ChatterBank1 min ago
Well We Can All Stop Blaming The Governement Now The Lunatics Have Taken Over The Asylum...
112 Answers
https:/
What will our fate be?
What will our fate be?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//Also, May does not have to go if she doesn’t want to. And it seems she wants to hold on. //
She will cling on as long as she can.She had young aspirations of being the first female PM and was disappointed when Thatcher succeeded (and was much more successful).
She was unable to have children and her parents died very young.The Conservative Party is her family and one she wants to be the figurehead for as long as possible.
She will cling on as long as she can.She had young aspirations of being the first female PM and was disappointed when Thatcher succeeded (and was much more successful).
She was unable to have children and her parents died very young.The Conservative Party is her family and one she wants to be the figurehead for as long as possible.
NJ: // Who would have cared about the Leavers had the result been 52:48 to remain. And how would their "care" have manifested itself? //
I don't know the answer to this -- how can I? But the most obvious point is that the UK would certainly not have pivoted to a "hard remain" position, ie there is no likelihood that we would have joined the Euro, Schengen, proposed European Army; we would have continued to act as best we could as a check against rapidly increased federalism, etc. In as much as it's possible to provide a compromise between two such utterly irreconcilable positions, then that seems the most likely future.
I don't know the answer to this -- how can I? But the most obvious point is that the UK would certainly not have pivoted to a "hard remain" position, ie there is no likelihood that we would have joined the Euro, Schengen, proposed European Army; we would have continued to act as best we could as a check against rapidly increased federalism, etc. In as much as it's possible to provide a compromise between two such utterly irreconcilable positions, then that seems the most likely future.
Firstly Jim, I’m a ‘she’ not a ‘he’.
Secondly, My disregard for remainers and the EU is NOT based on fact, or factual misunderstanding. It’s based on my own, thoughts, feelings and opinions.
And yes, of course you are entitled think my opinions are wrong, but when you do, your credibility goes out of the window with your “I’m right, you’re wrong” attitude, which, lets face it, is opinion based too.
Secondly, My disregard for remainers and the EU is NOT based on fact, or factual misunderstanding. It’s based on my own, thoughts, feelings and opinions.
And yes, of course you are entitled think my opinions are wrong, but when you do, your credibility goes out of the window with your “I’m right, you’re wrong” attitude, which, lets face it, is opinion based too.
> Who would have cared about the Leavers had the result been 52:48 to remain. And how would their "care" have manifested itself?
I can answer that as it's pretty much the outcome I wanted. In fact, 51:49 would have been even better. And 50.1:49.9 better yet.
What would have happened is pretty much as Nigel Farage hoped for when he thought the vote was a narrow Remain victory. Fighting on for another referendum. The closer the result, the more likely that was to happen.
Why I wanted that was because I think the EU does need to change in order for us to remain in it on the same terms as we have been. I was hopeful that such a close vote would give us sufficient clout to get that change, unlike when Cameron went before the referendum. And I was hopeful that change would come, or we'd certainly be out the next time - which would probably have been 2018 or 2019, i.e. within the lifetime of the 2015 parliament.
A lot has changed since then, but I think it would be astonishing to imagine that Leave could have lost by literally one vote and accepted that for another generation, when you look at the animosity and vitriol now.
I can answer that as it's pretty much the outcome I wanted. In fact, 51:49 would have been even better. And 50.1:49.9 better yet.
What would have happened is pretty much as Nigel Farage hoped for when he thought the vote was a narrow Remain victory. Fighting on for another referendum. The closer the result, the more likely that was to happen.
Why I wanted that was because I think the EU does need to change in order for us to remain in it on the same terms as we have been. I was hopeful that such a close vote would give us sufficient clout to get that change, unlike when Cameron went before the referendum. And I was hopeful that change would come, or we'd certainly be out the next time - which would probably have been 2018 or 2019, i.e. within the lifetime of the 2015 parliament.
A lot has changed since then, but I think it would be astonishing to imagine that Leave could have lost by literally one vote and accepted that for another generation, when you look at the animosity and vitriol now.
On his podcast on ConservativeHome, Jacob Rees-Mogg says Theresa May ‘will not deliver a no-deal Brexit’, agrees that the choice is either leaving with her deal or no Brexit, and asks: ‘is this deal worse than not leaving?’ He answers: ‘No, definitely not. If we take this deal we are legally out of the EU.’
Preparations are well underway to contain the expected riots and civil unrest. Plod has even got in early by feeling the collars of a few truckers during a "go slow" protest. Knife crime? No thanks, no can do. Protesters …...oohh yes please we'll have some of that. The lunatics haven't yet taken over mind, but are getting closer.
Consider this.
“The cabinet even discussed the circumstances under which Jeremy Corbyn could become prime minister even without an election. Under the provisions of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, the government losing a vote of confidence in the Commons does not necessarily lead to an election. Instead there is a two-week period in which others can attempt to form a government that commands a majority of the Commons.” The link may be paywalled. I can c&p it if required.
https:/
Consider this.
“The cabinet even discussed the circumstances under which Jeremy Corbyn could become prime minister even without an election. Under the provisions of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, the government losing a vote of confidence in the Commons does not necessarily lead to an election. Instead there is a two-week period in which others can attempt to form a government that commands a majority of the Commons.” The link may be paywalled. I can c&p it if required.
https:/
jim// But the most obvious point is that the UK would certainly not have pivoted to a "hard remain" position, ie there is no likelihood that we would have joined the Euro, Schengen, proposed European Army; we would have continued to act as best we could as a check against rapidly increased federalism, etc.//
Dream on! There's no cherry picking within the EU (their words), there is no democracy either; the Parliament is simply a talking shop, the real power is with the Commission, and mostly even then with its President, at the moment J.C. Juncker, a drunkard who has more power and influence than Hitler or Napoleon ever had.
David Cameron tried to 'act as best he could' to make small reasonable changes and his requests were met with scorn.
Dream on! There's no cherry picking within the EU (their words), there is no democracy either; the Parliament is simply a talking shop, the real power is with the Commission, and mostly even then with its President, at the moment J.C. Juncker, a drunkard who has more power and influence than Hitler or Napoleon ever had.
David Cameron tried to 'act as best he could' to make small reasonable changes and his requests were met with scorn.
“ie there is no likelihood that we would have joined the Euro, Schengen, proposed European Army; we would have continued to act as best we could as a check against rapidly increased federalism,…”
What, like we are at the moment you mean, Jim (or are supposed to be until the “opt outs” are gradually whittled away in typical EU style). So how would that be caring for the 48% of Leavers?
“Why I wanted that was because I think the EU does need to change in order for us to remain in it on the same terms as we have been.”
You need to understand that the EU does not do “change” at the behest of anybody else. The only changes it makes are of the Commission’s making and are in one direction only. Whether we stay or whether we leave (under whatever dire terms the EU dictates) that will not change. You cannot get a clearer message than one of its major members expressing a desire to leave. That is a far greater jolt that the 50.1%:49.9% scenario you describe. But it will make not one jot of difference. Good luck to all those who wish for more of the same (and look like they'll be getting it one way or another). But don't say you were not warned.
What, like we are at the moment you mean, Jim (or are supposed to be until the “opt outs” are gradually whittled away in typical EU style). So how would that be caring for the 48% of Leavers?
“Why I wanted that was because I think the EU does need to change in order for us to remain in it on the same terms as we have been.”
You need to understand that the EU does not do “change” at the behest of anybody else. The only changes it makes are of the Commission’s making and are in one direction only. Whether we stay or whether we leave (under whatever dire terms the EU dictates) that will not change. You cannot get a clearer message than one of its major members expressing a desire to leave. That is a far greater jolt that the 50.1%:49.9% scenario you describe. But it will make not one jot of difference. Good luck to all those who wish for more of the same (and look like they'll be getting it one way or another). But don't say you were not warned.
> You need to understand that the EU does not do “change” at the behest of anybody else
Change is unavoidable when it is inflicted upon you rather than a matter of personal choice.
> Anyone else get the feeling that after this motley crew we have in parliament (and I mean all of them) have finished riding roughshod over the electorate and destroying Brexit, one of these days we’re going to be telling Remainers “We told you so”?
Not sure what you mean. Whatever the motley crew comes up with, none of us can say we voted for it - certainly not remainers.
Change is unavoidable when it is inflicted upon you rather than a matter of personal choice.
> Anyone else get the feeling that after this motley crew we have in parliament (and I mean all of them) have finished riding roughshod over the electorate and destroying Brexit, one of these days we’re going to be telling Remainers “We told you so”?
Not sure what you mean. Whatever the motley crew comes up with, none of us can say we voted for it - certainly not remainers.
Latest Posts
News1 min ago
ChatterBank18 mins ago
Crosswords20 mins ago
ChatterBank21 mins ago
ChatterBank28 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.