexit we have since they feel it was not articulated clearly enough).
Asking them about Remain again does not deliver on the result.
If people don't want the result, the need to deliver on it disappears.
So I have been out canvassing in the local elections today in my part of Norfolk - for my own seat. We have boundary changes in our Council so there is less incumbent advantage and I focused on the 'new' part of my ward where I am unknown. I should say that I'm standing for the Conservatives. It's my 5th election campaign so I know a little bit about canvassing. And I know my way around the system.
I was astonished by the response on the doorstep. Contrary to what I was expecting, the response on the doorstep for the LOCAL elections was much warmer, even enthusiastic for the Tories - with no softness at all. There is total disdain for what's going on in London, but as most agreed, there's a world of difference between Wacton [a village in our parts] and Westminster.
Collecting the bins has nothing to do with Brexit. We'll be cleaning the streets, finding homes for the homeless, investing in sports and leisure and ensuring public safety whether Brexit happens or not. This message resonated strongly.
Also Yes, there is a meme that the Conservative Party is finished. Based on my evidence this afternoon, that's bunkum. The electorate is clearly more discriminating and sophisticated than the media will have. And more resiliant to the Conservative message in an environment where the LibDems and Labour have alienated their natural base.
Bunnco - Your Man on the Spot.
I've always thought that in this big round of local elections in the Shires, the number of candidates being fielded is an indication of how parties will do. Labour and the Lib Dems are not contesting seats which they were contesting in the nineties.
Sean, why do you think that is the case now?
Between 1999-2010 the Conservatives made big gains against the Lib Dems in local elections. Ordinarily, many seats would have switched back after 2010 but they did not due to the Lib Dems being in government. Indeed, the Lib Dems fell back further, leaving them without an organisation in a lot of places.
It's harder to understand why Labour is not fielding more candidates, given the influx of new members.
It depends where the members are - if they are predominantly in cities, and momentum types not sure they will go down well in the shires
Perhaps, although in Wiltshire for example Lab did signficantly increase their numbers of candidates for the elections in 2017, although it didn't actually achieve much. Granted this was before the Corbyn surge and May collapse.
Not much point bolstering support for a zombie PM ,why put your name to it? I'm surprised there were people willing to be made ministers to fill in resignations.
Democracy allows for further consideration of the same question. Lord knows enough time has been spent on this one and Leavers have proven themselves singularly clueless about what they actually want, as opposed to what they don’t want.
Democracy allows for further consideration once the first vote has been enacted. Otherwise it is simply Oligarchy.
Different people define enacting the first vote in different ways. If May's deal went through and we went into transition, would you regard the first vote as having been enacted? Millions wouldn't, which is why you have no right to set yourself up as the arbiter of this question. It is always legitimate to oppose a policy by democratic means, no matter how many people have voted for it.
LOL. More desperate spinning. I doubt you will find many voters of either camp who think revoking means we have enacted the referendum result even if they are glad that is the outcome. You may fool yourself with that sort of thinking but you wont fool many other people.
Presenting a Brexit deal to the public against the option of Remain delivers on the result. If people don't like the reality, that's their choice.
Nope. Presenting the Deal against No Deal would deliver on the result (and also fulfils the apparent desire from Remainers for a confirmatory referendum on the type of Brexit we have since they feel it was not articulated clearly enough).
Asking them about Remain again does not deliver on the result.
Denying the public the opportunity to vote on an option that is apparently far more popular than either of the options you would offer them would be a travesty of democracy.
But ignoring a previous vote to Leave would be hunky dory?
Well clearly I think you are wrong both in terms of effect of Brexit on the country and the ability to implement it. But that is immatetial. Circumstances have not changed. We always had all those warnings of catastrophe before the refetenfum and they turned out to be rubbish. Trying to pull the ssme stunt again just shows how desperate you are to stop our leaving.
But I am not and never have been. I voted remain in 2016, but only because I was so undecided that I asked my 17 y.o. what he wanted to do, and voted as his proxy. And if you think this is still about "warnings of catastrophe" you haven't been keeping up with current events. The condition of the country now is a present and actual catastrophe, and you are afraid to admit it because you know you, and a lot of c@@ts like Rees Mogg, got us here by promising what you could not deliver.
You had your chance, Gorman.
As I have said many times before you are clearly deluded, both about the implications of Brexit and the serious consequences of revoking. I suspect you will come to regret it if you get your way.
I’m impressed with you’re self belief, there is no other way than you’re way
Not at all. I am not in favour of the Customs Union as it is stupid idea that will tie our hands and put us at an enormous disadvantage in terms of trade. Nor do I particularly like May's deal in some aspects. But I have been willing to compromise on those because, even if I don't like them, they are still clearly Brexit.
But in the end if we do not leave then the democratic process has failed completely and I do not look forward to the consequences of that which so many Remainers seem to be blind to. .
I think I quite like the idea of having a customs union with the EU. I'm profoundly suspicious of all these wonderful 'trade deals' that are going to make us so wealthy, I think they're likely to be terrible for the consumer, and if anything like the same negotiating skills we've seen up until now are employed, we should all be worried.
Democracy allows for further consideration of the same question. Lord knows enough time has been spent on this one and Leavers have proven themselves singularly clueless about what they actually want, as opposed to what they don’t want.
Democracy allows for further consideration once the first vote has been enacted. Otherwise it is simply Oligarchy.
Different people define enacting the first vote in different ways. If May's deal went through and we went into transition, would you regard the first vote as having been enacted? Millions wouldn't, which is why you have no right to set yourself up as the arbiter of this question. It is always legitimate to oppose a policy by democratic means, no matter how many people have voted for it.
LOL. More desperate spinning. I doubt you will find many voters of either camp who think revoking means we have enacted the referendum result even if they are glad that is the outcome. You may fool yourself with that sort of thinking but you wont fool many other people.
Presenting a Brexit deal to the public against the option of Remain delivers on the result. If people don't like the reality, that's their choice.
Nope. Presenting the Deal against No Deal would deliver on the result (and also fulfils the apparent desire from Remainers for a confirmatory referendum on the type of Brexit we have since they feel it was not articulated clearly enough).
Asking them about Remain again does not deliver on the result.
Denying the public the opportunity to vote on an option that is apparently far more popular than either of the options you would offer them would be a travesty of democracy.
But ignoring a previous vote to Leave would be hunky dory?
The public are always welcome to freely express Alastair's opinion.
Not much point bolstering support for a zombie PM ,why put your name to it? I'm surprised there were people willing to be made ministers to fill in resignations.
Bit if a different to what @bunnco was reporting earlier?
If you mean the UKIP wing then so be it.
The UKIP wing as you call it accounts for about 70% of your party now in case you hadn't noticed?
Means that by the time this is finished the "Tory Party" will literally consist of you, May, Hammond and Oliver bloody Letwin!
You are losing it Gin
Even if so, and while the percentage may be off, from what I can tell the UKIP wing does account for a larger chunk of the party than any other.
Yes it does but the conservative vote is much broader than a hard right group that has infiltrated the party
It may not remain so. Labour is now the Corbyn party more than any other faction, and most seem to think that the Tory membership is essentially UKIP-lite, hence all the talk about the importance of the leadership election process and who gets to the final two, or a change in the rules to allow more than two. Parties change, and there's no guarantee they will remain broad.
Parliament voting on a second referendum would not be a surrender. They've already voted on it several times. If Labour were content with parliament to vote on a referendum and to back some new deal if parliament said no to that, that would be an achievement for May. I don't see Corbyn conceding that though.
A free vote would be good
Even now, because of various whipping and people apparently looking with one eye to leadership elections or Generl Elections and whether the evil Tories/Labour will benefit, I don't think we really know what many MPs would really like. But even if there was officially a free vote, absolutely free, on the main issues, its not like the tribalism would disappear.
Democracy allows for further consideration of the same question. Lord knows enough time has been spent on this one and Leavers have proven themselves singularly clueless about what they actually want, as opposed to what they don’t want.
Democracy allows for further consideration once the first vote has been enacted. Otherwise it is simply Oligarchy.
Different people define enacting the first vote in different ways. If May's deal went through and we went into transition, would you regard the first vote as having been enacted? Millions wouldn't, which is why you have no right to set yourself up as the arbiter of this question. It is always legitimate to oppose a policy by democratic means, no matter how many people have voted for it.
LOL. More desperate spinning. I doubt you will find many voters of either camp who think revoking means we have enacted the referendum result even if they are glad that is the outcome. You may fool yourself with that sort of thinking but you wont fool many other people.
Presenting a Brexit deal to the public against the option of Remain delivers on the result. If people don't like the reality, that's their choice.
Nope. Presenting the Deal against No Deal would deliver on the result (and also fulfils the apparent desire from Remainers for a confirmatory referendum on the type of Brexit we have since they feel it was not articulated clearly enough).
Asking them about Remain again does not deliver on the result.
Denying the public the opportunity to vote on an option that is apparently far more popular than either of the options you would offer them would be a travesty of democracy.
But ignoring a previous vote to Leave would be hunky dory?
Devoting all our governmental and parliamentary resources to something for the best part of three years counts as ignoring it, does it?
Well clearly I think you are wrong both in terms of effect of Brexit on the country and the ability to implement it. But that is immatetial. Circumstances have not changed. We always had all those warnings of catastrophe before the refetenfum and they turned out to be rubbish. Trying to pull the ssme stunt again just shows how desperate you are to stop our leaving.
But I am not and never have been. I voted remain in 2016, but only because I was so undecided that I asked my 17 y.o. what he wanted to do, and voted as his proxy. And if you think this is still about "warnings of catastrophe" you haven't been keeping up with current events. The condition of the country now is a present and actual catastrophe, and you are afraid to admit it because you know you, and a lot of c@@ts like Rees Mogg, got us here by promising what you could not deliver.
You had your chance, Gorman.
As I have said many times before you are clearly deluded, both about the implications of Brexit and the serious consequences of revoking. I suspect you will come to regret it if you get your way.
I’m impressed with you’re self belief, there is no other way than you’re way
Not at all. I am not in favour of the Customs Union as it is stupid idea that will tie our hands and put us at an enormous disadvantage in terms of trade. Nor do I particularly like May's deal in some aspects. But I have been willing to compromise on those because, even if I don't like them, they are still clearly Brexit.
But in the end if we do not leave then the democratic process has failed completely and I do not look forward to the consequences of that which so many Remainers seem to be blind to. .
I think I quite like the idea of having a customs union with the EU. I'm profoundly suspicious of all these wonderful 'trade deals' that are going to make us so wealthy, I think they're likely to be terrible for the consumer, and if anything like the same negotiating skills we've seen up until now are employed, we should all be worried.
I am told that Turkey objects to the asymmetry of third party trade deals in A customs union, but on the other hand their manufacturing seems to be doing very very well in some areas, for instance it been very acquisitive of EU domestic appliance brands.
Well clearly I think you are wrong both in terms of effect of Brexit on the country and the ability to implement it. But that is immatetial. Circumstances have not changed. We always had all those warnings of catastrophe before the refetenfum and they turned out to be rubbish. Trying to pull the ssme stunt again just shows how desperate you are to stop our leaving.
But I am not and never have been. I voted remain in 2016, but only because I was so undecided that I asked my 17 y.o. what he wanted to do, and voted as his proxy. And if you think this is still about "warnings of catastrophe" you haven't been keeping up with current events. The condition of the country now is a present and actual catastrophe, and you are afraid to admit it because you know you, and a lot of c@@ts like Rees Mogg, got us here by promising what you could not deliver.
You had your chance, Gorman.
As I have said many times before you are clearly deluded, both about the implications of Brexit and the serious consequences of revoking. I suspect you will come to regret it if you get your way.
I’m impressed with you’re self belief, there is no other way than you’re way
Not at all. I am not in favour of the Customs Union as it is stupid idea that will tie our hands and put us at an enormous disadvantage in terms of trade. Nor do I particularly like May's deal in some aspects. But I have been willing to compromise on those because, even if I don't like them, they are still clearly Brexit.
But in the end if we do not leave then the democratic process has failed completely and I do not look forward to the consequences of that which so many Remainers seem to be blind to. .
I think I quite like the idea of having a customs union with the EU. I'm profoundly suspicious of all these wonderful 'trade deals' that are going to make us so wealthy, I think they're likely to be terrible for the consumer, and if anything like the same negotiating skills we've seen up until now are employed, we should all be worried.
It comes back to that question of 'the' CU vs 'a' CU. And again it still denies us a seat in many of the organisations that are actually making the rules above the level of the EU.
No amount of constitutional jiggary pokery from those passionate lovers of the EU that May has surrounded herself with can change the fact that this Parliament cannot bind the hands of another Parliament
We will never get another leavers' parliament. Miss this open goal and you will never get another shot.
Well clearly I think you are wrong both in terms of effect of Brexit on the country and the ability to implement it. But that is immatetial. Circumstances have not changed. We always had all those warnings of catastrophe before the refetenfum and they turned out to be rubbish. Trying to pull the ssme stunt again just shows how desperate you are to stop our leaving.
But I am not and never have been. I voted remain in 2016, but only because I was so undecided that I asked my 17 y.o. what he wanted to do, and voted as his proxy. And if you think this is still about "warnings of catastrophe" you haven't been keeping up with current events. The condition of the country now is a present and actual catastrophe, and you are afraid to admit it because you know you, and a lot of c@@ts like Rees Mogg, got us here by promising what you could not deliver.
You had your chance, Gorman.
As I have said many times before you are clearly deluded, both about the implications of Brexit and the serious consequences of revoking. I suspect you will come to regret it if you get your way.
I’m impressed with you’re self belief, there is no other way than you’re way
Not at all. I am not in favour of the Customs Union as it is stupid idea that will tie our hands and put us at an enormous disadvantage in terms of trade. Nor do I particularly like May's deal in some aspects. But I have been willing to compromise on those because, even if I don't like them, they are still clearly Brexit.
But in the end if we do not leave then the democratic process has failed completely and I do not look forward to the consequences of that which so many Remainers seem to be blind to. .
I think I quite like the idea of having a customs union with the EU. I'm profoundly suspicious of all these wonderful 'trade deals' that are going to make us so wealthy, I think they're likely to be terrible for the consumer, and if anything like the same negotiating skills we've seen up until now are employed, we should all be worried.
I am told that Turkey objects to the asymmetry of third party trade deals in A customs union, but on the other hand their manufacturing seems to be doing very very well in some areas, for instance it been very acquisitive of EU domestic appliance brands.
It is not without its concerns. But they do seem to be doing quite well on it.
Bit if a different to what @bunnco was reporting earlier?
If you mean the UKIP wing then so be it.
“There are no tanks in Baghdad” I think you vastly underestimate the damage this is doing to the Tory base
It may but the party is broader than a hard right grouping
At least 70% of the Tory members would prefer no deal , if they are classed as hard right then your party has an existential problem
We can survive the loss of fair weather supporters like Big G.
I think the only event that could break the party completely would be Revoke sans second referendum. A second referendum that led to Remain would be ugly but manageable.
Eh, maybe. I'm genuinely surprised no big beasts quit over May opening up negotiations with Corbyn, and don't know if that is because any who intend to are waiting to see what formally comes out of it, if anything, or if because they think nothing will come out of it they see the harm in remaining in government as she tries to be less than damaging to their careers than saying that even attempting to compromise is unacceptable.
Democracy allows for further consideration of the same question. Lord knows enough time has been spent on this one and Leavers have proven themselves singularly clueless about what they actually want, as opposed to what they don’t want.
Democracy allows for further consideration once the first vote has been enacted. Otherwise it is simply Oligarchy.
Different people define enacting the first vote in different ways. If May's deal went through and we went into transition, would you regard the first vote as having been enacted? Millions wouldn't, which is why you have no right to set yourself up as the arbiter of this question. It is always legitimate to oppose a policy by democratic means, no matter how many people have voted for it.
LOL. More desperate spinning. I doubt you will find many voters of either camp who think revoking means we have enacted the referendum result even if they are glad that is the outcome. You may fool yourself with that sort of thinking but you wont fool many other people.
Presenting a Brexit deal to the public against the option of Remain delivers on the result. If people don't like the reality, that's their choice.
Nope. Presenting the Deal against No Deal would deliver on the result (and also fulfils the apparent desire from Remainers for a confirmatory referendum on the type of Brexit we have since they feel it was not articulated clearly enough).
Asking them about Remain again does not deliver on the result.
Denying the public the opportunity to vote on an option that is apparently far more popular than either of the options you would offer them would be a travesty of democracy.
But ignoring a previous vote to Leave would be hunky dory?
Devoting all our governmental and parliamentary resources to something for the best part of three years counts as ignoring it, does it?
Yes. The leaflet said ‘your decision’ not ‘your decision, then we’ll faff around for a few years and decide you didn’t really want to leave’.
Comments
"Tiger Roll, as last year's winner, who has been visually impressive in his races since, has obvious claims to repeat his victory on Saturday. I have my doubts, though. He has to carry 9lbs more weight than he did last year; he might have looked impressive at the Cheltenham Festival, but that was in a very different type of race against inferior opposition; that race was only three weeks ago, raising concerns over whether he will have fully recovered; and this year sees him switch to wearing blinkers over the cheekpieces he was sporting when winning last year. Now, that last fact may not seem especially significant (what difference can the cut of his headgear make?) but I wouldn't want to take such short odds over a horse, in such a chaotic race, where his vision was being obscured further. Instead of laying him in the win market, though, I'll be doing so in the place market at 2.96, in the expectation that he can be kept out of the first four."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-final-say-eu-referendum-peoples-vote-poll-a8857211.html
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-jacob-rees-mogg-tweet-uk-disruption-brexit-delay-a8856326.html
The poll didn’t actually ask people what would be on the ballot paper - which is where it gets a bit messier.
What’s the next euphemism we will get for a second referendum? Perhaps someone is focus grouping that....:
https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/1114587779722301440
Even in his worst moments, it's perhaps worth remembering Corbyn isn't as bad as Netanyahu.
Good night.
You had your chance, Gorman.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/04/06/furious-tory-activists-go-strike-political-donations-dry-theresa/
Bit if a different to what @bunnco was reporting earlier?
So little movement
Since they don’t know what they want, they can’t.
https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1114631322146877440
Means that by the time this is finished the "Tory Party" will literally consist of you, May, Hammond and Oliver bloody Letwin!
I don't think I even have to articulate the logic against that argument, it is so obvious. And of course the current rabble in Parliament largely make it for me.
I don't disagree that a deal which is much more beloved of remainers in the face of opposition from leavers would be problematic (or that ultimately the Leaver contingent are most to blame for rejecting Brexit), and we know many remainers have already voted for May's deal, I just think given the hard core of remainer opposition, and the twisting and turning from supposedly amenable MPs, that it is not guaranteed that a few more Leaver MPs behind it would have seen an appreciably greater number of Remainer MPs back it, or a future deal. Most of the Leaver MPs did back a deal after all, it didn't unlock many other remainer MPs.
Asking them about Remain again does not deliver on the result.
Elevator to hell ...... going down!
It is even more true now than it was for MV2.5, but scaring people with no Brexit doesn't work.
But in the end if we do not leave then the democratic process has failed completely and I do not look forward to the consequences of that which so many Remainers seem to be blind to. .
LDs are gone, however. I’ll agree entirely with your comment about LD’s tithing making their demise a vicious circle. Our local LD candidates include several who were dislodged from wards in the 00s.
Tories will be whipped against, Labour will free vote ....... it fails.
https://twitter.com/MattSingh_/status/1114638190751768576
The Remain establishment have played this wrong. Again.
Trying to stop us leaving has made people want to leave harder, and quicker.
I think the only event that could break the party completely would be Revoke sans second referendum. A second referendum that led to Remain would be ugly but manageable.