Jump to content
Wanderers Ways - passion not fashion

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, MickyD said:

I've got to the point where I'm thinking, even if they invited the Labour Party to come up with an acceptable deal, if May was delivering it to parliament, the Opposition would vote against it. It makes for pretty shit governance if it doesn't matter what one side wants, the others won't. 

Hang on - this is what normally happens. It's just the Tories fucked up the last election and didn't get the landslide they thought they would.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 45.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • miamiwhite

    5124

  • Mounts Kipper

    3444

  • boltondiver

    2989

  • Tonge moor green jacket

    2905

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I would encourage everyone to read the story and background of Emmett Till For those who don’t know who Emmett Till was he was a 14 year old black boy, who wolf whistled at a white lady. As a res

I'll even name names. The following are massive cunts: Me. Bolty. Miami. Cheese. Kent. Casino. Kipper. Royal. Labour. Tories. Scotland. The Welsh. The EU. Americans. People from fucking Yorkshire

My last comment on this... There are people on here who apart from being Bolton fans I have nothing in common with & whose opinions I wheheartedly disagree with, however I would fight for their ri

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Be interesting to see what a GE would throw up

What on earth would this bunch of liars put in their manifesto?

Same as usual, stuff they have no intention of implementing

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
14 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

One MP already said he will change his vote from against to for.

Very important debate and some hugely important subtleties, which alas some opposition members will clearly not consider.

TM sounding like a dalek adding to the atmosphere!

Which is probably why one of the Labour Shadow Cabinet MPs was on lunchtime news stating that nothing had significantly changed enough to make anyone at all alter their vote. A bit of psychology perhaps?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Probably

who?

Probably a red-blooded Brexiteer v some wishy washy remainer type?

Certainly a Brexit GE

May goes before. Corbyn after. Hopefully. In best case scenario.

I like Starmer. On the Tory side...Raab? Seems most credible option there. No doubt Gove will stick his hat in. And Boris. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter

Any delay, may result in an opportunity for the EU to change its stance.

This unilateral opt out, via the Vienna convention keeps cropping up.

Seem to be pushing it; Cox can't advocate it (without sufficient reason) but it's there.

Additional agreement to sort out alternative arrangements to the backstop may also help the likes of the dup.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Any delay, may result in an opportunity for the EU to change its stance.

This unilateral opt out, via the Vienna convention keeps cropping up.

Seem to be pushing it; Cox can't advocate it (without sufficient reason) but it's there.

Additional agreement to sort out alternative arrangements to the backstop may also help the likes of the dup.

The DUP have said they are voting against....

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

May goes before. Corbyn after. Hopefully. In best case scenario.

I like Starmer. On the Tory side...Raab? Seems most credible option there. No doubt Gove will stick his hat in. And Boris. 

Surely Corbyn can’t stand, as he is the living embodiment of a lie?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter
12 minutes ago, MickyD said:

Which is probably why one of the Labour Shadow Cabinet MPs was on lunchtime news stating that nothing had significantly changed enough to make anyone at all alter their vote. A bit of psychology perhaps?

Repeated questions, as there have been for months, from labour MPs that the political declaration doesn't give certainty.

Despite being told and knowing full well that trade agreement cannot be arranged until we're out.

Pure spoiling. 

TM has expressed a new way of going about achieving a trade deal, using more cross party agreement. 

If that's what labour want; to have more input then get behind it and then crack on with the bit that will have the true economic impact later.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

We'll see what the debate brings. That's why these points are being made, to give them opportunity.

No doubt Cox will be discussing things behind the scenes too.

Never rule anything out but given they’ve published a written statement explaining why they are voting against an hour ago they will look pretty silly if they change their minds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter

Jrm just confirmed that erg not decided yet which way they'll go. A meeting at 5.00pm

Minded to go no, based on their own legal advice, but as some have already said they'll back the deal, it's clear even they have differences of opinion.

Interestingly, the EU have apparently just said that all members not in the eurozone will have to relinquish their own currency and join by 2020.

Yet more issues.

Going to be a closer call than last time, but defeat still likely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

 

Interestingly, the EU have apparently just said that all members not in the eurozone will have to relinquish their own currency and join by 2020.

 

The EU said that about 5 years ago - no way could countries just drop their own currency in a period of less than two years  -  anyway Denmark won't have to, and if the UK was to remain they wouldn't have to either as they both have an opt out clause.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter
5 minutes ago, Sweep said:

The EU said that about 5 years ago - no way could countries just drop their own currency in a period of less than two years  -  anyway Denmark won't have to, and if the UK was to remain they wouldn't have to either as they both have an opt out clause.

 

I've taken a quote from an MP being interviewed- he phrased it as a new announcement. Perhaps they've changed tack.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I've taken a quote from an MP being interviewed- he phrased it as a new announcement. Perhaps they've changed tack.

Hate to tell you this....it’s a bare faced lie. We have an opt out and were never being forced in. Mcvey tried tweeting this shit earlier in the week and was called out on it and deleted it. No apology though...*shocked*

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

Hate to tell you this....it’s a bare faced lie. We have an opt out and were never being forced in. Mcvey tried tweeting this shit earlier in the week and was called out on it and deleted it. No apology though...*shocked*

Aye, McVey made a bit of a tit of herself: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47523168

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter

An MP makes a statement, one that I hadn't heard before. 

A fucknugget follows the line of a few conspiracy idiots and decides troops will be on the streets, medicines will run low etc. This after previous tripe that the country would plummet into recession immediately after a referendum.

Gullible?

Edited by Tonge moor green jacket
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

An MP makes a statement, one that I hadn't heard before. 

A fucknugget follows the line of a few conspiracy idiots and decides troops will be on the streets, medicines will run low etc. This after previous tripe that the country would plummet into recession immediately after a referendum.

Gullible?

Dismissing a huge range of incredibly credible warnings as ‘conspiracy idiots’ yet believing every word a tiny band of elite rich white MPs say is probably not the way to go.

One thing this has taught me is to listen to all views and weigh them against real evidence. The warnings of implications of no deal come from government no deal planning and scenario papers. The government. Are you really saying those are ‘conspiracy’? The huge GDP reductions bigger than the last recession the supply chain issues, travel issues etc...I don’t think it’s credible to dismiss government planning and evidence based predictions out of hand like that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.