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

[Chomper Higgot]

The whole purpose of Cameron offering the referendum was to prevent the Tory Party falling apart.

 

Oops!

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-tory-mp-defect-commons-majority-brexit-lib-dems-a9037756.html

[7by7]

3 hours ago, evadgib said:

Dictating? I was merely bursting the old 'too scared' balloon before any newbies fell for it.

You have had your answer time and again; the fear you claim exists has been manufactured by one side desperately trying to undermine the other and failing spectacularly.

 

If you expat Brexiteers are not scared of a referendum, why are you so against it?

 

Here in the UK it is not just Remainers who are calling for a final say referendum.

 

This is not the Brexit I expected when I voted Leave, which is why I want a Final Say

 

Remorseful Caller Who Voted Leave Wants Another Referendum

 

Some very valid points in The democratic argument behind a People’s Vote, the most telling being

Quote

When the first referendum was held in 2016, the options were rudimentary, and while Remain had an obvious definition, Leave had multiple definitions and promises attached. Would we adopt a Norway style agreement? Would we continue to be part of the Single Market? What happens to EU citizens? Will there be £350m a week more to go to the NHS? How easy will it be to sign a trade agreement with the EU afterwards? 

In the two years since that vote, a lot of those questions have been answered, and not in the way which was promised. There will be no more money for the NHS, a Norway style deal is not on the cards without negotiation and compromises that the current Government seem unwilling to make, and so far we have only signed six trade agreements and one of them is with the Faroe Islands - our 114th largest trading partner. 

The Brexit realities (and limitations) are clear, and Parliament is seemingly deadlocked over the way forwards, so now is the time for the people to indicate the direction they want to go.

 

But I expect you and your mates to dismiss those facts as the article was written by a self acknowledged Remainer. He continues

Quote

A second referendum on the final decision allows the public to consent to a decision one way or the other, based on the facts of the situation...…….. If the majority of people still believe that Brexit is the best thing for the country, the results will still reflect that, and MPs will have little choice but to implement it.

Especially if, unlike 2016, the referendum is made binding; which it should be. Then Parliament would have no choice other than to abide by the result.

 

BTW, if the 2016 referendum had been binding rather than advisory then following the Electoral Commission's rulings that the Leave campaign broke electoral law by overspending and sending spam texts the result would have been quashed and we'd either be remaining in the EU or be having another referendum anyway!

 

Why do you accept Boris changing his mind more often than his underpants, but demand to deny the British public the opportunity to do so just once?

[david555]

1 hour ago, elliss said:

 

        Fyi ,   a General Election soon .  Before doom day dawns..

 

             

 

I hope they remember to call in the representatives of the Guinness World Record book …., as they can check all is correct  ...so he can claim the record of the shortest time  P.M. of the U.K. 

[elliss]

27 minutes ago, david555 said:

I hope they remember to call in the representatives of the Guinness World Record book …., as they can check all is correct  ...so he can claim the record of the shortest time  P.M. of the U.K. 

   I have it from informed sources , that our latest PM , arrived  in Downing Street , on a bicycle.

     With a back pack , and a Tesco bag .  Short visit ..

 

Edited August 3, 2019 by elliss

[evadgib]

46 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 As usual with you, evadethequestion, your answers bear no relation to the questions!

 

Sometimes I feel like Paxman to your Howard!

 

You may consider that a compliment; the rest of us remember how slimy and reprehensible Howard was.

 <Intentional deletion>????;

 

- There is no fear and never has been as explained to you umpteen times.

- The 2016 result has yet to be implemented

- Any 2nd neverendum would need to be a rerun of the original, but you lot would try and slip in ONE option to revoke/remain in the EU and half a dozen or more options to leave (Leave/No Deal/Mays deal/Canada +++/ Norway+/Hokey Cokey.....) so that you can split the vote and declare yourselves the winners.

 

We ain't having it and thankfully nor are you.

 

Which part of the above do you not understand?

 

Now it's my turn to bugger off as I'm done for the day.

Edited August 3, 2019 by evadgib

[7by7]

2 hours ago, evadgib said:

 <Intentional deletion>????;

 

- There is no fear and never has been as explained to you umpteen times.

- The 2016 result has yet to be implemented

- Any 2nd neverendum would need to be a rerun of the original, but you lot would try and slip in ONE option to revoke/remain in the EU and half a dozen or more options to leave (Leave/No Deal/Mays deal/Canada +++/ Norway+/Hokey Cokey.....) so that you can split the vote and declare yourselves the winners.

 

We ain't having it and thankfully nor are you.

 

Which part of the above do you not understand?

 

Now it's my turn to bugger off as I'm done for the day.

I do not have to understand your multiple choice type referendum because no body here in the UK has ever suggested such a thing. 

 

As you would know if you lived here in the UK, most people calling for another referendum, whether they be Leavers or Remainers, want just two questions; leave with the negotiated deal or remain.

 

Others want the type of referendum I have suggested many times here.

 

Three options:

Leave with the deal,

Leave with no deal,

Remain.

 

Voters mark their first and second preferences. If no first preference has 50% of the votes plus 1 then the first preference with the fewest votes is eliminated and the second choice on those papers is allocated as appropriate to decide the winner.

 

Which part of that do you not understand?

 

Parliament has shown itself incapable of making the final decision; so why do you demand the British public be denied the right to make the final decision on this vital matter which will effect those of us who, unlike you and your expat Brexit mates, actually live here in the UK?

[Scott]

Posts badgering other members have been removed.   If someone chooses not to answer, they do not have to.   Continued badgering of members will earn a suspension.  

 

[Bluespunk]

12 hours ago, Becker said:

And how about you answer his question? 

I mean, if I didn't know any better I'd say you're deflecting like crazy. 

Deflection is the 5th rule of brexitocracy. 

[nauseus]

22 hours 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

 

 

One man who has been on this mission for the last 20 odd years. I'm talking about all of those remainers who will only accept their version of democracy.  

[Bluespunk]

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

One man who has been on this mission for the last 20 odd years. I'm talking about all of those remainers who will only accept their version of democracy.  

You seriously believe his views, outlined in that article, are not representative of how many of his fellow brexiteers would have reacted to a narrow defeat?

 

Laughable. 

[nauseus]

8 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

You seriously believe his views, outlined in that article, are not representative of how many of his fellow brexiteers would have reacted to a narrow defeat?

 

Laughable. 

You guys like to twist everything. I am not talking about views. I am talking about acceptance of the vote.

[Bluespunk]

Just now, nauseus said:

You guys like to twist everything. I am not talking about views. I am talking about acceptance of the vote.

So am I. 

 

The arch brexiteer made it clear he would not accept a narrow defeat and I believe he is representative of many (not all) of his followers. 

[sanemax]

14 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

So am I. 

 

The arch brexiteer made it clear he would not accept a narrow defeat and I believe he is representative of many (not all) of his followers. 

Although he didnt say that he wouldnt accept a narrow victory 

[nauseus]

57 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

So am I. 

 

The arch brexiteer made it clear he would not accept a narrow defeat and I believe he is representative of many (not all) of his followers. 

I can't remember ever seeing one leaver comment on here indicating that a national vote to remain in the 2016 referendum would not have been accepted by them. This is the biggest difference between the two groups, I think. That is all.

Edited August 4, 2019 by nauseus
+ been

[Bluespunk]

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I can't remember ever seeing one leaver comment on here indicating that a national vote to remain in the 2016 referendum would not have accepted by them. This is the biggest difference between the two groups, I think. That is all.

My point is farage said the direct opposite of that. I really doubt his followers would have been any different had they lost. 

[Bluespunk]

21 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Although he didnt say that he wouldnt accept a narrow victory 

So we agree. He’s a hypocrite. 

Edited August 4, 2019 by Bluespunk

[Nigel Garvie]

10 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The whole purpose of Cameron offering the referendum was to prevent the Tory Party falling apart.

 

Oops!

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-tory-mp-defect-commons-majority-brexit-lib-dems-a9037756.html

Yes it's an interesting article, these two paragraphs  were key ones.

 “At the moment Boris Johnson has a very difficult pitch to play and that has been made even harder by the formation of this cabinet. There are increasingly people who think, ‘Even if my career is over, I can’t put my name to this.’

“I am doing my best to represent my constituents – I cannot think of a business in my patch that is enthusiastic about Brexit let alone no deal. It is an odd situation for the MP being threatened with deselection for being on the side of virtually every business in his constituency. You never would have thought a Tory MP could be in that position.”

 

Is does appear that the number of Tory MPs who wouldn't put their name to a no deal Brexit, is significantly larger than the LP retards, like Caroline Flint, who thinks she was elected to be a slave rather than use her own judgement.

 

It's going to be interesting when Boris loses his majority, which looks fairly certain now. Forget Brexit,  how will he cope with other parliamentary business?

[baboon]

11 minutes ago, Nigel Garvie said:

Yes it's an interesting article, these two paragraphs  were key ones.

 “At the moment Boris Johnson has a very difficult pitch to play and that has been made even harder by the formation of this cabinet. There are increasingly people who think, ‘Even if my career is over, I can’t put my name to this.’

“I am doing my best to represent my constituents – I cannot think of a business in my patch that is enthusiastic about Brexit let alone no deal. It is an odd situation for the MP being threatened with deselection for being on the side of virtually every business in his constituency. You never would have thought a Tory MP could be in that position.”

 

Is does appear that the number of Tory MPs who wouldn't put their name to a no deal Brexit, is significantly larger than the LP retards, like Caroline Flint, who thinks she was elected to be a slave rather than use her own judgement.

 

It's going to be interesting when Boris loses his majority, which looks fairly certain now. Forget Brexit,  how will he cope with other parliamentary business?

What other parliamentary business? The country is paralysed...

[sanemax]

28 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

So we agree. He’s a hypocrite. 

I cannot see any hypocrisy there .

Would be rather silly and unprecedented for a person who wins a referendum  , to call for a re run 

[baboon]

49 minutes ago, sanemax said:

I cannot see any hypocrisy there .

Would be rather silly and unprecedented for a person who wins a referendum  , to call for a re run 

Very true. But you can't blame the other side for using his words as a template. 

[sanemax]

1 hour ago, baboon said:

Very true. But you can't blame the other side for using his words as a template. 

Maybe thats because they all agreed to accept the result and they are using Nigels words to justify their change of mind ?

[Becker]

15 hours ago, vogie said:

Because it is not mandatory to do so, also it is not good TV protocol to keep asking.

Certainly not mandatory but very revealing.

[Becker]

15 hours ago, evadgib said:

How much clearer could it be?

You can be forgiven as a relative newcomer but 49 has no excuse & knows he's been rumbled.

QED.

[Nigel Garvie]

2 hours ago, baboon said:

What other parliamentary business? The country is paralysed...

Fair comment, what I was trying to say was that there certainly are other things that they should be doing if they weren't paralyzed. One question is would you prefer your politicians to be paralyzed, or paralytic, or both, and would it make any difference? 

[Nigel Garvie]

7 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Maybe thats because they all agreed to accept the result and they are using Nigels words to justify their change of mind ?

Being able to change your mind, when evidence leads you to a different view to the one you first had, is a sign of maturity. The whole of science is based on that principle. When I get in a plane, or drive across a bridge, I am so grateful that scientists and engineers modified their designs to suit current circumstances, using the latest evidence available. 

[evadgib]

8 hours ago, 7by7 said:

I do not have to understand your multiple choice type referendum because no body here in the UK has ever suggested such a thing. 

 

As you would know if you lived here in the UK, most people calling for another referendum, whether they be Leavers or Remainers, want just two questions; leave with the negotiated deal or remain.

 

Others want the type of referendum I have suggested many times here.

 

Three options:

Leave with the deal,

Leave with no deal,

Remain.

 

Voters mark their first and second preferences. If no first preference has 50% of the votes plus 1 then the first preference with the fewest votes is eliminated and the second choice on those papers is allocated as appropriate to decide the winner.

 

Which part of that do you not understand?

 

Parliament has shown itself incapable of making the final decision; so why do you demand the British public be denied the right to make the final decision on this vital matter which will effect those of us who, unlike you and your expat Brexit mates, actually live here in the UK?

I'll keep this short (????) ;

 

- Splitting the Leave vote exactly as explained.

 

- PUT UP OR SHUT UP-THERE HAS BEEN NO 'DEMAND OR DENIAL' (other than your own)!

 

- Legislation currently allows voters to participate up to 15 years after they have left the UK regardless of geographic location; furthermore a motion to restore VOTES FOR LIFE has reached the HoL and is expected to pass into law during the life of this Govt.

 

Which part of any o'that do you not understand?

Edited August 4, 2019 by evadgib

[sanemax]

8 minutes ago, Nigel Garvie said:

Being able to change your mind, when evidence leads you to a different view to the one you first had, is a sign of maturity. The whole of science is based on that principle. When I get in a plane, or drive across a bridge, I am so grateful that scientists and engineers modified their designs to suit current circumstances, using the latest evidence available. 

Yes, we are all pleased that bridges are safe , but we are talking about the referendum and people not accepting the result , after previously claiming that they would 

[Basil B]

13 minutes ago, evadgib said:

I'll keep this short (????) ;

 

- Splitting the Leave vote exactly as explained.

 

- PUT UP OR SHUT UP-THERE HAS BEEN NO 'DEMAND OR DENIAL' (other than your own)!

 

- Legislation currently allows voters to participate up to 15 years after they have left the UK regardless of geographic location; furthermore a motion to restore VOTES FOR LIFE has reached the HoL and is expected to pass into law during the life of this Govt.

 

Which part of any o'that do you not understand?

Who's splitting the leave vote?

It is many of those who voted leave who are saying they did not vote for a no deal Brexit.

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Yes, we are all pleased that bridges are safe , but we are talking about the referendum and people not accepting the result , after previously claiming that they would 

Once again, you confuse accepting the result with the democratic right to oppose it. 

 

See what the now leader of the Brexit Party had to say on the matter at the time of the referendum, he understood and articulated the idea perfectly. 

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, Basil B said:

Who's splitting the leave vote?

It is many of those who voted leave who are saying they did not vote for a no deal Brexit.

And many more who are simply staying home.