Memo Neoliberalism or neo-liberalism is the 20th-century resurgence of 19th-century ideas associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism. Those ideas include economic liberalization policies such as privatization, austerity, deregulation, free trade and reductions in government spending in order to increase the role of the private sector in the economy and society. These market-based ideas and the policies they inspired constitute a paradigm shift away from the post-war Keynesian consensus which lasted from 1945 to 1980
Just throw in Workhouses and you'd have a perfect economic and social policy platform.
That's an 'Against', btw.
Are you against liberalism then?
I'm not a liberal, I'm a Socialist.
And thus an authoritarian rather than a liberal ?
For the many, not the few. I regard that as progressive rather than authoritarian.
Well with the ERG that was always the case, for them Brexit requires leaving the single market and customs union and some of them even oppose the transition period, if the Withdrawal Agreement goes through it will be with the votes of Labour MPs like Flint and Nandy
According to latest data from CBS the Republican lead in the Senatorial race in Florida is now less than 17,400 . Yesterday they were 34,000 ahead.
What I don’t get is how the felon vote amendment got 60% backing when Republicans won the governorship and the Senate race.
I am a bit surprised that some of the networks have not reverted to 'Too close to call' on this one given that the margin is barely 0.2% now - comparable to circa 100 votes in a UK constituency. I doubt that the automatic recount has yet taken place.
It is not equivalent to 100 votes. That's not how statistical variation works.
what statistical variation? at this point we are talking about mistakes - some of which scale with greater size of Florida and some don't.
Is there ever a push in the US for Senators to be allocated porportionally to states rather than on a flat two-per-state basis?
Currently, there is one US Senator for every 18.6m Californian voters and one per 0.3m Wyoming voters. Hardly fair.
The States are the foundation of the USA, not the individuals who inhabit the territory. Equal representation in the Senate recognises their sovereignty and gives a measure of protection to the small states from domination by their larger neighbours.
I predicted Tester would win by around 16,000 votes a few threads back, and so it will come to pass (15317 ahead + around 1000 net from Gallatin to come). The New York Times precinct/remaining vote model worked very well indeed there.
Saw that, was very impressed! How did you find/create the model?
Well with the ERG that was always the case, for them Brexit requires leaving the single market and customs union and some of them even oppose the transition period, if the Withdrawal Agreement goes through it will be with the votes of Labour MPs like Flint and Nandy
Though Steve Baker has said he wants 'something for the £39 billion' which could be helped by promises on the future trading relationship with the EU
Is there ever a push in the US for Senators to be allocated porportionally to states rather than on a flat two-per-state basis?
Currently, there is one US Senator for every 18.6m Californian voters and one per 0.3m Wyoming voters. Hardly fair.
The States are the foundation of the USA, not the individuals who inhabit the territory. Equal representation in the Senate recognises their sovereignty and gives a measure of protection to the small states from domination by their larger neighbours.
High but still under 50% and lower than even the 49% who voted in the 1996 presidential election, the lowest turnout presidential election in the last 50 years
The issue isn't the pharmaceutical companies it is the broken US medical system. Allowing health programs to use their buying power seems a reasonable first step.
Yep. Prescription drugs account for somewhere around 10% of US healthcare spending. Assuming a hugely over-ambitious 50% cut, it would barely make a dent in healthcare costs (though clearly would make a big difference in individual cases).
Healthcare in the US is a mess, and addressing that systematically would deal with the drug pricing problem at the same time. Won't happen, of course, and pharmas are a relatively easy target.
The unintended consequence would quite likely be the acceleration of the current slow migration of drug development to Asia.
That's not 'barely a dent' in healthcare costs that's quite significant. It would be a saving of 5% of healthcare costs which for an individual saving is absolutely mammoth. Furthermore its worth bearing in mind that US healthcare expenditure is approaching and will soon reach 20% of GDP. Therefore the saving would be equivalent to an incredible 1% of GDP.
The other aspect is who pays. While other healthcare costs are usually covered by either insurance or government Medicare, often prescriptiond are paid for directly by the patient as a co-payment.
I was talking to the director of a US medical school a while back about the massive cost of US healthcare. He pointed out to me that the 17% of GDP spent in the US on healthcare is not lost to the economy, it just circulates back round into the economy.
Seemed plausible but I'm no economist.
All expenditure "circulates back round into the economy" (except on imports). It still means that 17% of US national income is spent on healthcare with no better outcomes than countries that only spend 9% of their national income on healthcare. Your US medical school director is trying to bamboozle you.
No he wasn't trying to bamboozle me, just challenging my assumptions.
The question I was left with is does it matter to the economy if we in the UK increased our spending to say 12% of GDP (through increased taxation) since that extra 2% would go back into the economy.
I am sure the neolibs on here will tell me why they think that's a bad idea but seems a great thing to me. What's more important improving health or everyone having a bit more to spend on stuff they don't really need or driving up house prices?
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
How many tweets about Raab have you shared today Scott?
Why shoot the messenger.
I was quite impressed with Raab until he shot himself in the foot today. I should say my wife shook her head in utter disbelief at his comments on Dover - Calais
I am in utter despair with the ignorance of so many leavers who just open the door to remainers argument; very reminiscent of football chants
The issue isn't the pharmaceutical companies it is the broken US medical system. Allowing health programs to use their buying power seems a reasonable first step.
Yep. Prescription drugs account for somewhere around 10% of US healthcare spending. Assuming a hugely over-ambitious 50% cut, it would barely make a dent in healthcare costs (though clearly would make a big difference in individual cases).
Healthcare in the US is a mess, and addressing that systematically would deal with the drug pricing problem at the same time. Won't happen, of course, and pharmas are a relatively easy target.
The unintended consequence would quite likely be the acceleration of the current slow migration of drug development to Asia.
That's not 'barely a dent' in healthcare costs P.
The other aspect is who pays. While other healthcare costs are usually covered by either insurance or government Medicare, often prescriptiond are paid for directly by the patient as a co-payment.
I was talking to the director of a US medical school a while back about the massive cost of US healthcare. He pointed out to me that the 17% of GDP spent in the US on healthcare is not lost to the economy, it just circulates back round into the economy.
Seemed plausible but I'm no economist.
All expenditure "circulates back round into the economy" (except on imports). It still means that 17% of US national income is spent on healthcare with no better outcomes than countries that only spend 9% of their national income on healthcare. Your US medical school director is trying to bamboozle you.
No he wasn't trying to bamboozle me, just challenging my assumptions.
The question I was left with is does it matter to the economy if we in the UK increased our spending to say 12% of GDP (through increased taxation) since that extra 2% would go back into the economy.
I am sure the neolibs on here will tell me why they think that's a bad idea but seems a great thing to me. What's more important improving health or everyone having a bit more to spend on stuff they don't really need or driving up house prices?
The multiplier effect on the economy for health spending is pretty high compared to other areas of government spending, with defence the worst. About 2/3 of health spending is pay.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
The Brexit deal will be framed as the establishment dismissing the referendum so they might as we’ll go the whole hog.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
How many tweets about Raab have you shared today Scott?
Frankly it deserves all the publicity it can get, this is the man in charge of negotiating our Brexit deal FFS. God help us, and people wonder why the EU are running rings around us.
How many tweets about Raab have you shared today Scott?
Frankly it deserves all the publicity it can get, this is the man in charge of negotiating our Brexit deal FFS. God help us, and people wonder why the EU are running rings around us.
Nah, May, Hammond and Robbins (all Remainers) are in control of the fake negotiation.
How many tweets about Raab have you shared today Scott?
Frankly it deserves all the publicity it can get, this is the man in charge of negotiating our Brexit deal FFS. God help us, and people wonder why the EU are running rings around us.
He is not in charge. May has been in charge form day 1, she is a control freak. He is just another stooge, who did not realise he was expendable when he took the jobs with sweet platitudes ringing in his ears.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
The irony is that the brexiteers themselves are sabotaging their own dreams in a spectacular way. I expect the chances of another referendum are growing daily
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
But the vote being asked for is May's deal or remain. None of these are leave.
So just like in North Carolina upon losing the governor race the GOP controlled assembly is simply going to remove all the governors powers.
Truly an astounding country.
h ttps://twitter.com/patrickdmarley/status/1060301509584404480?s=19
America is very rapidly losing any right to call itself a democracy. And Trump is a symbol of, rather than a causal factor in, this.
To think Americans still go around the world telling other countries how to run a democracy. They really could do with staying at home and sorting themselves out first. It really is a disgrace and it won't change.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
The irony is that the brexiteers themselves are sabotaging their own dreams in a spectacular way. I expect the chances of another referendum are growing daily
The leading Brexiteers seem to be truly, madly, deeply stupid in a way I never expected from top-level politicians. It has been a real eye-opener for me (and I suspect, many people) just how superficial and shallow these "leaders" are. Many of them seem to lack even the most basic knowledge of how the country works.
It appears that we have indeed shaved some monkeys, put them in suits and voted for the rosette stuck to them.
So just like in North Carolina upon losing the governor race the GOP controlled assembly is simply going to remove all the governors powers.
Truly an astounding country.
h ttps://twitter.com/patrickdmarley/status/1060301509584404480?s=19
America is very rapidly losing any right to call itself a democracy. And Trump is a symbol of, rather than a causal factor in, this.
To think Americans still go around the world telling other countries how to run a democracy. They really could do with staying at home and sorting themselves out first. It really is a disgrace and it won't change.
At least the Septics have a fully elected 2nd chamber.
How many tweets about Raab have you shared today Scott?
Why shoot the messenger.
I was quite impressed with Raab until he shot himself in the foot today. I should say my wife shook her head in utter disbelief at his comments on Dover - Calais
I am in utter despair with the ignorance of so many leavers who just open the door to remainers argument; very reminiscent of football chants
'You don't know what you are doing'
Unfortunately, there's rather more at stake than 3 points.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
The irony is that the brexiteers themselves are sabotaging their own dreams in a spectacular way. I expect the chances of another referendum are growing daily
The leading Brexiteers seem to be truly, madly, deeply stupid in a way I never expected from top-level politicians. It has been a real eye-opener for me (and I suspect, many people) just how superficial and shallow these "leaders" are. Many of them seem to lack even the most basic knowledge of how the country works.
It appears that we have indeed shaved some monkeys, put them in suits and voted for the rosette stuck to them.
ERG are utterly inept but do not forget Boris etc neither expected or even wanted to win
My fellow neuro patients,all with long-term ,progressive conditions,in the US are being hit hard by Trump's changes.One posted he was crowfunding to pay for his essential treatment and another was at her wits' end to discover when she was diagnosed her insurance cover included a $10k "excess".She did not have $10 let alone $10k.She had been advised to declare bankrupcy-for just being ill. Thank heavens for the NHS.We should not take it for granted.
Is there ever a push in the US for Senators to be allocated porportionally to states rather than on a flat two-per-state basis?
Currently, there is one US Senator for every 18.6m Californian voters and one per 0.3m Wyoming voters. Hardly fair.
The founding fathers fixed it that way so the urban areas would not dominate the rural areas. Far sighted.
Yes, I know that. But it doesn't answer my question.
I assume a change would require a constitutional amendment which, oh wait, requires a 2/3rd majority in the House and the Senate and has to be ratified by 3/4 of the states. So, tricky...
Indeed it's never going to happen nor should it. It is a feature not a bug, the House of Representatives gets roughly equal weightings due to population, the Senate gets equal weightings per state. Its a deliberate design and smaller states have no reason to let California trump federation.
It also skews the electoral college as each state gets an electoral vote for each senator, which is why the last 2 Republicans "won"the presidency despite losing the popular vote.
If the situation was reversed the right in America would be screaming blue murder. With the gerrymandering and the voter suppression measures on top the Republican seem to have given up any pretence of democracy as it is commonly understood.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
But the vote being asked for is May's deal or remain. None of these are leave.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
The irony is that the brexiteers themselves are sabotaging their own dreams in a spectacular way. I expect the chances of another referendum are growing daily
The leading Brexiteers seem to be truly, madly, deeply stupid in a way I never expected from top-level politicians. It has been a real eye-opener for me (and I suspect, many people) just how superficial and shallow these "leaders" are. Many of them seem to lack even the most basic knowledge of how the country works.
It appears that we have indeed shaved some monkeys, put them in suits and voted for the rosette stuck to them.
ERG are utterly inept but do not forget Boris etc neither expected or even wanted to win
Of course we now know why
I think we are going to find out pretty soon whether they are inept or not. So far thay have loyally voted with the Govt every time. The remain nutters have voted against their Govt and lost. They have put forward a customs union lost the vote but now May wants a customs union. This little trouble she has with her new customs arrangement is not caused by the brexiteers but the remainers. It is the remainers who have been inept. Referendums are rubbish, ah but now we want one it is a peoples vote, etc, etc, etc.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
But the vote being asked for is May's deal or remain. None of these are leave.
My fellow neuro patients,all with long-term ,progressive conditions,in the US are being hit hard by Trump's changes.One posted he was crowfunding to pay for his essential treatment and another was at her wits' end to discover when she was diagnosed her insurance cover included a $10k "excess".She did not have $10 let alone $10k.She had been advised to declare bankrupcy-for just being ill. Thank heavens for the NHS.We should not take it for granted.
+1
That does not mean that the NHS is perfect, or immune to criticism (especially when it gets things wrong) and should not evolve.
The NHS is brilliant. It should not be a religion.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
I fail to understand how that is different from the first vote. Project fear made it eminently clear that there would be dire consequences if we left, indeed I believe at one point World War III was mooted.
All you are doing is re-running the first vote, with the same dire warnings, this time saying "are you sure, are you really really sure?"
People knew the risks entailed in what they were voting for. To suggest otherwise, in the face of the highly negative campaign Remain ran the first time around, is a total fantasy.
So you say you will accept a leave vote a second time round.
But my question for you is, given that people were adequately warned the first time around, why is two the magic number? Why not three, or four?
Given the EU's record on making countries vote again until they give the right answer, surely you can understand my cynicism. It is a rod they have made for their own backs by displaying such contempt for democracy time after time after time.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
I fail to understand how that is different from the first vote. Project fear made it eminently clear that there would be dire consequences if we left, indeed I believe at one point World War III was mooted.
All you are doing is re-running the first vote, with the same dire warnings, this time saying "are you sure, are you really really sure?"
People knew the risks entailed in what they were voting for. To suggest otherwise, in the face of the highly negative campaign Remain ran the first time around, is a total fantasy.
So you say you will accept a leave vote a second time round.
But my question for you is, given that people were adequately warned the first time around, why is two the magic number? Why not three, or four?
Given the EU's record on making countries vote again until they give the right answer, surely you can understand my cynicism. It is a rod they have made for their own backs by displaying such contempt for democracy time after time after time.
I think we are going to find out pretty soon whether they are inept or not. So far thay have loyally voted with the Govt every time. The remain nutters have voted against their Govt and lost. They have put forward a customs union lost the vote but now May wants a customs union. This little trouble she has with her new customs arrangement is not caused by the brexiteers but the remainers. It is the remainers who have been inept. Referendums are rubbish, ah but now we want one it is a peoples vote, etc, etc, etc.
The Remainers have spent the time pointing out the upcoming pitfalls.
The Leavers have spent the time saying "Oh! We did not realise it worked like that..."
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
Yet we were told there would only be one chance ot say remain - we were told that again and again.
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
I believe we already had a peoples vote? oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want. How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory. So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop. If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
I fail to understand how that is different from the first vote. Project fear made it eminently clear that there would be dire consequences if we left, indeed I believe at one point World War III was mooted.
All you are doing is re-running the first vote, with the same dire warnings, this time saying "are you sure, are you really really sure?"
People knew the risks entailed in what they were voting for. To suggest otherwise, in the face of the highly negative campaign Remain ran the first time around, is a total fantasy.
So you say you will accept a leave vote a second time round.
But my question for you is, given that people were adequately warned the first time around, why is two the magic number? Why not three, or four? Given the EU's record on making countries vote again until they give the right answer, surely you can understand my cynicism. It is a rod they have made for their own backs by displaying such contempt for democracy time after time after time.
Your problem is that the Remain campaign was run by top Tories. So naturally nobody believed them. Furthermore, since the Top Tories have for some time run their campaigns on a basis of fear, there was even more probability that they would not be believed.
Now it is turning out that the situation is even worse than the Top Tories threatened. Definitely time to think again.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
Yet we were told there would only be one chance ot say remain - we were told that again and again.
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
As I say how very EU
The calls for a #peoplesvote are not coming from the EU, they are coming from Britons in Britain.
So just like in North Carolina upon losing the governor race the GOP controlled assembly is simply going to remove all the governors powers.
Truly an astounding country.
h ttps://twitter.com/patrickdmarley/status/1060301509584404480?s=19
America is very rapidly losing any right to call itself a democracy. And Trump is a symbol of, rather than a causal factor in, this.
To think Americans still go around the world telling other countries how to run a democracy. They really could do with staying at home and sorting themselves out first. It really is a disgrace and it won't change.
At least the Septics have a fully elected 2nd chamber.
But with one where the results were fixed in advance. Case proven, I think.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
Yet we were told there would only be one chance ot say remain - we were told that again and again.
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
As I say how very EU
The calls for a #peoplesvote are not coming from the EU, they are coming from Britons in Britain.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
I fail to understand how that is different from the first vote. Project fear made it eminently clear that there would be dire consequences if we left, indeed I believe at one point World War III was mooted.
All you are doing is re-running the first vote, with the same dire warnings, this time saying "are you sure, are you really really sure?"
People knew the risks entailed in what they were voting for. To suggest otherwise, in the face of the highly negative campaign Remain ran the first time around, is a total fantasy.
So you say you will accept a leave vote a second time round.
But my question for you is, given that people were adequately warned the first time around, why is two the magic number? Why not three, or four?
Given the EU's record on making countries vote again until they give the right answer, surely you can understand my cynicism. It is a rod they have made for their own backs by displaying such contempt for democracy time after time after time.
I'm not the EU. I've never asked for a referendum to be rerun before. I didn't want the bloody first one. I don't much want a second one. Brexit can't be delivered. We have to get out of it somehow. If you've got a better way out I'll listen, but if a third referendum is the only way I'll take it.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
Yet we were told there would only be one chance ot say remain - we were told that again and again.
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
As I say how very EU
The calls for a #peoplesvote are not coming from the EU, they are coming from Britons in Britain.
How many tweets about Raab have you shared today Scott?
Frankly it deserves all the publicity it can get, this is the man in charge of negotiating our Brexit deal FFS. God help us, and people wonder why the EU are running rings around us.
Nah, May, Hammond and Robbins (all Remainers) are in control of the fake negotiation.
You can sleep easy in your bed now.
Ohm yes sorry, he's only the Secretary off State for Exiting the EU and hadn't "fully understood" how most of trade enters the UK. Strikes me it's a damn good job he's not in charge of anything.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
Yet we were told there would only be one chance ot say remain - we were told that again and again.
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
As I say how very EU
The calls for a #peoplesvote are not coming from the EU, they are coming from Britons in Britain.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
Yet we were told there would only be one chance ot say remain - we were told that again and again.
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
As I say how very EU
The calls for a #peoplesvote are not coming from the EU, they are coming from Britons in Britain.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
Yet we were told there would only be one chance ot say remain - we were told that again and again.
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
As I say how very EU
The calls for a #peoplesvote are not coming from the EU, they are coming from Britons in Britain.
23.6.16 was a people's vote.
It wouldn't matter if it were a gerbil's vote. Brexit is still a failed project.
I believe we already had a peoples vote? oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want. How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory. So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop. If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
I fail to understand how that is different from the first vote. Project fear made it eminently clear that there would be dire consequences if we left, indeed I believe at one point World War III was mooted.
All you are doing is re-running the first vote, with the same dire warnings, this time saying "are you sure, are you really really sure?"
So you say you will accept a leave vote a second time round.
But my question for you is, given that people were adequately warned the first time around, why is two the magic number? Why not three, or four? Given the EU's record on making countries vote again until they give the right answer, surely you can understand my cynicism. It is a rod they have made for their own backs by displaying such contempt for democracy time after time after time.
Your problem is that the Remain campaign was run by top Tories. So naturally nobody believed them. Furthermore, since the Top Tories have for some time run their campaigns on a basis of fear, there was even more probability that they would not be believed.
Now it is turning out that the situation is even worse than the Top Tories threatened. Definitely time to think again.
The board of BSIE was Lord Sainsbury, Mandelson, Nick Clegg and Ken Clarke. Damian Green replace Clarke latter on. The executives in chard of BSIE day to day were Straw and the ex Head of Strategy for the Lib Dems. I think it was spot the Tory in the BSIE campaign.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
Yet we were told there would only be one chance ot say remain - we were told that again and again.
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
As I say how very EU
OK - let me put it very, very plainly. I do not care if we leave, but now that we have a MUCH clearer idea of want Leave entails - actual outcomes in the short term rather than vague outlines in the medium term - we would be complete fools not to reassess the whole thing.
I suspect all you Leavers get uppity about it because you do not believe that you could win again given the current scenarios and situations that will come to pass in less than 6 months. Your fantasy project is being exposed as just that - a fantasy.
TBH, if the Leave side had any brains at all, they would recognise that stopping this shambles would be the wisest thing to do for their own repuations, because otherwise we are heading for the WTO cliff or EU vassalage and that will be the Leavers' fault and you they can have all the blame that comes with it.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
Yet we were told there would only be one chance ot say remain - we were told that again and again.
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
As I say how very EU
The calls for a #peoplesvote are not coming from the EU, they are coming from Britons in Britain.
23.6.16 was a people's vote.
It wouldn't matter if it were a gerbil's vote. Brexit is still a failed project.
And if the result is ignored, democracy is a failed project. A far more terrifying prospect.
How many tweets about Raab have you shared today Scott?
Frankly it deserves all the publicity it can get, this is the man in charge of negotiating our Brexit deal FFS. God help us, and people wonder why the EU are running rings around us.
Nah, May, Hammond and Robbins (all Remainers) are in control of the fake negotiation.
You can sleep easy in your bed now.
Ohm yes sorry, he's only the Secretary off State for Exiting the EU and hadn't "fully understood" how most of trade enters the UK. Strikes me it's a damn good job he's not in charge of anything.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
Yet we were told there would only be one chance ot say remain - we were told that again and again.
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
As I say how very EU
The calls for a #peoplesvote are not coming from the EU, they are coming from Britons in Britain.
23.6.16 was a people's vote.
It wouldn't matter if it were a gerbil's vote. Brexit is still a failed project.
And if the result is ignored, democracy is a failed project. A far more terrifying prospect.
If the result is overturned by a #peoplesvote then democracy will have triumphed.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
Yet we were told there would only be one chance ot say remain - we were told that again and again.
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
As I say how very EU
The calls for a #peoplesvote are not coming from the EU, they are coming from Britons in Britain.
23.6.16 was a people's vote.
It wouldn't matter if it were a gerbil's vote. Brexit is still a failed project.
And if the result is ignored, democracy is a failed project. A far more terrifying prospect.
The result hasn't been ignored. We've talked about nothing else since the referendum was announced. And in all that time nobody has come up with a way that gets us out without doing huge damage to the country. The damage to democracy was done by proposing something that can't be delivered.
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
No. Vote again because we now have a much clearer idea of the brick wall the Leavers are pointing us at.
And if people still vote to leave, what then? Will you accept the result then? The polls have hardly changed in two and a half years, despite well over two years of relentless campaigning from the remain side.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
If people reinforce the Leave vote, then we Leave no matter how bad or disastrous it will be. But there cannot be any recriminations from Leavers if the whole thing is a pile of poop.
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
Yet we were told there would only be one chance ot say remain - we were told that again and again.
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
As I say how very EU
The calls for a #peoplesvote are not coming from the EU, they are coming from Britons in Britain.
23.6.16 was a people's vote.
It wouldn't matter if it were a gerbil's vote. Brexit is still a failed project.
And if the result is ignored, democracy is a failed project. A far more terrifying prospect.
The result hasn't been ignored. We've talked about nothing else since the referendum was announced. And in all that time nobody has come up with a way that gets us out without doing huge damage to the country. The damage to democracy was done by proposing something that can't be delivered.
Brexit has always been possible, and of course still is. It is just that the fantasy Brexit that has fallen on its face. A Brexit that diminishes and marginalises Britain has always been possible. There was a good article on it in the FT the other day:
How many tweets about Raab have you shared today Scott?
It is important, Raab confirmed he'll never be PM/Tory leader after his comments.
To be honest I think that's a bit harsh - obviously one can make fun of him for that slip, but one bit of admitted ignorance shouldn't damn him forever. It's that sort of reaction that creates control freaks who never say a word that hasn't been tested on a focus group.
As someone who voted Remain, and who continues to think we'll be fortunate if Brexit can be contained to be merely a mistake rather than a disaster, I have to say that the only significant new piece of information since the referendum is that the economic damage from Brexit uncertainty, so far at least, is less than anyone expected. It's hard to see how that justifies a rerun of the People's Vote. That's the plain truth of the matter; sorry guys'n'gals.
How many tweets about Raab have you shared today Scott?
It is important, Raab confirmed he'll never be PM/Tory leader after his comments.
To be honest I think that's a bit harsh - obviously one can make fun of him for that slip, but one bit of admitted ignorance shouldn't damn him forever. It's that sort of reaction that creates control freaks who never say a word that hasn't been tested on a focus group.
Yeah and lets not forget how much TSE's hero Cameron used to shoot his mouth off and make an idiot of himself...
As someone who voted Remain, and who continues to think we'll be fortunate if Brexit can be contained to be merely a mistake rather than a disaster, I have to say that the only significant new piece of information since the referendum is that the economic damage from Brexit uncertainty, so far at least, is less than anyone expected. It's hard to see how that justifies a rerun of the People's Vote. That's the plain truth of the matter; sorry guys'n'gals.
Fine. If I am wrong about effects of Brexit then the UK will be fine and I will have egg on my face. I can live with that.
If you are wrong, the UK will be screwed up. I hope you can live with that.
How many tweets about Raab have you shared today Scott?
It is important, Raab confirmed he'll never be PM/Tory leader after his comments.
To be honest I think that's a bit harsh - obviously one can make fun of him for that slip, but one bit of admitted ignorance shouldn't damn him forever. It's that sort of reaction that creates control freaks who never say a word that hasn't been tested on a focus group.
It's entirely synthetic nonsense. He should have used a different phrasing, such as 'I am learning more about the details...'.
As someone who voted Remain, and who continues to think we'll be fortunate if Brexit can be contained to be merely a mistake rather than a disaster, I have to say that the only significant new piece of information since the referendum is that the economic damage from Brexit uncertainty, so far at least, is less than anyone expected. It's hard to see how that justifies a rerun of the People's Vote. That's the plain truth of the matter; sorry guys'n'gals.
Okay, Brexit can't be delivered in less than 10 years and possibly not in less than 20- by which time public opinion will have swung against it and one or probably both of the main parties will be committed to remaining/rejoining. So there is at best a very narrow window whereby we could just about slip out if a set of unlikely but not impossible circumstances arise. Common sense cries out to stop it now.
Comments
Big pharma
Spec pharm
Gx
OTC
Vet
Global biotech
Shitty biotech
Allowing purchasing of insurance across state lines would massively reduce prices (costs) as well
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/08/business-leaders-call-for-second-brexit-referendum
oh, you mean vote again until you get the result you want.
How very EU
https://www.npr.org/2018/11/08/665197690/a-boatload-of-ballots-midterm-voter-turnout-hit-50-year-high
I can't reconcile various Arizona government figures . Maricopa County figures don't match the state wide early vote figures.
Not a clue what is happening, will wait for tomorrow morning to see if my cheeky tenner this morning has tuned into a cheekier sixty quid.
A second referendum, particularly a "people's" vote that can be framed as the establishment dismissing the first one for the wrong type of people voting for the wrong sort of thing, would have no guarantee of victory.
So what then? A third? A fourth? How many will it take?
I was quite impressed with Raab until he shot himself in the foot today
I am in utter despair with the ignorance of so many leavers who just open the door to remainers argument; very reminiscent of football chants
'You don't know what you are doing'
I was quite impressed with Raab until he shot himself in the foot today. I should say my wife shook her head in utter disbelief at his comments on Dover - Calais
I am in utter despair with the ignorance of so many leavers who just open the door to remainers argument; very reminiscent of football chants
'You don't know what you are doing'
https://twitter.com/williamjordann/status/1060635600766799873
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3849102/
Do you think sometimes PB is in a bit of a bubble?
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/eu-citizens-make-human-chain-at-downing-street_uk_5be049e5e4b01ffb1d04609f?ncid=other_twitter_cooo9wqtham&utm_campaign=share_twitter
The growing impression is that brexiteer after brexiteer are making a complete horlicks of their arguments
If the country is certain it wants to indulge in a national hiri-kiri then so be it, but we should have the opportunity to step back from the precipice.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46142188
You can sleep easy in your bed now.
It appears that we have indeed shaved some monkeys, put them in suits and voted for the rosette stuck to them.
Of course we now know why
Thank heavens for the NHS.We should not take it for granted.
If the situation was reversed the right in America would be screaming blue murder. With the gerrymandering and the voter suppression measures on top the Republican seem to have given up any pretence of democracy as it is commonly understood.
- No deal
- Chequers deal
- Remain
It is the remainers who have been inept. Referendums are rubbish, ah but now we want one it is a peoples vote, etc, etc, etc.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/08/business-leaders-call-for-second-brexit-referendum
That does not mean that the NHS is perfect, or immune to criticism (especially when it gets things wrong) and should not evolve.
The NHS is brilliant. It should not be a religion.
All you are doing is re-running the first vote, with the same dire warnings, this time saying "are you sure, are you really really sure?"
People knew the risks entailed in what they were voting for. To suggest otherwise, in the face of the highly negative campaign Remain ran the first time around, is a total fantasy.
So you say you will accept a leave vote a second time round.
But my question for you is, given that people were adequately warned the first time around, why is two the magic number? Why not three, or four?
Given the EU's record on making countries vote again until they give the right answer, surely you can understand my cynicism. It is a rod they have made for their own backs by displaying such contempt for democracy time after time after time.
The Leavers have spent the time saying "Oh! We did not realise it worked like that..."
Of course now remain lost they want to forget all of that
As I say how very EU
Now it is turning out that the situation is even worse than the Top Tories threatened. Definitely time to think again.
Oh dear.
Or they would have agred customs union. Or would never have left in the first place.
I suspect all you Leavers get uppity about it because you do not believe that you could win again given the current scenarios and situations that will come to pass in less than 6 months. Your fantasy project is being exposed as just that - a fantasy.
TBH, if the Leave side had any brains at all, they would recognise that stopping this shambles would be the wisest thing to do for their own repuations, because otherwise we are heading for the WTO cliff or EU vassalage and that will be the Leavers' fault and you they can have all the blame that comes with it.
https://twitter.com/MarieAnnUK/status/1060647887762345985
Which of those would you choose?
https://www.ft.com/content/29468d52-e0e5-11e8-8e70-5e22a430c1ad
https://twitter.com/MrsCupcake79/status/1060632986591346688
So why did we have a referendum asking if we wanted to remain or leave?
If you are wrong, the UK will be screwed up. I hope you can live with that.