Cameron and Osbourne, dead men walking??

[Funkycoldribena]

Zod said:

Serves him right for being so lazy. He should have been much tougher on Brussels, used the full time available to hold the referendum and made the referendum one that required a proper majority for change. In Australia, they require a majority of voters, with compulsory voting. Other countries require special majorities of 2/3 or 3/4. Changes to the constitutional documents of companies require such special majorities. To allow such a massive change on the basis of a simple majority of the turnout was utterly irresponsible.

Yes, pan3, I know there was no vote on entry or on subsequent treaties. That's because we have a parliamentary democracy. Referenda are not the way we do things.

1.We're not Australia or other countries.
2.Why should people be forced to vote if they don't care?
Seems rather dictorial.

[Burwood]

WestyCarl said:

"Utterly broken"

What, leaving one job for another, increasing you salary by multiples, decreasing your hours by multiples and no media scrutiny.

Made up rubbish.

Only insofar as it was embarrassing and cost him his job. He'll scrape by.

[jmorgan]

I had him lining up a new job post No. 10 had the Brexit vote gone his way. My tinfoil hat makes me think the failure of his way on Brexit scuppered his new job.

[grumbledoak]

Hayek said:

The 2/3 or 3/4 majority thing is BS. Imagine if 60% had voted to leave but it counted for nothing because we require 66.6% to do anything! Apart from anything else we joined with no vote whatsoever!

It is. If the referendum result had been 49% "out", the Remoaners would be claiming referenda are wonderful and we should have them more often; at 65% "out" they would want two thirds; and at 74% they would claim 3/4s is the magic number.

There are plenty of sour grapes to go around in all this. It sounds like "Call Me" has been sucking them. Tough st.

[anonymous-user]

grumbledoak said:

Hayek said:

The 2/3 or 3/4 majority thing is BS. Imagine if 60% had voted to leave but it counted for nothing because we require 66.6% to do anything! Apart from anything else we joined with no vote whatsoever!

It is. If the referendum result had been 49% "out", the Remoaners would be claiming referenda are wonderful and we should have them more often; at 65% "out" they would want two thirds; and at 74% they would claim 3/4s is the magic number.

There are plenty of sour grapes to go around in all this. It sounds like "Call Me" has been sucking them. Tough st.

Supermajorities are required in many nations referendums where major constitutional change is being proposed. The reason is that making large changes with a tiny majority leads to fragmentation in society and a poor mandate for change. Which is exactly what is going on now in the UK.

I and many other leavers would rather have had a supermajority in the Brexit vote, the reasons are to avoid the situation we are in now with a divided nation, many businesses being against it and a government negotiating it with a poor mandate led by a prime minister against it.

Despite voting for Brexit, I can see the negotiations are unlikely now to go well. One of the main reasons is simply that not enough people are behind it. Unfortunately I think we run a real risk now that Brexit will be a Pyrrhic victory for all but the most ardent brexiters.

[turbobloke]

El stovey said:

Despite voting for Brexit, I can see the negotiations are unlikely now to go well. One of the main reasons is simply that not enough people are behind it. Unfortunately I think we run a real risk now that Brexit will be a Pyrrhic victory for all but the most ardent brexiters.

The negotiations have barely started.

All of the various types of Leaver wanted to leave, that's what's happening and nobody knows how the negotiations will turn out.

Words from the EU side or the UK side are hardly disinterested statements of pure objectivity, and nobody else knows diddly,

[Murph7355]

El stovey said:

...
I and many other leavers would rather have had a supermajority in the Brexit vote, the reasons are to avoid the situation we are in now with a divided nation, many businesses being against it and a government negotiating it with a poor mandate led by a prime minister against it.

Despite voting for Brexit, I can see the negotiations are unlikely now to go well. One of the main reasons is simply that not enough people are behind it. Unfortunately I think we run a real risk now that Brexit will be a Pyrrhic victory for all but the most ardent brexiters.

Do you think a supermajority needing 66.6% of the vote and only getting 65% (no matter which way it went) would have made the country less divided?

The country was divided on the issue regardless of what the rules were (short of a 100% result!). Ignoring what the majority wanted was not going to change that. It would only have made the situation worse.

55%+ either way would have been preferable to 52:48. But you can't control outcomes that way over and above making a decent case (which both sides failed at).

The negotiating team know what leaving means. I'm not sure having any more "people behind it" would make the blindest bit of difference to how the negotiations go. Our negotiating counterparty would not have cared if 100% of people had voted to leave - what the people of member states want isn't high on their agenda IMO. Their position would be the same as it is today and their attitude and approach to the political project would be the same.

A major positive spin off of the referendum result will hopefully be that people remain more engaged in the political and governing process, and that those we elect will be held more accountable. The outcome of this won't always be desirable in personal terms (as it's unlikely you'll always be on the winning side of a vote), but over time it should do us some good.

[turbobloke]

Murph7355 said:

El stovey said:

...
I and many other leavers would rather have had a supermajority in the Brexit vote, the reasons are to avoid the situation we are in now with a divided nation, many businesses being against it and a government negotiating it with a poor mandate led by a prime minister against it.

Despite voting for Brexit, I can see the negotiations are unlikely now to go well. One of the main reasons is simply that not enough people are behind it. Unfortunately I think we run a real risk now that Brexit will be a Pyrrhic victory for all but the most ardent brexiters.

Do you think a supermajority needing 66.6% of the vote and only getting 65% (no matter which way it went) would have made the country less divided?

Exactly.

Remaining on the moan: convenience of non-argument matters.

[BlackLabel]

George Osborne hints at return to politics and says he opposed EU vote. Former chancellor says he was not keen on decision to hold last year’s referendum and was pessimistic about the likely result

[Leroy902]

He really came across as a smug like fker whilst regular interviews whilst the referendum took place, to see Teresa May fall apart. Quite blatantly no love lost between the two.

[Murph7355]

BlackLabel said:

George Osborne hints at return to politics and says he opposed EU vote. Former chancellor says he was not keen on decision to hold last year’s referendum and was pessimistic about the likely result

Perhaps if the smug little gobste had actually listened to what the people who were telling him they wanted out of the EU were saying, he might have done a better job of the Remain campaign and the outcome wouldn't have been as gloomy as he thought it would be.

[Jockman]

So he went along with one of the most important decisions in modern British politics because he was Cameron’s mate?

I’ll avoid the derogatory language.

[BlackLabel]

Someone isn’t too happy with Cameron.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7bkXKO2qVXY

Meanwhile George comes to Dave’s defence.



Should Cameron have stayed on to finish what he started?

[Burwood]

I'm no cameron fan boy but it's wrong to blame him. He was pressured into the referendum by the pro leave cabinet. He was pro remain. I didn't get the Dyer 'tt' comment. Then again, coming from him, who cares. He can't even speak propa

[Kccv23highliftcam]

BlackLabel said:

Someone isn’t too happy with Cameron.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7bkXKO2qVXY

Meanwhile George comes to Dave’s defence.



Should Cameron have stayed on to finish what he started?

Absolutely.

As for Osborne, well how DO you polish a turd?

[frisbee]

Burwood said:

I'm no cameron fan boy but it's wrong to blame him. He was pressured into the referendum by the pro leave cabinet. He was pro remain. I didn't get the Dyer 'tt' comment. Then again, coming from him, who cares. He can't even speak propa

I'm still bemused by how the rabid Brexiteers blame him, for giving them exactly what they want...

Blaming everyone for everything and never actually getting to the point, like a twisted Oscars acceptance speech.

[voyds9]

Burwood said:

I'm no cameron fan boy but it's wrong to blame him. He was pressured into the referendum by the pro leave cabinet. He was pro remain. I didn't get the Dyer 'tt' comment. Then again, coming from him, who cares. He can't even speak propa

Because that is exactly who should be in charge of the country, someone without enough balls to even stand up to his own hand picked cabinet.


(but to give him credit he was better than wishy washy May).

[Deptford Draylons]

frisbee said:

I'm still bemused by how the rabid Brexiteers blame him, for giving them exactly what they want...

.

Which Brexiteers are blaming Cameron , and what are they blaming him for ?
So far I've only seen the rather arrogant Remainers, who thought it was a cert they would win, turn around and knife him.

[sidicks]

frisbee said:

I'm still bemused by how the rabid Brexiteers blame him, for giving them exactly what they want...

Blaming everyone for everything and never actually getting to the point, like a twisted Oscars acceptance speech.

I'm still bemused by how you can make stuff up without evidence to support your claims.

Edited by sidicks on Saturday 30th June 17:48

[B'stard Child]

Kccv23highliftcam said:

Absolutely.

As for Osborne, well how DO you polish a turd?

You can’t - but if it’s reasonably fresh you can roll it in glitter