|
|
Post by crapslinger on Jun 12, 2017 13:53:39 GMT
Free beer tomorrow  |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jun 12, 2017 13:57:38 GMT
Your arguments are weaker than your bullshit statements. Which is saying something. You came out with some nonsense goals analogy and "how is losing a majority winning" cobblers. Losing is the new winning if you are a Labour supporter  In all fairness I think if you call an election when there is no need to and you are already in a majority and you finish up clinging to power courtesy of an arrangement with the Orange Order things haven't exactly gone to plan. It's not hard to see why Theresa May was in floods of tears and Jeremy Corbyn strutting around with that now trademark frazzled panache! |
|
|
|
Post by songthrush01 on Jun 12, 2017 14:18:15 GMT
So Theresa May wanted an election because she felt that having a majority of 17 wasn't enough to secure a good deal with the EU. She wanted a bigger majority to strengthen her hand.
What sort of position do we find ourselves in now that that majority has been wiped out? It doesn't look good does it. you do wonder about all this,even her own mps were surprised she went for a election,there was no need to and dont forget she was all for staying in europe.then i have listened to some tory who have lost there seat,and said it was the worst campaign they have ever been involved in.for me i smell a rat to get a soft brexit and thought that when she called a election. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2017 14:18:51 GMT
Can someone please explain the difference between a hard and soft Brexit? Because for me one isn't leaving the EU at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by tuum on Jun 12, 2017 14:24:11 GMT
How about this for an idea.
Given that half the population are running scared about adopting a Hard Brexit and the Tories seems to be wavering.
Why not go for the softer brexit. Keep the free movement of labour & the other fundamental freedoms.
At the same time start negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world...gradually wean ourselves away from the EU teat.
Once everyone realizes the sky will not fall in if we engage with the rest of the world we can then fuck the Europeans off and scrap the fundamental freedoms five years down the line.
Bottom line is ordinary people understandably are worried that they will suffer short-medium term economic loss that they can ill afford. Big business is worried it will lose its access to cheap labour. Everyone wants to be reassured. Some need an arm around the shoulder, others need a hug. Not many people want to jeopardise what they have now even if in 20 years time their children will be better off.
One thing is for sure. The EU will not get any better. If we stay in we will be having this conversation again in 10 years time with a population hell bent on revolution...after a nice cup of hot tea of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Jun 12, 2017 14:26:07 GMT
Wudda, Cudda, Shudda rog. 
You are a rational chap mate, and I look forward to the day when the penny finally drops and you start to point the finger at the real villains of the piece - the unscrupulous, self serving and irresponsible politicians who managed to convince a significant proportion of an otherwise sensible and well meaning population that Brexit would be easily and painlessly achieved, and would lead to a wonderful land of milk and honey for all.
The pragmatists amongst us  realised this was unlikely to be the case and that the checks and balances built into the democratic system in this country would make the process long, drawn out, economically damaging and the result ultimately very disappointing - particularly for it's proponents.
As I said at the time "Expectations have been raised that CANNOT be fulfilled by our system". Cameron's ill-considered advisory referendum short circuited the democratic process in this country. We live in a parliamentary democracy and there was not a parliamentary majority in favour of Brexit. There still isn't a parliamentary majority honestly in favour of Brexit - predominately we have a set of remainers forced to act against their judgement in trying to carry out the popular will. For that reason alone, never mind the foolishness of Theresa May, the resulting Brexit is guaranteed to prove sub-optimal.
If you want an example of how to sensibly effect change in a democratic society just look at Macron's La République en Marche. A popular movement built from nothing in next to no time, is about to achieve an unassailable majority in the French Parliament and with it a legitimate and PRACTICAL mandate for their change programme If supporters of Leaving the EU had followed a similar parliamentary path in this country we would not be in the mess we are now and the implementation of Brexit would be relatively painless.
As it is, Brexit is going to happen but it won't truly please anybody, it will prove a bitter disappointment for most and, economically, it will be grim for many people. 
POPULISM = FAILURE. Learn the lessons of history.
Great post, accurate and eloquent Thanks. I try my best. |
|
|
|
Post by tuum on Jun 12, 2017 14:27:43 GMT
Can someone please explain the difference between a hard and soft Brexit? Because for me one isn't leaving the EU at all. You are correct. The soft brexit to me seems like we stay in the EU and accept all their fundamental freedoms, pay them some cash to trade with them and don't get a seat at the voting table. I am hoping it is a bit greyer than that and we will be allowed to go our own way in some areas albeit with one arm tied behind our back...and a big jangly ankle chain bolted to the Brandenburg Gate...lest we forget who are Masters are (will be). |
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Jun 12, 2017 14:28:27 GMT
Can someone please explain the difference between a hard and soft Brexit? Because for me one isn't leaving the EU at all. It is pretty much: Soft Brexit = staying in the single market with freedom of movement still in place. Hard Brexit = out of the single market and out of any binding agreement to freedom of movement. In either scenario, we would leave the EU and would no longer be a member. |
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Jun 12, 2017 14:53:57 GMT
Wudda, Cudda, Shudda rog.
You are a rational chap mate, and I look forward to the day when the penny finally drops and you start to point the finger at the real villains of the piece - the unscrupulous, self serving and irresponsible politicians who managed to convince a significant proportion of an otherwise sensible and well meaning population that Brexit would be easily and painlessly achieved, and would lead to a wonderful land of milk and honey for all.
The pragmatists amongst us realised this was unlikely to be the case and that the checks and balances built into the democratic system in this country would make the process long, drawn out, economically damaging and the result ultimately very disappointing - particularly for it's proponents.
As I said at the time "Expectations have been raised that CANNOT be fulfilled by our system". Cameron's ill-considered advisory referendum short circuited the democratic process in this country. We live in a parliamentary democracy and there was not a parliamentary majority in favour of Brexit. There still isn't a parliamentary majority honestly in favour of Brexit - predominately we have a set of remainers forced to act against their judgement in trying to carry out the popular will. For that reason alone, never mind the foolishness of Theresa May, the resulting Brexit is guaranteed to prove sub-optimal.
If you want an example of how to sensibly effect change in a democratic society just look at Macron's La République en Marche. A popular movement built from nothing in next to no time, is about to achieve an unassailable majority in the French Parliament and with it a legitimate and PRACTICAL mandate for their change programme If supporters of Leaving the EU had followed a similar parliamentary path in this country we would not be in the mess we are now and the implementation of Brexit would be relatively painless.
As it is, Brexit is going to happen but it won't truly please anybody, it will prove a bitter disappointment for most and, economically, it will be grim for many people.
POPULISM = FAILURE. Learn the lessons of history.
Excellent post. That summarises perfectly how we got here and try as I might I can't see any happy ending. Thanks. I suppose it depends where you stand politically. If Labour play their cards right and make sure that the Tories alone fully "own" a disappointing Brexit then it will be an albatross around the neck of the Tories and they will be unelectable for a generation. Unfortunately for the populists' predicated argument, Europe hasn't followed Trump and ourselves into chaos and despair and is instead opting for "strength and stability". Growth is picking up nicely in the Eurozone and I expect it to continue. The stupidly brutal straitjacket of the Euro will eventually force all the economies (bar Greece) into tandem and then the past decade of pent up suppressed demand will be fully released and growth take off. Once prosperity returns the Greek problem can be massaged by a programme of generous debt relief. The UK will apply to rejoin within the next 20 years. It will probably cost us the £. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2017 14:58:44 GMT
Can someone please explain the difference between a hard and soft Brexit? Because for me one isn't leaving the EU at all. It is pretty much: Soft Brexit = staying in the single market with freedom of movement still in place. Hard Brexit = out of the single market and out of any binding agreement to freedom of movement. In either scenario, we would leave the EU and would no longer be a member. With a soft-brexit we are not truly setting our own rules so we'd effectively still have a tentacle of the ewww holding us firmly. Even if we go for the hard-brexit that has already been voted for (it's a fucking disgrace that we're even discussing the type of brexit we'll seek) and end up with many of the same systems and rules still in place such as huge immigration levels and whatnot, at least it'll be much easier / possible for the people of this country to democratically decide what happens in this country. |
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jun 12, 2017 15:00:17 GMT
Can someone please explain the difference between a hard and soft Brexit? Because for me one isn't leaving the EU at all. You are correct. The soft brexit to me seems like we stay in the EU and accept all their fundamental freedoms, pay them some cash to trade with them and don't get a seat at the voting table. I am hoping it is a bit greyer than that and we will be allowed to go our own way in some areas albeit with one arm tied behind our back...and a big jangly ankle chain bolted to the Brandenburg Gate...lest we forget who are Masters are (will be). A soft Brexit would involve us remaining in the EEA and possibly rejoining EFTA (which we were a part of before we joined the EEC in 1973). Although we would be subject to freedom of movement there is a chance for us to control immigration, using article 112 of the EEA agreement. As for paying to trade with them and not getting a seat at the voting table, well that's just a lie that David Cameron told during the referendum campaign when he said that Norway pay but have no say. Norway do pay to have access to the Single Market, but they have their own seat at the WTO, the United Kingdom doesn't. We are going to have to pay to trade with the EU regardless of what happens. By being part of the EEA and EFTA we would , like Norway, get a say in some of the laws, because the EU is not solely responsible for them. Have you ever heard of ISO or OECD? These are global bodies (among many others) which set trade regulations and standards and which the EU adopts into their law. Even outside of the EU we are going to have to comply with them to trade with other countries in Europe and around the world anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2017 15:03:35 GMT
Excellent post. That summarises perfectly how we got here and try as I might I can't see any happy ending. Thanks. I suppose it depends where you stand politically. If Labour play their cards right and make sure that the Tories alone fully "own" a disappointing Brexit then it will be an albatross around the neck of the Tories and they will be unelectable for a generation. Unfortunately for the populist's predicated argument, Europe hasn't followed Trump and ourselves into chaos and despair and is instead opting for "strength and stability". Growth is picking up nicely in the Eurozone and I expect it to continue. The stupidly brutal straitjacket of the Euro will eventually force all the economies (bar Greece) into tandem and then the past decade of pent up suppressed demand will be fully released and growth take off. Once prosperity returns the Greek problem can be massaged by a programme of generous debt relief. The UK will apply to rejoin within the next 20 years. It will probably cost us the £. This is best case scenario for a europhile. It's a nice fantasy you project but clearly one that ignores the harsh realities of what's actually going on across the continent. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jun 12, 2017 15:10:10 GMT
Gina Miller, Keir Starmer's 137 urgent questions, SNP blocking any Brexit legislation, 114 MP's voting against A50, The Lords rejecting the initial act, Juncker shit stirring to the German press, Barnier plucking a 100 billion Euro 'divorce' bill out of the air, Clegg and Mandelson, Blair reappearing, the Lib Dems writing a second EU ref into their manifesto etc, etc. Ever since the referendum result there has been nothing but many, many groups both in the UK and the EU trying to disrupt and stop Brexit. Maybe just maybe, if those in this country had really, genuinely, actually accepted the vote and backed the UK, May wouldn't have felt the need to call this election to strengthen her hand. Wudda, Cudda, Shudda rog.
You are a rational chap mate, and I look forward to the day when the penny finally drops and you start to point the finger at the real villains of the piece - the unscrupulous, self serving and irresponsible politicians who managed to convince a significant proportion of an otherwise sensible and well meaning population that Brexit would be easily and painlessly achieved, and would lead to a wonderful land of milk and honey for all.
The pragmatists amongst us realised this was unlikely to be the case and that the checks and balances built into the democratic system in this country would make the process long, drawn out, economically damaging and the result ultimately very disappointing - particularly for it's proponents.
As I said at the time "Expectations have been raised that CANNOT be fulfilled by our system". Cameron's ill-considered advisory referendum short circuited the democratic process in this country. We live in a parliamentary democracy and there was not a parliamentary majority in favour of Brexit. There still isn't a parliamentary majority honestly in favour of Brexit - predominately we have a set of remainers forced to act against their judgement in trying to carry out the popular will. For that reason alone, never mind the foolishness of Theresa May, the resulting Brexit is guaranteed to prove sub-optimal.
If you want an example of how to sensibly effect change in a democratic society just look at Macron's La République en Marche. A popular movement built from nothing in next to no time, is about to achieve an unassailable majority in the French Parliament and with it a legitimate and PRACTICAL mandate for their change programme If supporters of Leaving the EU had followed a similar parliamentary path in this country we would not be in the mess we are now and the implementation of Brexit would be relatively painless.
As it is, Brexit is going to happen but it won't truly please anybody, it will prove a bitter disappointment for most and, economically, it will be grim for many people.
POPULISM = FAILURE. Learn the lessons of history.
Can't really be arsed to point out (again) in detail where you're wrong but suffice to say the question wasn't about what will the future of the UK look like outside the EU. To steal a soundbite from the Remoaners it wasn't about the detail of the destination the question asked do you want to REMAIN? And we all knew exactly what the EU was last June and in fact we all knew what the future would look like as well thanks to the reforms that Cameron negotiated. I wasn't convinced by any politician. I made my mind up from living in the EU for 20 years and working globally for 30. I don't think the process will be smooth sailing. I've never said that but I honestly believe that it will be much better for the UK in the long term to be out of the EU. And as for Populism. Is that Corbyn offering free shit to absolutely everyone apart from the 5% who can then pay an accountant to avoid paying any extra. |
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Jun 12, 2017 15:14:40 GMT
Thanks. I suppose it depends where you stand politically. If Labour play their cards right and make sure that the Tories alone fully "own" a disappointing Brexit then it will be an albatross around the neck of the Tories and they will be unelectable for a generation. Unfortunately for the populist's predicated argument, Europe hasn't followed Trump and ourselves into chaos and despair and is instead opting for "strength and stability". Growth is picking up nicely in the Eurozone and I expect it to continue. The stupidly brutal straitjacket of the Euro will eventually force all the economies (bar Greece) into tandem and then the past decade of pent up suppressed demand will be fully released and growth take off. Once prosperity returns the Greek problem can be massaged by a programme of generous debt relief. The UK will apply to rejoin within the next 20 years. It will probably cost us the £. This is best case scenario for a europhile. It's a nice fantasy you project but clearly one that ignores the harsh realities of what's actually going on across the continent. I disagree (of course ). Europe has certainly rejected populism/fascism though and, for historical reasons, will continue to do so. Eurozone economic growth is already outpacing the US and this year will overtake the UK as Brexit uncertainty snuffs out our recovery. Time will tell. |
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Jun 12, 2017 15:21:03 GMT
Wudda, Cudda, Shudda rog.
You are a rational chap mate, and I look forward to the day when the penny finally drops and you start to point the finger at the real villains of the piece - the unscrupulous, self serving and irresponsible politicians who managed to convince a significant proportion of an otherwise sensible and well meaning population that Brexit would be easily and painlessly achieved, and would lead to a wonderful land of milk and honey for all.
The pragmatists amongst us realised this was unlikely to be the case and that the checks and balances built into the democratic system in this country would make the process long, drawn out, economically damaging and the result ultimately very disappointing - particularly for it's proponents.
As I said at the time "Expectations have been raised that CANNOT be fulfilled by our system". Cameron's ill-considered advisory referendum short circuited the democratic process in this country. We live in a parliamentary democracy and there was not a parliamentary majority in favour of Brexit. There still isn't a parliamentary majority honestly in favour of Brexit - predominately we have a set of remainers forced to act against their judgement in trying to carry out the popular will. For that reason alone, never mind the foolishness of Theresa May, the resulting Brexit is guaranteed to prove sub-optimal.
If you want an example of how to sensibly effect change in a democratic society just look at Macron's La République en Marche. A popular movement built from nothing in next to no time, is about to achieve an unassailable majority in the French Parliament and with it a legitimate and PRACTICAL mandate for their change programme If supporters of Leaving the EU had followed a similar parliamentary path in this country we would not be in the mess we are now and the implementation of Brexit would be relatively painless.
As it is, Brexit is going to happen but it won't truly please anybody, it will prove a bitter disappointment for most and, economically, it will be grim for many people.
POPULISM = FAILURE. Learn the lessons of history.
Can't really be arsed to point out (again) in detail where you're wrong but suffice to say the question wasn't about what will the future of the UK look like outside the EU. To steal a soundbite from the Remoaners it wasn't about the detail of the destination the question asked do you want to REMAIN? And we all knew exactly what the EU was last June and in fact we all knew what the future would look like as well thanks to the reforms that Cameron negotiated. I wasn't convinced by any politician. I made my mind up from living in the EU for 20 years and working globally for 30. I don't think the process will be smooth sailing. I've never said that but I honestly believe that it will be much better for the UK in the long term to be out of the EU. And as for Populism. Is that Corbyn offering free shit to absolutely everyone apart from the 5% who can then pay an accountant to avoid paying any extra. As I've said previously rog, we must agree to differ. Time will tell. |
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 12, 2017 15:26:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jun 12, 2017 15:27:43 GMT
Excellent post. That summarises perfectly how we got here and try as I might I can't see any happy ending. Thanks. I suppose it depends where you stand politically. If Labour play their cards right and make sure that the Tories alone fully "own" a disappointing Brexit then it will be an albatross around the neck of the Tories and they will be unelectable for a generation. Unfortunately for the populists' predicated argument, Europe hasn't followed Trump and ourselves into chaos and despair and is instead opting for "strength and stability". Growth is picking up nicely in the Eurozone and I expect it to continue. The stupidly brutal straitjacket of the Euro will eventually force all the economies (bar Greece) into tandem and then the past decade of pent up suppressed demand will be fully released and growth take off. Once prosperity returns the Greek problem can be massaged by a programme of generous debt relief. The UK will apply to rejoin within the next 20 years. It will probably cost us the £. The oddest thing of all, and I still can't start to get my head around this, is that 479 MP's declared support for Remain and 158 for Brexit ahead of the vote. So three quarters of MP's believe it to be a nonsense and yet they are just going to go ahead and drive it through regardless. Their hearts can't be in it, it's like stabbing yourself in the eye with a compass. I know how it has happened, we have mixed a referendum in to our system of government and it has created an anomaly. We just shouldn't be doing that, we either have a system of elective democracy or we don't. |
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Jun 12, 2017 15:38:45 GMT
Thanks. I suppose it depends where you stand politically. If Labour play their cards right and make sure that the Tories alone fully "own" a disappointing Brexit then it will be an albatross around the neck of the Tories and they will be unelectable for a generation. Unfortunately for the populists' predicated argument, Europe hasn't followed Trump and ourselves into chaos and despair and is instead opting for "strength and stability". Growth is picking up nicely in the Eurozone and I expect it to continue. The stupidly brutal straitjacket of the Euro will eventually force all the economies (bar Greece) into tandem and then the past decade of pent up suppressed demand will be fully released and growth take off. Once prosperity returns the Greek problem can be massaged by a programme of generous debt relief. The UK will apply to rejoin within the next 20 years. It will probably cost us the £. The oddest thing of all, and I still can't start to get my head around this, is that 479 MP's declared support for Remain and 158 for Brexit ahead of the vote. So three quarters of MP's believe it to be a nonsense and yet they are just going to go ahead and drive it through regardless. Their hearts can't be in it, it's like stabbing yourself in the eye with a compass. I know how it has happened, we have mixed a referendum in to our system of government and it has created an anomaly. We just shouldn't be doing that, we either have a system of elective democracy or we don't. Yep. It's done now though and we have to go through with the tragedy/farce. I can't imagine the penny isn't finally starting to drop with the more thoughtful on the Leave side of the argument though. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jun 12, 2017 15:39:13 GMT
Thanks. I suppose it depends where you stand politically. If Labour play their cards right and make sure that the Tories alone fully "own" a disappointing Brexit then it will be an albatross around the neck of the Tories and they will be unelectable for a generation. Unfortunately for the populists' predicated argument, Europe hasn't followed Trump and ourselves into chaos and despair and is instead opting for "strength and stability". Growth is picking up nicely in the Eurozone and I expect it to continue. The stupidly brutal straitjacket of the Euro will eventually force all the economies (bar Greece) into tandem and then the past decade of pent up suppressed demand will be fully released and growth take off. Once prosperity returns the Greek problem can be massaged by a programme of generous debt relief. The UK will apply to rejoin within the next 20 years. It will probably cost us the £. The oddest thing of all, and I still can't start to get my head around this, is that 479 MP's declared support for Remain and 158 for Brexit ahead of the vote. So three quarters of MP's believe it to be a nonsense and yet they are just going to go ahead and drive it through regardless. Their hearts can't be in it, it's like stabbing yourself in the eye with a compass. I know how it has happened, we have mixed a referendum in to our system of government and it has created an anomaly. We just shouldn't be doing that, we either have a system of elective democracy or we don't. It's not an anomaly. It was passed 6 to 1 in the HoC to give the final Leave - Remain decision to the electorate. I'm not against a cross party Brexit committee but they must all come from 158 Brexiteers MP's. |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jun 12, 2017 15:46:42 GMT
Don't worry we are going to fill these nursing posts and staff the care homes with the indigenous population, if we can drag them out of Wetherspoons for long enough! |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jun 12, 2017 15:54:41 GMT
The oddest thing of all, and I still can't start to get my head around this, is that 479 MP's declared support for Remain and 158 for Brexit ahead of the vote. So three quarters of MP's believe it to be a nonsense and yet they are just going to go ahead and drive it through regardless. Their hearts can't be in it, it's like stabbing yourself in the eye with a compass. I know how it has happened, we have mixed a referendum in to our system of government and it has created an anomaly. We just shouldn't be doing that, we either have a system of elective democracy or we don't. It's not an anomaly. It was passed 6 to 1 in the HoC to give the final Leave - Remain decision to the electorate. I'm not against a cross party Brexit committee but they must all come from 158 Brexiteers MP's. If the cross-party Brexit committee comes from brexiteers only then there are 138 Tories, 10 Labour MP's and 8 DUP's to shoot after so it wouldn't be very cross-party in its nature. More importantly it would be a pretty radical mob, comprised of those who chose to ignore the advice of business, academia, the Trade Unions, the CBI you name it... Not sure I'd want my future placed in their hands and I don't suppose anyone else would much either. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jun 12, 2017 16:00:40 GMT
It's not an anomaly. It was passed 6 to 1 in the HoC to give the final Leave - Remain decision to the electorate. I'm not against a cross party Brexit committee but they must all come from 158 Brexiteers MP's. If the cross-party Brexit committee comes from brexiteers only then there are 138 Tories, 10 Labour MP's and 8 DUP's to shoot after so it wouldn't be very cross-party in its nature. It would be a pretty radical mob, comprised of those who chose to ignore the advice of business, academia, the Trade Unions, the CBI you name it... Not sure I'd want my future placed in their hands. Tough shit. Any other MP's are on the wrong side of history. It's like having an HS2 planning committee and having anti-HS2 MP's on the panel. What do you think they're motive would be? |
|
|
|
Post by capto on Jun 12, 2017 16:00:50 GMT
So Theresa May wanted an election because she felt that having a majority of 17 wasn't enough to secure a good deal with the EU. She wanted a bigger majority to strengthen her hand.
What sort of position do we find ourselves in now that that majority has been wiped out? It doesn't look good does it. you do wonder about all this,even her own mps were surprised she went for a election,there was no need to and dont forget she was all for staying in europe.then i have listened to some tory who have lost there seat,and said it was the worst campaign they have ever been involved in.for me i smell a rat to get a soft brexit and thought that when she called a election. Been on too many chan4 sites? You smell a rat - where? Where was there anyone who said a hung parliament up until a few days before? Where in the press did anyone forecast the result? Theresa smelt a victory of over 100 tory MPS - labour supporters were hoping it might be under that figure. Are you trying to rewrite history? The tory dreams didn't come true - and it can't be the tories fault? If you want to smell a rat - look at their policies and at the performance of their leader. |
|
|
|
Post by capto on Jun 12, 2017 16:07:41 GMT
If the cross-party Brexit committee comes from brexiteers only then there are 138 Tories, 10 Labour MP's and 8 DUP's to shoot after so it wouldn't be very cross-party in its nature. It would be a pretty radical mob, comprised of those who chose to ignore the advice of business, academia, the Trade Unions, the CBI you name it... Not sure I'd want my future placed in their hands. Tough shit. Any other MP's are on the wrong side of history. It's like having an HS2 planning committee and having anti-HS2 MP's on the panel. What do you think they're motive would be? maybe the future prosperity of the country? Don't worry, Drake's Drum has sounded: www.cnbc.com/2017/06/12/nigel-farage-to-gain-brexit-role-under-dup-conservative-deal--reports.htmlBut this is why you won't get tories & labour working together - they have completely different objectives: veritasetlibertasdeannolxxxix.wordpress.com/2017/06/03/10/ |
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Jun 12, 2017 16:12:17 GMT
Anyone claiming that the results of this GE are a sign that there is no mandate for hard-brexit are full of shit. We were explicitly told by Cameron that a vote to leave would be a vote to leave the single-market, which is the definition of a hard-brexit. The fact that labour did quite well isn't people turning on brexit, it's people turning on the tories. There are surely good numbers of left-wingers who want a hard-brexit and will have voted for labour. Correct. All the parties that were anti Brexit failed miserably. They were spinning this bullshit about the meaning of the election in the media almost straight away. You can spin whatever shit you want about the meaning of the election. Maybe folk don't like Teresa May's new hairstyle?? Anyway, the result of the referendum remains the same- the people voted out. |
|
|
|
Post by hammered on Jun 12, 2017 16:15:02 GMT
Can someone please explain the difference between a hard and soft Brexit? Because for me one isn't leaving the EU at all. No need to explain because you've succinctly done it already. |
|
|
|
Post by numpty40 on Jun 12, 2017 16:20:34 GMT
Seems like we've got hardcore Labour voters hanging on every word of a former Tory chancellor, strange times.
|
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jun 12, 2017 16:24:06 GMT
So great news for the Nurses. Lower numbers = higher salaries. Ahh.... Capitalism in action. Sod flooding the market with free movement eh? I 💖 the NHS |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Jun 12, 2017 16:27:02 GMT
Seems like we've got hardcore Labour voters hanging on every word of a former Tory chancellor, strange times. Was noted on twitter today that if Osborne had just taken his medicine and kept his mouth shut on the back benches for 12 months he would be the front runner for PM now. Funny old world. |
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Jun 12, 2017 16:50:52 GMT
Anyone claiming that the results of this GE are a sign that there is no mandate for hard-brexit are full of shit. We were explicitly told by Cameron that a vote to leave would be a vote to leave the single-market, which is the definition of a hard-brexit. The fact that labour did quite well isn't people turning on brexit, it's people turning on the tories. There are surely good numbers of left-wingers who want a hard-brexit and will have voted for labour. Correct. All the parties that were anti Brexit failed miserably. They were spinning this bullshit about the meaning of the election in the media almost straight away. You can spin whatever shit you want about the meaning of the election. Maybe folk don't like Teresa May's new hairstyle?? Anyway, the result of the referendum remains the same- the people voted out. I'd love to talk to some of the people who wanted a hard brexit who voted labour - and find out exactly how they thought that was the best way to achieve it. I think we may have seem a similar effect to the brexit vote itself, where some people blindly voting against the establishment as a protest against politicians in general - and may now be wondering what they've done. Corbyn cleverly placed himself as anti-establishment to appeal to them. |
|
realised this was unlikely to be the case and that the checks and balances built into the democratic system in this country would make the process long, drawn out, economically damaging and the result ultimately very disappointing - particularly for it's proponents. 
