Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result (Vol 2)

[Deptford Draylons]

wc98 said:

Deptford Draylons said:

Its not my finest effort, but good enough to understand. I can't be arsed to argue with you if you are looking for reasons not to address what I wrote.

i understood it perfectly well. it must be a thick leave voter thing always had greg down as very intelligent but ignorant , i will be devastated if i am wrong on the intelligent bit.

I think it was more an excuse for wanting to post the Daily Mail link, but then not actually answer any of the questions arising from it. He'll turn up again at some point with more big red bus rage.

[confused_buyer]

///ajd said:

JHB is vexatious from the first anger spit riddled attack.

Maybe but it was still a piss poor effort by the MP. This is the problem with arguing with democratic votes - once you start to do that you undermine the whole system which elected yourself. That is how you tie yourself up in knots.

I don't think the Tories are really that worried about it. They hated Goldsmith anyway so are pleased to see the back of him - particularly after the Mayor campaign.

"Go back to your constituencies, and prepare for government!" (D Steel 1981). We all know how that ended up.

There is another by-election next week - will be interesting to see if the LibDems can win that one.

[anonymous-user]

Pan Pan Pan said:

That will only happen if the judges treat the will of the majority voter in the UK with respect, If the judges choose to ignore that, they do so at the peril of the rule of law in the UK.
Why should anyone respect the law, if at any time an individual or small number of individuals, who were not happy with the result of a democratic vote, choose to just ignore it, or bend it to suit their point of view?

I realise that we are all now Constitutional law nouveau-scholars, but this post illustrates perfectly that you don't any the faintest understanding of what the rule of law is.

You, of all posters here, must be especially seething at the DM's latest revelations about the bias of the SC judges. But why aren't you calling for the head of the traitorous AG on a platter. He - a campaigning Remainer - must surely have poisoned the Government's case from the inside. Is there really no noose for him?

Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 3rd December 11:42

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

bmw535i said:

///ajd said:

You post as though you think its a real news article.

Amazing.

You post as though YOU think it's a real news article.

Hilarious

Is that what confused you?

[B'stard Child]

///ajd said:

don'tbesilly said:

Purely for entertainment purposes of course, and whilst it's been posted umpteen times before, it's worth a listen again and again for the lols.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn3vuKEgTbs

JHB is vexatious from the first anger spit riddled attack.

JHB knows its a clear anti-brexit statement and she is taking brexiteer bed wetting to new levels. Her anger belies her realisation the tories are in big trouble now.

She only quotes remain about leaving the Single Market. How telling.

You know what you make a damn fine point that you probably didn't mean to make

I see some striking similarities with your efforts on here

- Spit riddled attacks

- Quoting "only" what benefits your own viewpoint

Can you see how that might make you look a little two faced in terms of your comment.......

[Deptford Draylons]

///ajd said:

don'tbesilly said:

Purely for entertainment purposes of course, and whilst it's been posted umpteen times before, it's worth a listen again and again for the lols.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn3vuKEgTbs

JHB is vexatious from the first anger spit riddled attack.

JHB knows its a clear anti-brexit statement and she is taking brexiteer bed wetting to new levels. Her anger belies her realisation the tories are in big trouble now.

She only quotes remain about leaving the Single Market. How telling.

Fails to appreciate vote leave talked about the single market on their own web pages - now deleted.

This is not a campaign that deserves respect, and the finality of the vote is not beyond revisiting for that reason.

Her seat will be up again in 2020. When do the people get a say about the undeliverable lies of vote leave, so we can boot it out like any other democratically elected bent and fraudulent MP?

Onley started out talking about how the vote result should be respected. The when confirmed as the LiBDem candidate, adopted the Tim Farron con job line about needing a second referendum to vote on the deal. After the election she said she would vote against any triggering of article 50 even if the Government was to hold a second referendum. Then when challenged on this she either stormed off or the PR guy ended the interview. Democracy is such a pest when answering questions by the press, huh ?
In true ///ajd fashion, she too ran away when the SM bullst was pointed out to her. Maybe like the Question Time guy, you should try and get JHB the sack too ?

You are welcome to form a political party when we have left the EU and spend 25 years of so campaigning to get back in, like the last guy did in trying to get out. Maybe it will take the same 40 years though to reverse ?

[FiF]

Deptford Draylons said:

///ajd said:

don'tbesilly said:

Purely for entertainment purposes of course, and whilst it's been posted umpteen times before, it's worth a listen again and again for the lols.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn3vuKEgTbs

JHB is vexatious from the first anger spit riddled attack.

JHB knows its a clear anti-brexit statement and she is taking brexiteer bed wetting to new levels. Her anger belies her realisation the tories are in big trouble now.

She only quotes remain about leaving the Single Market. How telling.

Fails to appreciate vote leave talked about the single market on their own web pages - now deleted.

This is not a campaign that deserves respect, and the finality of the vote is not beyond revisiting for that reason.

Her seat will be up again in 2020. When do the people get a say about the undeliverable lies of vote leave, so we can boot it out like any other democratically elected bent and fraudulent MP?

Onley started out talking about how the vote result should be respected. The when confirmed as the LiBDem candidate, adopted the Tim Farron con job line about needing a second referendum to vote on the deal. After the election she said she would vote against any triggering of article 50 even if the Government was to hold a second referendum. Then when challenged on this she either stormed off or the PR guy ended the interview. Democracy is such a pest when answering questions by the press, huh ?
In true ///ajd fashion, she too ran away when the SM bullst was pointed out to her. Maybe like the Question Time guy, you should try and get JHB the sack too ?

You are welcome to form a political party when we have left the EU and spend 25 years of so campaigning to get back in, like the last guy did in trying to get out. Maybe it will take the same 40 years though to reverse ?

To be fair it was top trolling by JHB, , even worse having previously signalled how she was going to play it, Olney could have got her to move the interview on in so many ways, but she didn't have the experience or preparation to do it, so hung herself out to dry. Not the sharpest tool in the box.

Regardless, the by election result is not a sign, as Verhofstadt et al claimed, that the UK is therefore willing to overturn the vote and now wants to Remain, and IDS was correct to tell him, Verhofstadt, to butt his nose out and immediately FRO.

[B'stard Child]

FiF said:

Regardless, the by election result is not a sign, as Verhofstadt et al claimed, that the UK is therefore willing to overturn the vote and now wants to Remain, and IDS was correct to tell him, Verhofstadt, to butt his nose out and immediately FRO.

They can't help it - they really can't. The fundamental issue is they are not used to been overruled - they are of course the "over-rulers" now when you had 40 years of being in control you aren't going to be happy about losing any

Reason to vote leave number 6 - We have our own politicians with their noses in the trough - why do we need another layer above that also just skims cream off the top?

Not a single remain person I spoke to regarding this issue could debate that point without moving the conversation to how democratic the EU was - pulling the conversation back to the subject never worked - the waste of moving the parliament the size of the wages bill for Presidents (how many does a democracy need FFS) Council, Parliament and all the support services - the conversation went back to how Democratic the EU was.....

So in the end I debated that point - they found that frustrating too I think - can't be sure as they found excuses to move on.....

[don'tbesilly]

///ajd said:

don'tbesilly said:

Purely for entertainment purposes of course, and whilst it's been posted umpteen times before, it's worth a listen again and again for the lols.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn3vuKEgTbs

JHB is vexatious from the first anger spit riddled attack.

JHB knows its a clear anti-brexit statement and she is taking brexiteer bed wetting to new levels. Her anger belies her realisation the tories are in big trouble now.

She only quotes remain about leaving the Single Market. How telling.

Fails to appreciate vote leave talked about the single market on their own web pages - now deleted.

This is not a campaign that deserves respect, and the finality of the vote is not beyond revisiting for that reason.

Her seat will be up again in 2020. When do the people get a say about the undeliverable lies of vote leave, so we can boot it out like any other democratically elected bent and fraudulent MP?

Spit riddled attack!
Is that what the delight in JHB's voice came across as to you?
To me it sounded like she had just read her notes, and was laughing at the impending car crash the interview was inevitably going to become, and she wasn't disappointed, it was f*cking hilarious.

If you want to see spit riddled, pop back to the recent QT thread and read some of your own comments, or many of the other Brexit related threads on here, no one quite does spit riddled/odious and snidey attacks to get close to those of your own!

The By-election was supposed to be about local issues and probably more importantly, Heathrow 3, but the Lib-Dems, specifically the weasel Farron,turned into it into a Brexit vote.

Unsurprisingly the local electorate who had voted massively to vote remain in the EU referendum, voted for the Lib-Dems, and we got a rerun of the EU referendum with the same result, shock horror!

Tories are worried you say, what/who about...Farron .........Corbyn , you're deluded if that's what you think!

I bet May had another Horlicks whilst plotting her next orienteering trip with Hubby in the Lake District, and chuckling whilst whispering in Philip's ear "I'm looking forward to tomorrow, Farron's going to wa*k himself into oblivion".

You seem upset that JHB only mentioned that the Remain campaign mentioned the single market, just for you, and if you've missed it, here it is again for the umpteenth time:

Johnson on the Marr show - 5th June -20 secs in
Gove on the Marr show - 8th June - 12 secs in
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUI5A1Gd5D0

You mention the lies of the leave campaign, which are yet to be proven as such, whilst ignoring the lies of the remain campaign, which have been proven to be lies and quite spectacularly.
You want bent and fraudulent MP's booted out, thankfully:

We don't need to boot out the bent and fraudulent Cameron he did a runner, and did what he accused leave voters of being - quitters, so he quit

We don't need to boot out the bent and fraudulent Osborne, he got fired, shame it was verbally and not from a cannon!

Any other remain politicians you'd like to boot out because of the lies?

Crack on Fella.

How's Le Pen getting on by the way?
Renzi's on the ropes, and Hofer's gaining ground, looks like it will be a race to see who slams the door shut first, will the UK still be the first one wonders.

This will liven things up, thanks Turbobloke :




Faux outrage incoming

[B'stard Child]

don'tbesilly said:

I bet May had another Horlicks whilst plotting her next orienteering trip with Hubby in the Lake District, and chuckling whilst whispering in Philip's ear "I'm looking forward to tomorrow, Farron's going to wa*k himself into oblivion".

Stop it - please stop it - my sides can't take much more

[768]

///ajd said:

don'tbesilly said:

Purely for entertainment purposes of course, and whilst it's been posted umpteen times before, it's worth a listen again and again for the lols.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn3vuKEgTbs

-snipped- SQUEAL! -snipped-

Brilliant. Julia played a blinder there.

[Disastrous]

I love the wit there.

"Oh! I know!! I'll use a sinking ship as a metaphor for the EU, and I'll write 'debt' on the anchor, because debt is like an anchor...but will my readers understand it??"

Impressive stuff. Can we at least agree that Brexit camp has a very unsophisticated sense of humour?

[Cobnapint]

http://news.sky.com/story/labour-will-seek-amendme...

More stalling tactics from more vote respecters.

[B'stard Child]

Disastrous said:

I love the wit there.

"Oh! I know!! I'll use a sinking ship as a metaphor for the EU, and I'll write 'debt' on the anchor, because debt is like an anchor...but will my readers understand it??"

Impressive stuff. Can we at least agree that Brexit camp has a very unsophisticated sense of humour?

Can I suggest that British humour itself is quite unsophisticated??

A strong theme of sarcasm and self-deprecation, often with deadpan delivery, runs throughout British humour. Humour may be used to bury emotions in a way that seems insensitive to other cultures.

I have no doubt at all that the readership undestood it.

We have had a long history of cartoons being used to illustrate the politics of the time - I don't think many were ever sophisticated

[Elysium]

Pan Pan Pan said:

Elysium said:

B'stard Child said:

Elysium said:

FiF said:

So if/when the Govt loses the Supreme Court case will Parliament have the balls to vote down Article 50 declaration? link

And will the Lords then be turkeys voting for Christmas?

Plus despite all the efforts to argue that people didn't know what they were voting for, it seems they did, and voted on a point of principle. link2 Nice one Richmond, get rid of an odious twerp as your MP, and elect a clueless puppet.

So ...

If the a50 bill has already been drafted and Theresa May is now 'confident' that it will be voted through, why is she wasting our time and money fighting a case in the Supreme Court and paying the Attorney General to put forward an argument that the judges must consider the 'will of the people' when interpreting a narrow point of law?

It fills the void between the referendum and the actual triggering of Art.50 - the EU can't interfere and are sitting on their hands waiting and (please god I hope it is true) gives the Government more time to get their st in order in terms of preparation for the exit negotiations from the standing start that the slimey DC handed to them before he foxtrot oscar'd into the distance.

Elysium said:

The argument that judges should not decide that Parliament should not be involved because they may not honour an advisory referendum is foolish. The fact that the Govt are now saying that it doesn't matter anyway takes us from the sublime to the ridiculous.

See previous comment.....

So May is buying time in order to get her act together. I agree.

So why all the nasty rabble rousing nonsense about the judges. Why not simply put together a cogent mature argument for the courts and treat the judiciary with a modicum of respect?

That will only happen if the judges treat the will of the majority voter in the UK with respect, If the judges choose to ignore that, they do so at the peril of the rule of law in the UK.
Why should anyone respect the law, if at any time an individual or small number of individuals, who were not happy with the result of a democratic vote, choose to just ignore it, or bend it to suit their point of view?

The will of the majority in respect of the referendum is irrelevant to this case.

The referendum was advisory. It carries no legal status and the courts could not change this even if they wanted to.

It solely focused on either leaving or remaining in the EU. There has never been a vote, advisory or otherwise, on the authority of parliament of government to change the law by issuing an article 50 notice.

This case CANNOT stop Parliament from issuing an article 50 notice as it is sovereign. The Govt did not have to defend it and they certainly did not need to appeal.

There had been no barrier to them going to Parliament at any time in the last 5 months, but they have chosen not to. The people bringing this case have done us all a big favour because without it, May would have set us on a road towards an unlawful Brexit, which would have mired the UK in the courts for years to come.

[Elysium]

B'stard Child said:

Disastrous said:

I love the wit there.

"Oh! I know!! I'll use a sinking ship as a metaphor for the EU, and I'll write 'debt' on the anchor, because debt is like an anchor...but will my readers understand it??"

Impressive stuff. Can we at least agree that Brexit camp has a very unsophisticated sense of humour?

Can I suggest that British humour itself is quite unsophisticated??

A strong theme of sarcasm and self-deprecation, often with deadpan delivery, runs throughout British humour. Humour may be used to bury emotions in a way that seems insensitive to other cultures.

I have no doubt at all that the readership undestood it.

We have had a long history of cartoons being used to illustrate the politics of the time - I don't think many were ever sophisticated

It's not a very funny cartoon though in honesty, plus they drew the 'cliff edge' in the wrong place.

[B'stard Child]

Elysium said:

B'stard Child said:

Disastrous said:

I love the wit there.

"Oh! I know!! I'll use a sinking ship as a metaphor for the EU, and I'll write 'debt' on the anchor, because debt is like an anchor...but will my readers understand it??"

Impressive stuff. Can we at least agree that Brexit camp has a very unsophisticated sense of humour?

Can I suggest that British humour itself is quite unsophisticated??

A strong theme of sarcasm and self-deprecation, often with deadpan delivery, runs throughout British humour. Humour may be used to bury emotions in a way that seems insensitive to other cultures.

I have no doubt at all that the readership undestood it.

We have had a long history of cartoons being used to illustrate the politics of the time - I don't think many were ever sophisticated

It's not a very funny cartoon though in honesty, plus they drew the 'cliff edge' in the wrong place.

That Sir has yet to be proven

With all the problems in the EU that they keep kicking down the road who knows where the cliff is

[Disastrous]

B'stard Child said:

Disastrous said:

I love the wit there.

"Oh! I know!! I'll use a sinking ship as a metaphor for the EU, and I'll write 'debt' on the anchor, because debt is like an anchor...but will my readers understand it??"

Impressive stuff. Can we at least agree that Brexit camp has a very unsophisticated sense of humour?

Can I suggest that British humour itself is quite unsophisticated??

A strong theme of sarcasm and self-deprecation, often with deadpan delivery, runs throughout British humour. Humour may be used to bury emotions in a way that seems insensitive to other cultures.

I have no doubt at all that the readership undestood it.

We have had a long history of cartoons being used to illustrate the politics of the time - I don't think many were ever sophisticated

Perhaps so, but that cartoon is an exceptionally poor example. I couldn't care less about the content but the execution is just woeful.

The cartoonist has literally just written 'political correctness' on a shark.

Actually, analysing how badly done it is, is funnier than the cartoon.

[confused_buyer]

Elysium said:

There had been no barrier to them going to Parliament at any time in the last 5 months, but they have chosen not to. The people bringing this case have done us all a big favour because without it, May would have set us on a road towards an unlawful Brexit, which would have mired the UK in the courts for years to come.

I am inclined to agree although I think by bringing the case they have actually helped the Leave side. By doing so they will ensure the decision to trigger Article 50 will be difficult to challenge whereas otherwise I have no doubt some sort of challenge would have popped up down the road.

[Rich_W]

Just read this.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/01/theresa...


This is the sort of nonsense we've come to expect from the higher levels of the EU. Quite aside from the fact ware still part of Europe and thus should be invited. WHY are they being so damn petty! Surely the EU machine should be swinging into top gear to try and stop us from leaving. I appreciate they don't want to be held to ransom for fear of other nations trying to get concessions. But like a divorce (which is what this is) you do need to TRY and make an agreement that will repair things and go forward.

And surely the Remain camp can't look at this stance by the idiots in Brussels and spin it positively??? Like a divorce they are screaming "I love you" whilst the other party is tossing their stuff out the door.

I voted Leave. And in the spirit of the naysayers "you dunno what you voted for" I do, but I guess I would be happy to stay if we could change "right to free movement" to something along the lines of "right to free labour" with the proviso you can only settle here if you have a job lined up ready from a UK firm. Probably wouldn't hurt to lower the fees to somewhere less than £100M a week. But as long as UK, Germany and France are propping it up, cant see that happening.

But IF a new better deal was offered to the UK. Then I could conceivable entertain a new vote. But it has to be more concrete, further reaching than the weak ste Dave came back with in February