Pro-EU Liberal Democrats win parliamentary seat from UK PM Johnson's Conservatives

[nauseus]

36 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

There’s an obvious and significant practical problem with your argument.

 

Right now nobody knows if, in the light of the more clearly understood consequences, leaving the E.U. with or without a deal is acceptable to the electorate. Claims by both Leave and Remain have been replaced by the reality the nation faces.

 

You argue, Leave first and don’t ask the electorate again until after leaving.

 

The problem is, doing so would deny the UK any future access to the rafts of hard won concessions in its E.U. membership.

 

Far more sensible to go back to the electorate and ask ‘is this what you wanted?’.

 

Those arguing Leave is the will of the people can hardly object to the people being asked to confirm that this crock of Brexit is what they wanted.

 

 

 

Not using those exact words, I hope?

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Not using those exact words, I hope?

Well I agree insomuch as describing this utter mess as ‘a crock of Brexit’ is stating the blindingly obvious.

[nauseus]

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Well I agree insomuch as describing this utter mess as ‘a crock of Brexit’ is stating the blindingly obvious.

Well I agree insofar as Brexit could have been managed a lot better than it has been.

[stephenterry]

9 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Well, that's one way to spin it. Another way to look at it may be that upholding the result of a democratic vote is more important to the country than anything else. In reality. if remain had won the referendum, then leavers, generally, would value democracy and would not be constantly complaining, carping and whinging - although they would be democratically entitled to canvas against the result - which remainers are doing and which is not beneficial to the UK. 

You still don't get it do you? It is the government and parliament's responsibility to act - or not to act  - on the referendum vote. NOT THE PEOPLE. Under the UK democracy the people are entitled to lobby, canvas, complain, carp, whinge, and do what they freaking well like - but at the end of the day it's up to government and parliament to decide what is most beneficial to the UK and what's not.

 

Three years down the line, parliament has decided that the WAG was not acceptable, in the main, owing to a backstop that - if implemented - would not benefit the UK for eternity...  

 

Regrettably, Johnson's no-deal approach solution at the expense of Scotland, Wales and Nth Ireland seems like he's on a UK self-destruct course to oblivion. No wonder parliament would aim to prevent that. 

 

As I've said many times, it is understood that the EU is open to changing the political statement relating to the WAG. Seems to me the backstop issue could be addressed within the transitional period. By which means, the WAG - however much it is disliked by ideologists - could be passed by parliament. 

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Well I agree insofar as Brexit could have been managed a lot better than it has been.

Yes it could have and being ill

managed it’s turned out to be a crock.

 

The only consideration now being given is does it meet the needs of hard right wingers in the Tory Party.

 

The consideration not being given is, does this give the electorate what they want.

[Bluespunk]

36 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Well, that's one way to spin it. Another way to look at it may be that upholding the result of a democratic vote is more important to the country than anything else. In reality. if remain had won the referendum, then leavers, generally, would value democracy and would not be constantly complaining, carping and whinging - although they would be democratically entitled to canvas against the result - which remainers are doing and which is not beneficial to the UK. 

Really? Let’s see what the leader of the brexit party said about what would happen if he lost back in 2016.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681

 

 

[AGareth2]

3 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Really? Let’s see what the leader of the brexit party said about what would happen if he lost back in 2016.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681

 

 

And Prime Minister David Cameron said it was a "once in a generation, once in a lifetime" decision, saying the UK had "referendums not Neverendums".

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, AGareth2 said:

And Prime Minister David Cameron said it was a "once in a generation, once in a lifetime" decision, saying the UK had "referendums not Neverendums".

And that disproves the point I was making, how?

[AGareth2]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

And that disproves the point I was making, how?

what point were you making?

[Bluespunk]

Just now, AGareth2 said:

what point were you making?

Read the post I quoted. 

[AGareth2]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

Read the post I quoted. 

right

so you

were not making a point then

[Bluespunk]

2 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:

right

so you

were not making a point then

Keep telling yourself that. 

Edited August 3, 2019 by Bluespunk

[stephenterry]

10 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Well I agree insofar as Brexit could have been managed a lot better than it has been.

Quite.

 

I lay the blame firmly on the doorstep of Theresa May's headlong rush into invoking Article 50 WITHOUT ANY PLAN in place as how to unravel decades (1973 to date) of EU membership. Apart from that, with no trained global negotiators, it was a recipe for disaster from day one. A red line approach was infantile, IMO.

 

That failure was exacerbated by the government not detailing the pros and cons of leaving the EU, plus the financial implications on the UK pound, economy and businesses. Only recently has ANYTHING been published, but of course, it's far too late and wouldn't influence people's entrenched and opposing positions.

 

That is criminal neglect. And for the populous, whether leavers, remainers, or don't carers, today's Brexit garbage is just that. 

 

 

 

 

 

[luckyluke]

12 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:

And Prime Minister David Cameron said it was a "once in a generation, once in a lifetime" decision, saying the UK had "referendums not Neverendums".

In my country the majority, if not all, don't believe anymore what politicians says/promise.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, luckyluke said:

In my country the majority, if not all, don't believe anymore what politicians says/promise.

You should spend some time asking yourself, in who's best interests is it that this is the case? 

[Percy P]

3 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

Quite.

 

I lay the blame firmly on the doorstep of Theresa May's headlong rush into invoking Article 50 WITHOUT ANY PLAN in place as how to unravel decades (1973 to date) of EU membership. Apart from that, with no trained global negotiators, it was a recipe for disaster from day one. A red line approach was infantile, IMO.

 

That failure was exacerbated by the government not detailing the pros and cons of leaving the EU, plus the financial implications on the UK pound, economy and businesses. Only recently has ANYTHING been published, but of course, it's far too late and wouldn't influence people's entrenched and opposing positions.

 

That is criminal neglect. And for the populous, whether leavers, remainers, or don't carers, today's Brexit garbage is just that. 

 

 

 

 

 

But it there were a GE and the Brexit party won ,then what

[metisdead]

A troll post questioning another member's ethnicity has been removed as a member's ethnicity is irrelevant to the discussion. 

[Percy P]

37 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Well I agree insofar as Brexit could have been managed a lot better than it has been.

But a remainer PM was handling to leave the EU.

[luckyluke]

Chomper Higott,

 

We are tired of all the false promises and lies of the politicians.

 

We believe them when tangible proves are there.

Edited August 3, 2019 by luckyluke

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, Percy P said:

But it there were a GE and the Brexit party won ,then what

That's a big if. 

 

You can fool some of the people, some of the time.... 

 

Right now the issue is the habitual liar in No 10 is sitting on a Government majority that this by-election has reduced to 1, and yet still insists he is going to deliver on the most divisive  issue facing the nation. 

 

Members of his own party are stating they will block any deal regardless, they only want a no deal exit, while Parliament will not back a no deal exist and the PM is banging on about a backstop that he has no power over. 

 

As I said when Johnson put himself forward for PM, 'great, a Brexiteer gets to be held accountable for the mess he played a significant part in creating'.

 

Liars never deliver on their lies. 

[stephenterry]

2 minutes ago, Percy P said:

But it there were a GE and the Brexit party won ,then what

Apart from that being statistically improbable, if they managed to obtain a majority of parliament possibly by amalgamating with the Tories, it would be their decision how to implement their vision of Brexit. 

 

This is exactly the situation with Johnson, right now. Only he has determined a kamikaze solution.

[Basil B]

33 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Really? Let’s see what the leader of the brexit party said about what would happen if he lost back in 2016.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681

 

 

Just waiting for the first brexiteer to say he is entitled to change his mind... ????

[stephenterry]

5 minutes ago, Basil B said:

Just waiting for the first brexiteer to say he is entitled to change his mind... ????

That's democracy in action...????

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

Apart from that being statistically improbable, if they managed to obtain a majority of parliament possibly by amalgamating with the Tories, it would be their decision how to implement their vision of Brexit. 

 

This is exactly the situation with Johnson, right now. Only he has determined a kamikaze solution.

I'm not at all convinced you can conclude what Johnson't solution is on the basis of of what he says.

 

He's making promises and statements that are patently false, misleading or otherwise detached from reality. 

 

Don't judge a known liar by his words, watch for his actions. 

 

 

[baboon]

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

That's a big if. 

 

You can fool some of the people, some of the time.... 

 

Right now the issue is the habitual liar in No 10 is sitting on a Government majority that this by-election has reduced to 1, and yet still insists he is going to deliver on the most divisive  issue facing the nation. 

 

Members of his own party are stating they will block any deal regardless, they only want a no deal exit, while Parliament will not back a no deal exist and the PM is banging on about a backstop that he has no power over. 

 

As I said when Johnson put himself forward for PM, 'great, a Brexiteer gets to be held accountable for the mess he played a significant part in creating'.

 

Liars never deliver on their lies. 

"As I said when Johnson put himself forward for PM, 'great, a Brexiteer gets to be held accountable for the mess he played a significant part in creating'."

 

Afraid not. If we leave with no deal and it is a catastrophe, the Leave camp will blame the EU, Soros, Corbyn, etc. If we leave with a deal then Johnson will be accused of being a secret remainer all along. Always somebody else's fault, remember...

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, baboon said:

"As I said when Johnson put himself forward for PM, 'great, a Brexiteer gets to be held accountable for the mess he played a significant part in creating'."

 

Afraid not. If we leave with no deal and it is a catastrophe, the Leave camp will blame the EU, Soros, Corbyn, etc. If we leave with a deal then Johnson will be accused of being a secret remainer all along. Always somebody else's fault, remember...

Well of course, it is always somebody else's fault. 

 

 

[AGareth2]

40 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Well of course, it is always somebody else's fault. 

 

 

Cameron

[brewsterbudgen]

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

Well we can see the how well the commitments from the last GE manifestos of the major parties have been honoured now, eh? How can anyone believe them?? 

True.  But does anyone really believe politicians or manifestos?

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, stephenterry said:

You still don't get it do you? It is the government and parliament's responsibility to act - or not to act  - on the referendum vote. NOT THE PEOPLE. Under the UK democracy the people are entitled to lobby, canvas, complain, carp, whinge, and do what they freaking well like - but at the end of the day it's up to government and parliament to decide what is most beneficial to the UK and what's not.

 

Three years down the line, parliament has decided that the WAG was not acceptable, in the main, owing to a backstop that - if implemented - would not benefit the UK for eternity...  

 

Regrettably, Johnson's no-deal approach solution at the expense of Scotland, Wales and Nth Ireland seems like he's on a UK self-destruct course to oblivion. No wonder parliament would aim to prevent that. 

 

As I've said many times, it is understood that the EU is open to changing the political statement relating to the WAG. Seems to me the backstop issue could be addressed within the transitional period. By which means, the WAG - however much it is disliked by ideologists - could be passed by parliament. 

 

 

 

I know what the government's and parliament's responsibilities are. 

 

The WA is BRINO, even without considering the implications of the Irish backstop and it could keep the UK under ECJ/EU jurisdiction indefinitely. The WA also commits the UK to the EU future defence plans. It does not give back exclusive fishing to us. The PD is linked to the WA in parts and these parts may legally force the UK to accept a customs union but not an FTA in any form of that that exists today. 

 

Overall, the WA is bad for the UK and I see it as the UK government's responsibility to reject it and try for an alternative. Article 50 actually puts the onus on the EU to 'negotiate and conclude an agreement' but it seems they need to put in a bit more work on that. If the EU were to open up for sensible negotiations, then I would say that would be worth another extension.

 

   

[stephenterry]

42 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I'm not at all convinced you can conclude what Johnson't solution is on the basis of of what he says.

 

He's making promises and statements that are patently false, misleading or otherwise detached from reality. 

 

Don't judge a known liar by his words, watch for his actions. 

 

 

I meant by 'a solution', he has determined a date of 31st October for leaving the EU - whether that comes to fruition is another matter.  

 

However, I have a sense, despite the rhetoric from him and the EU, that a face-saving solution on both sides could be reached. If not, I would expect him  - or parliament, by rejecting a no-deal - to trigger a GE. Whatever, he's needs to activate something to retain his credibility.