Politics

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, barryk32 said:

Save me looking through 10000 posts, could someone point me to a list of whats been agreed, I cant seem to find one.

Nothing as yet!

[bwfcfan5]

7 minutes ago, Casino said:

despite your best efforts its pretty clear you are lapping up this obvious split in the tory camp

 

dont kid yourselves corbyns mob is any more united

I'm hoping that we get rid of Corbyn and a number of his front bench along with the extreme Brexit Tories and a moderate group of MPs work together from both sides. Its highly unlikely though the Sun reported today that some discussions on that had taken place!

Politics needs a reset. Two ineffective parties full of splits. If anything good comes out of this it will be politics finding the sensible middle ground again.

The Brexit wankers pushing for an unsuccessful leadership challenge could be the start of this. 

Edited November 16, 2018 by bwfcfan5

[bwfcfan5]

Bolton MP Chris Green has confirmed he has submitted his letter of no confidence In Theresa May stating

Quote

My constituents want a clean break from the European Union, taking back control of our laws, our borders, our money and our trade. The withdrawal proposal from the Prime Minister will not help deliver that result

.

 

 

[Casino]

so chris, how do we take control of the irish border

[ZiggyStardust]

47 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

 

So we should take what is universally seen as a "bad deal" because its "all we've managed to get" and industry wants "certainty".

That's a weak argument when the majority of industry wanted to remain.

We've three choices. Take a bad deal that will cost the economy and leave us weaker than remaining (we know this for a fact since May has refused to say we'll be better off with this deal than now), take no deal which the government estimates to be a huge financial and logistical disaster, or remain.

Given what we now know - we should ask the British people what they want to do. Its all quite clear as a choice. Because those who voted for Brexit are most certainly not happy with this deal. So one can therefore deduce that it ISN'T what they voted for. 

The only slight problem with that ......

 

52% thought the status quo is a bad deal, yet you want us to return to that. Interesting.

 

So says theres 3 options on the ballot, with the following counts:

 

Exit - No Deal 30%

Exit - As per deal 30%

Remain 40%

 

Im assuming you would take this as a clear mandate to remain. And thats why we cant have a second vote, unless its binary, and the only 2 options are deal or no deal.

 

[Cheese]

4 hours ago, Mounts Kipper said:

I think the deal on the table has the basis of a decent deal but as I understand it, it’s is not acceptable. 

Can somebody ask Mounts which bits of the Withdrawal Agreement he likes, and which bits he thinks are unacceptable...? I suspect he has no idea what he's talking about, as usual.

[Cheese]

4 minutes ago, ZiggyStardust said:

The only slight problem with that ......

 

52% thought the status quo is a bad deal, yet you want us to return to that. Interesting.

 

So says theres 3 options on the ballot, with the following counts:

 

Exit - No Deal 30%

Exit - As per deal 30%

Remain 40%

 

Im assuming you would take this as a clear mandate to remain. And thats why we cant have a second vote, unless its binary, and the only 2 options are deal or no deal.

 

It's not happening anyway, but if Leave voters "Knew exactly what they were voting for", as has been repeated over and over, the result would be the same as the 2016 referendum.

Remain would get 48 %, and one of the other options would get 52%, surely? Are you saying Leave voters DIDN'T all vote for the same thing?

Edited November 16, 2018 by Cheese

[birch-chorley]

Apparently letters of no confidence will get  to 60 

Whilst it would trigger a leadership vote it’s still way short of enough to overthrow TM, it needs at least twice that, if not more surely? 

mean while we sleep walk into the No Deal abyss 

Watch Sterling fall off another cliff, be down to 1.2 v the $ again in no time I imagine 

Edited November 16, 2018 by birch-chorley

[bwfcfan5]

8 minutes ago, ZiggyStardust said:

The only slight problem with that ......

 

52% thought the status quo is a bad deal, yet you want us to return to that. Interesting.

 

So says theres 3 options on the ballot, with the following counts:

 

Exit - No Deal 30%

Exit - As per deal 30%

Remain 40%

 

Im assuming you would take this as a clear mandate to remain. And thats why we cant have a second vote, unless its binary, and the only 2 options are deal or no deal.

 

You can present a binary leave/remain choice and then as a secondary option ask people whether IF we leave it is "May's deal" or "No deal" to get around that.

But either way I propose that knowing what we do now - the public needs to be consulted. Polls are suggesting there is very little public support for May's deal. 

 

 

[bwfcfan5]

2 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Apparently letters of no confidence will get  to 60 

Whilst it would trigger a leadership vote it’s still way short of enough to overthrow TM, it needs at least twice that, if not more surely? 

mean while we sleep walk into the No Deal abyss 

There is absolutely no way she is overthrown. But imagine a scenario where in a completely confidential vote 100 Tory MPs vote to say they have no confidence in her. Long term can she survive with a third of her MPs being on record as wanting her gone? No. As soon as there is a credible candidate that enough people in the party could unite around she'd be gone. Mind you, that would possibly be a long wait. 

But if there is a vote and more than 80ish say "no confidence" she's a dead woman walking - just won't know how long for. 

[birch-chorley]

Corbyn survived with a much bigger rebellion on his hands (as a % of his own MP’s) 

 

[Sweep]

27 minutes ago, Cheese said:

Can somebody ask Mounts which bits of the Withdrawal Agreement he likes, and which bits he thinks are unacceptable...? I suspect he has no idea what he's talking about, as usual.

I assume he's got you on ignore. Anyway he'll be able to see this and answer, if he's bothered about answering you that is

[Salford Trotter]

22 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

There is absolutely no way she is overthrown. But imagine a scenario where in a completely confidential vote 100 Tory MPs vote to say they have no confidence in her. Long term can she survive with a third of her MPs being on record as wanting her gone? No. As soon as there is a credible candidate that enough people in the party could unite around she'd be gone. Mind you, that would possibly be a long wait. 

But if there is a vote and more than 80ish say "no confidence" she's a dead woman walking - just won't know how long for. 

If they don't overthrow her on this occasion then they can't do it for another 12 months so they would have had to have done their sums on this to take her down. I am not sure they will do it though if the deal doesn't get through Parliament she is a lame duck and will probably walk anyway

[Traf]

44 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

 

Watch Sterling fall off another cliff, be down to 1.2 v the $ again in no time I imagine 

Seasonal blip.

[Cheese]

22 minutes ago, Sweep said:

I assume he's got you on ignore. Anyway he'll be able to see this and answer, if he's bothered about answering you that is

Cheers. He has indeed got me on ignore - because I ask questions like this. I don't expect an answer. 

[bwfcfan5]

38 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Corbyn survived with a much bigger rebellion on his hands (as a % of his own MP’s) 

 

Yep and that prompted a leadership election which Corbyn won handsomely. That is the difference it got as far as a formal leadership election.

This won't but it COULD possibly show the PM has lost trust of a third of her MPs. In a minority government. That isn't sustainable forever. 

[Cheese]

1 minute ago, Traf said:

Seasonal blip.

"It was over-valued anyway." They'll be repeating that until a Euro costs a tenner..

[kent_white]

We are literally about to buy a house. We are now considering not buying the house. 

[Mounts Kipper]

56 minutes ago, Sweep said:

I assume he's got you on ignore. Anyway he'll be able to see this and answer, if he's bothered about answering you that is

I’m not conversing with a clown, that’s him not you. 

[Cheese]

5 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

I’m not conversing with a clown, that’s him not you. 

 Told you. 

[mickbrown]

Ignore function. 

Fuck’s sake - some proper mard arses on here. 

[Youri McAnespie]

Safe spaces are not just for libtard snowflakes tha' knows...

[Guest]

36 minutes ago, kent_white said:

We are literally about to buy a house. We are now considering not buying the house. 

Give over!

[ZiggyStardust]

1 hour ago, bwfcfan5 said:

You can present a binary leave/remain choice and then as a secondary option ask people whether IF we leave it is "May's deal" or "No deal" to get around that.

We altready have given people that first choice.

1 hour ago, bwfcfan5 said:

But either way I propose that knowing what we do now - the public needs to be consulted. Polls are suggesting there is very little public support for May's deal. 

 

 

More knowledge will be gained each passing year. Should we chalk up a referendum, 1st june, every year for the foreseeable future ? Polls suggested Remain would win last time too.

Do you think that, based on 'expert' opinion, many of the 52% voted that way because they feel ignored. Do you think they would then vote the opposite way after being told 'You got it wrong, so we are ignoring your opinion, and having another vote'. A vote/remain refendum would see a higher leave win than last time. And for all the wrong reasons, because peopple would not be voting on the issue.

I get it, you want to remain. The world we live in says that boat has sailed, and we have two choices, go over the edge, or get a deal. Thats the reality. And whilst people continue ti push for 'Another Peoples vote', they cannot see that they are partially part of the problem. A very small part. But a part nontheless.

However ...

The best hope ironically for the remainers is for May to be toppled, as its unlikely anyone else could step in and re-negotitae. Which then leaves two options, stay or go. And it would be a toss up which way they chose, as both would be poitical suicide. 

[bwfcfan5]

10 minutes ago, ZiggyStardust said:

We altready have given people that first choice.

More knowledge will be gained each passing year. Should we chalk up a referendum, 1st june, every year for the foreseeable future ? Polls suggested Remain would win last time too.

Do you think that, based on 'expert' opinion, many of the 52% voted that way because they feel ignored. Do you think they would then vote the opposite way after being told 'You got it wrong, so we are ignoring your opinion, and having another vote'. A vote/remain refendum would see a higher leave win than last time. And for all the wrong reasons, because peopple would not be voting on the issue.

I get it, you want to remain. The world we live in says that boat has sailed, and we have two choices, go over the edge, or get a deal. Thats the reality. And whilst people continue ti push for 'Another Peoples vote', they cannot see that they are partially part of the problem. A very small part. But a part nontheless.

However ...

The best hope ironically for the remainers is for May to be toppled, as its unlikely anyone else could step in and re-negotitae. Which then leaves two options, stay or go. And it would be a toss up which way they chose, as both would be poitical suicide. 

I was against another vote until this week. But I've been convinced by the argument that clearly leaving in any form is damaging and worse than the situation we have now. It is widely accepted that the deal is "damage limitation". With that knowledge, coupled to the fact parliament is a shambles, we should ask people again. If the result is leave then we leave. And if you believe people would again vote leave and are a leaver you have nothing to be concerned about. 

Personally I think it would switch. Until this week I didn't but I think it would now. I might be way, way off. But - either way it puts it to bed one way or another. 

I think you could sensibly build a review mechanism in to enforce a further referendum in the event of remaining for a number of years time (say 5?) to ensure that a further measure is taken and another chance given.

I accept none of this will happen because there isn't enough political will, but I struggle to see one argument why this wouldn't be a more viable way forward than the Tory party having a huge scrap and our future being at the mercy of who wins it. 

I also think that in the event May gets her deal through parliament that you then will have a lot of disenfranchised Brexiteers - who will not just go away. So the idea that it is resolved neatly in either case is simply not a reality.