UK PM Johnson's Brexit 'brain' Cummings to leave Downing Street

[7by7]

11 hours ago, vogie said:

<snip>

Without Cummings the democratic vote to leave the EU might never have happened,

 

Here was I thinking that Cameron was responsible for the referendum!

 

OK, he promised it in the 2015 Tory manifesto because he was worried UKIP may take Tory votes; but Cummings had nothing to do with it.

[7by7]

11 hours ago, vogie said:

I think we can safely say without fear of contradiction that without the undemocratic actions of the remainers that It would not have taken "years"

 

 Wrong.

 

Without the political ambitions and machinations of Boris Johnson (backed by Cummings?),and his backers amongst the Tory MPs at the time, we would have left in March 2019, a trade deal would have been completed and we would all be sailing into the Brexit future, for good or ill!

 

He and his cronies voted against May's WA, and then when he became Prime Minister presented the virtually identical WA as his!

[Rookiescot]

Perhaps the bold Brexiteers on here could answer a question I have.

You all think Johnson is just super.

You all think Cummings is just super.

So with this civil war in 10 Downing Street going on who do you think is right and why?

[7by7]

10 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

It was the Remainers who voted against every proposal hoping to force another referendum, that caused the delay in leaving 

 

So Johnson, Rees-Mogg and the ERG are Remainers?

 

Well knock me down with a feather!

[TKDfella]

9 hours ago, polpott said:

I consider things logically. Logic dictates that if all conservative MPs had voted for May's deal, including Johnson, it would have passed and we wouldn't be in the mess we are in now.

What you are saying is that if all conservatives had voted positively there would no mess. It was not the case that all conservatives had voted positively therefore there is not no mess. In elementary propositional calculus form C→ -M, -C ⊢- -M = M This produces a fallacy because the consequent, - -M, might occur for some other reason. In other words, a mess might still  have occurred but for some other reason. So no, logic does not dictate/confirm your conclusion.

[RayC]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

I have no interest in your imaginary and twisty postings as you well know. Your add-ons are of little interest.

You have no interest in having a debate.

 

I have concluded that this is because you have no evidence and/or a logically consistent argument to back up your premises.

 

Unlike you, I am open to being proved wrong, but I doubt that will happen in this case.

[7by7]

10 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

   And what would have happened had all Labour M.P's voted for the deal ?

 It would have passed.

 

But Labour MPs didn't vote against the deal because they were all Remainers; many had campaigned for Leave. They voted against it because they didn't like the deal.

 

As you Brexiteers constantly called it BRINO then surely you agreed with them?

[Rookiescot]

1 minute ago, TKDfella said:

What you are saying is that if all conservatives had voted positively there would no mess. It was not the case that all conservatives had voted positively therefore there is not no mess. In elementary propositional calculus form C→ -M, -C ⊢- -M = M This produces a fallacy because the consequent, - -M, might occur for some other reason. In other words, a mess might still  have occurred but for some other reason. So no, logic does not dictate/confirm your conclusion.

I bet that sounded cleverer and funnier to you than the rest of us.

Fact is the Conservatives were split on voting for Mays deal. This was because at no point during the leave campaign did Brexiteers actually define what Brexit meant. 

Ergo you had members of the house of commons who all had different interpretations of it.

This is the legacy of the leave campaign. Promising everything to everyone. Unicorns and sunny uplands.

But never actually stating which version of Brexit was the official one and what people were voting for.

[7by7]

9 hours ago, vogie said:

That nasty D word 'Democracy' raises its ugly head again. Maybe we'd be better going down the route of North Korea and have total dictatorship.

 

North Korea; a place where criticism of the government and campaigns for change are not allowed.

 

You'd be right at home there!

[Rookiescot]

1 minute ago, 7by7 said:

 

North Korea; a place where criticism of the government and campaigns for change are not allowed.

 

You'd be right at home there!

Look on the bright side. There is still a chance we will get a North Korea + deal from the EU ????

[7by7]

8 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

3 . 8 Million people voted for UKIP in the 2015 UK elections , third biggest political party in the UK and their support was growing .

   Their only aim was for the UK to leave the EU and over half the UKs population supported that ideology

 Half the population? Really?

 

I could have sworn the UK population was greater than 7.6 million!  

 

BTW, UKIP won one seat in 2015, and lost it in 2017.

[vogie]

6 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

I bet that sounded cleverer and funnier to you than the rest of us.

Fact is the Conservatives were split on voting for Mays deal. This was because at no point during the leave campaign did Brexiteers actually define what Brexit meant. 

Ergo you had members of the house of commons who all had different interpretations of it.

This is the legacy of the leave campaign. Promising everything to everyone. Unicorns and sunny uplands.

But never actually stating which version of Brexit was the official one and what people were voting for.

Where was this version of Brexit list, is it like a Chinese menu where you say 'I'll have a number 74 please. Can you show us all this list, I am sure we'd all be very interested and surprised to see it.

Or are you making it all up again?

[RayC]

1 hour ago, transam said:

No egg here sunbeam, you post unfounded tosh about Tory MP's, putting them all in one bracket which is nonsense...????

What on earth are you talking about? Care to be more specific?

[TKDfella]

2 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

I bet that sounded cleverer and funnier to you than the rest of us.

Fact is the Conservatives were split on voting for Mays deal. This was because at no point during the leave campaign did Brexiteers actually define what Brexit meant. 

Ergo you had members of the house of commons who all had different interpretations of it.

This is the legacy of the leave campaign. Promising everything to everyone. Unicorns and sunny uplands.

But never actually stating which version of Brexit was the official one and what people were voting for.

No so, I was merely correcting an error in reasoning. In fact I don't think the UK should been a member in the first place because it wanted to retain certain values which other members couldn't do (retaining the Pound, MPH etc.). So problems were created at the outset. My stance was if the UK was 'in' it would have to be 'in completely', if not then stay out. It must have seemed to others that the UK was sort of 'half membership' yet being a major voice. I wanted the UK to leave but only because it seemed uncommitted in the first place. Had it been fully committed then I would thought it best to stay

[Rookiescot]

Just now, vogie said:

Where was this version of Brexit list, is it like a Chinese menu where you say 'I'll have a number 74 please. Can you show us all this list, I am sure we'd all be very interested and surprised to see it.

Or are you making it all up again?

Can you show me where the leave campaign actually defined under what conditions the UK would actually exit the EU?

No you cant.

Because it was never actually stated what leaving really meant.

Course you guys all knew what you were voting for though. 

[vogie]

1 minute ago, Rookiescot said:

Can you show me where the leave campaign actually defined under what conditions the UK would actually exit the EU?

No you cant.

Because it was never actually stated what leaving really meant.

Course you guys all knew what you were voting for though. 

No caveats there, quite simply remain or leave. Add your own imaginary wording should you wish.

 

 

[Rookiescot]

1 minute ago, TKDfella said:

No so, I was merely correcting an error in reasoning. In fact I don't think the UK should been a member in the first place because it wanted to retain certain values which other members couldn't do (retaining the Pound, MPH etc.). So problems were created at the outset. My stance was if the UK was 'in' it would have to be 'in completely', if not then stay out. It must have seemed to others that the UK was sort of 'half membership' yet being a major voice. I wanted the UK to leave but only because it seemed uncommitted in the first place. Had it been fully committed then I would thought it best to stay

In what way is that a reasoned reply to my post. You have presented no counter argument. All we have here is some wandering hypothesis as to what the EU should or should not be and why the UK should have left. The UK is not alone in not adopting the Euro while a member. Or any other number of agreements which other EU members have signed up too.  

[shackleton]

Well I am afraid this Brexit the UK leaving Europe  is getting to be a farce 

Boris Johnson is getting worse than Teresa May makes threats about leaving 

Then changes his mind

We will still be discussing this next year with no good outcome 

 

[7by7]

7 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

 You picked two extremes there .

How about a City & Guilds in Carpentry ?

 Speak to any GCSE and A level teacher next time you are in the UK. You'll find that most parents want their children to go to university rather than learn a trade. Do as I say, not as I do

 

And most school leavers would rather spend three years getting a degree in drama or similar than get their hands dirty.

 

So what would you do; force them into the path you choose for them?

Edited November 14, 2020 by 7by7
Addendum

[7by7]

7 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

  What makes you think UK youngsters wouldnt want to learn a trade ?

 See my post above.

[vinny41]

8 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Can you show me where the leave campaign actually defined under what conditions the UK would actually exit the EU?

No you cant.

Because it was never actually stated what leaving really meant.

Course you guys all knew what you were voting for though. 

It was a binary choice so leave is the opposite of remain 

For the people that voted remain was remain as current status

remain but leave the single market,

remain but leave the single market and customs union

[Rookiescot]

8 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

It was a binary choice so leave is the opposite of remain 

For the people that voted remain was remain as current status

remain but leave the single market,

remain but leave the single market and customs union

 

Right so because the conditions under which we would leave was never defined you cannot say you knew what you were voting for.

[7by7]

2 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

   Cummings stated in his blog back in January , that he would be leaving his post by the end of the year , and he would spend the coming year making himself redundant in his position 

 Yes he did; but his departure has obviously come sooner and a whole lot more suddenly than he wished!

 

Dominic Cummings and Lee Cain: Exits give chance to 'reset government'

Quote

The departure of the prime minister's chief adviser Dominic Cummings is a chance to "reset government", a senior Tory MP said.

Mr Cummings left Downing Street for the last time on Friday following internal battles about his role.

Former Brexit Secretary David Davis said Boris Johnson had taken "decisive action" in removing his aide.

 

It goes on

Quote

Mr Cummings and director of communications Lee Cain, who resigned on Thursday, will work out their notices at home following tensions within No 10.

 That's nice for them. I wonder for how long they'll continue receiving their near six figure salaries from the taxpayer whilst doing nothing.

[vogie]

Alistair Campbell has just called Dominic Cummins a narcissist.? ????????????????????

[vinny41]

3 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

 

Right so because the conditions under which we would leave was never defined you cannot say you knew what you were voting for.

Incorrect anyone that voted leave knew that meant leaving the EU, Leaving the single market and Leaving the customs union

and anyone voting Remain voted on the basis that voting remain was voting for no change

[Rookiescot]

2 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 Yes he did; but his departure has obviously come sooner and a whole lot more suddenly than he wished!

 

Dominic Cummings and Lee Cain: Exits give chance to 'reset government'

 

It goes on

 That's nice for them. I wonder for how long they'll continue receiving their near six figure salaries from the taxpayer whilst doing nothing.

 

I do not think they will be doing nothing. They are most likely writing "exclusive" columns for the Mail and Express claiming they have been harshly treated as we speak.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, vogie said:

Alistair Campbell has just called Dominic Cummins a narcissist.? ????????????????????

He’s right, Cummings is a narcissist 

[Rookiescot]

Just now, vinny41 said:

Incorrect anyone that voted leave knew that meant leaving the EU, Leaving the single market and Leaving the customs union

and anyone voting Remain voted on the basis that voting remain was voting for no change

 

No. The leave campaign claimed we would be staying in the single market.

Now you can say that you knew what you wanted. Which was to leave.

But you cannot say you knew what you were voting for as it had never been defined.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, vinny41 said:

Incorrect anyone that voted leave knew that meant leaving the EU, Leaving the single market and Leaving the customs union

and anyone voting Remain voted on the basis that voting remain was voting for no change

It wasn’t quite that simple though was it?!

 

People also voted on the expectation of what Brexit would deliver, including the small matter of £350,000,000 a week for the NHS.

[vinny41]

2 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

 

No. The leave campaign claimed we would be staying in the single market.

Now you can say that you knew what you wanted. Which was to leave.

But you cannot say you knew what you were voting for as it had never been defined.

Didn't you see videos from Cameron,Gove, Osborne all stating a vote for leave would mean leaving the EU, leaving the single market and leaving the custom union