Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[SpookyFrank]

finally we have a workable set of questions for the 2nd referendum!

I thought we'd settled on The Devil or The Deep Blue Sea.

e2a: That's actually pretty accurate when you think about it.

 

[Kaka Tim]

I thought we'd settled on The Devil or The Deep Blue Sea.

a.rock
b.hard place

 

[Pickman's model]

I thought we'd settled on The Devil or The Deep Blue Sea.

a.rock
b.hard place

scylla and charybdis

 

[gosub]

a.rock
b.hard place

Scylla and Charybdis for those who had the benefit of an education that wasn't free



(eta oops Pickmans just pipped me to it)

 

[Pickman's model]

 

[sleaterkinney]

finally we have a workable set of questions for the 2nd referendum!

In with opt-outs ?
Or
Out with opt-ins ?

 

[gosub]

finally we have a workable set of questions for the 2nd referendum!

Whats the point?

Yes
Meh

 

[not-bono-ever]

Interesting twitter dump re a conversation truss had in public. Not going to post as it’s fuckig lazy to post twitter stuff really.

 

[Pickman's model]

Interesting twitter dump re a conversation truss had in public. Not going to post as it’s fuckig lazy to post twitter stuff really.

you auld tease

 

[TheHoodedClaw]

Interesting twitter dump re a conversation truss had in public. Not going to post as it’s fuckig lazy to post twitter stuff really.

here, have a thread unroll on me

Thread by @ZackPolanski: "Politicians are entitled to have private conversations & in balance particularly those in cabinet have a responsibility to be open & […]"

 

[not-bono-ever]

No fun

 

[tommers]

I am sure you can use yer spidey skills and track the posts down. The first is is in corporate raider goldsmith offspring , the last is in Sex case disgraced film director

Is it like Voldemort? Can you not say their name?

 

[not-bono-ever]

I have never read or seen any Harry potter as I am an adult so I cannot possibly respond on that


But someone has done it anyway

 

[SpackleFrog]

here, have a thread unroll on me

Thread by @ZackPolanski: "Politicians are entitled to have private conversations & in balance particularly those in cabinet have a responsibility to be open & […]"

Thanks.

No fun

What's no fun is that I spent a good 30 seconds looking for that thread when I should be working!

 

[not-bono-ever]

I am purposefully sabotaging the system - what’s the problem ?

 

[Wilf]

I do object to the undermining of my country's democracy by foreign powers, rich and unelected power-brokers, deliberate misinformation and a media complicit in the delusion that Brexit was ever our idea, and will deliver what we feel we need most.

I'm not sure why that makes me dangerous. Dangerous would be to accept what has gone on unquestioningly, focused only on the result rather than the anti-democratic tampering that we now know could at least in part have lead to the result.

Votes and opinions are constantly influenced by business, media and foreign powers - at home and abroad. So why is this particular one the one that has to be singled out for outrage and re-run?

 

[not-bono-ever]

Shocked that British democracy is being undermined. Shocked I am.

 

[Pickman's model]

Shocked that British democracy is being undermined. Shocked I am.

shocked that british democracy is believed to exist

 

[Pickman's model]

I am purposefully sabotaging the system - what’s the problem ?

you are the anti-bob

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Votes and opinions are constantly influenced by business, media and foreign powers - at home and abroad. So why is this particular one the one that has to be singled out for outrage and re-run?

I agree that is a weak argument. imo a stronger argument is one that says the first referendum had too little content - it gave no indication of what brexit might look like. Now that there is an idea of what it looks like, now that new information is available, how valid is that first vote as a mandate for one particular deal, or indeed 'no deal'?

Making that argument is easy for someone like me who neither asked for nor consented to the idea of a first vote. Harder to make by those, like the Labour front bench, who both voted in favour of the first vote and in favour of triggering Article50. It would be a climb-down by them to ask for a second referendum now. But that's their problem.

 

[Wilf]

I agree that is a weak argument. imo a stronger argument is one that says the first referendum had too little content - it gave no indication of what brexit might look like. Now that there is an idea of what it looks like, now that new information is available, how valid is that first vote as a mandate for one particular deal, or indeed 'no deal'?

Making that argument is easy for someone like me who neither asked for nor consented to the idea of a first vote. Harder to make by those, like the Labour front bench, who both voted in favour of the first vote and in favour of triggering Article50. It would be a climb-down by them to ask for a second referendum now. But that's their problem.

As a matter of straightforward process, the whole thing was weak, with no conception the vote might go leave and no thought about what followed from that. Thing is though, as you say, that doesn't add up to a logic for running the in/out vote again. And with regard to whether there's a referendum on the terms of the deal or even 'deal vs no deal', there's a further level of fuck up (in that a second referendum has been denied as even a possibility by May, right through to now). In fact if 'the deal' doesn't get approved next week, there's every chance that 'process' will have to be put in place at the end of the process (another gen election; another Tory leader; another referendum). Its an understatement to call it a farce - even article 50, the ticking clock, now looks as floppy as a Dali painting.

 

[SpackleFrog]

This BBC thread on Parliament today is fucking jokes.


You've literally got Tory MP's complaining that the British Parliamentary system is archaic and toothless. Isn't it bizarre how all these old custom and practice type rules are being dragged up from previous centuries?

I've just worked out what a 'humble address' is and it's bonkers.

MPs debate contempt of Parliament

 

[littlebabyjesus]

As a matter of straightforward process, the whole thing was weak, with no conception the vote might go leave and no thought about what followed from that. Thing is though, as you say, that doesn't add up to a logic for running the in/out vote again. And with regard to whether there's a referendum on the terms of the deal or even 'deal vs no deal', there's a further level of fuck up (in that a second referendum has been denied as even a possibility by May, right through to now). In fact if 'the deal' doesn't get approved next week, there's every chance that 'process' will have to be put in place at the end of the process (another gen election; another Tory leader; another referendum). Its an understatement to call it a farce - even article 50, the ticking clock, now looks as floppy as a Dali painting.

Thing is not to get sucked in to saying 'you're not respecting democracy' to people who object to this whole farrago, who might see a second ref as a chance to end it, and played no part whatever in creating it. Not our fault or problem that the first vote has led to this. It is a climbdown for Labour because of what they have (imo foolishly, in attempting to pander to populism) done in the past. And imo they should issue some kind of mea culpa if they call for a second ref. They no doubt won't, but again, that's neither my fault nor my responsibility.

 

[not-bono-ever]

Some beautiful Freeman of the land lite bollocks being chucked about at the minute about withdrawing consent of the people and handing ourselves over to the UN as a displaced people living in an occupied land

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

This BBC thread on Parliament today is fucking jokes.


You've literally got Tory MP's complaining that the British Parliamentary system is archaic and toothless. Isn't it bizarre how all these old custom and practice type rules are being dragged up from previous centuries?

I've just worked out what a 'humble address' is and it's bonkers.

MPs debate contempt of Parliament

An humble address.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Some beautiful Freeman of the land lite bollocks being chucked about at the minute about withdrawing consent of the people and handing ourselves over to the UN as a displaced people living in an occupied land

I love this idea that we're somehow governed with our consent. I wish I could get that far away from the evidence of my own senses, must be a right laugh.

 

[MickiQ]

au contraire: meet the new deal, same as the auld deal

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again

 

[Wilf]

An humble address.

Tories have just lost the first bit of the contempt of parliament vote. lol.

What a thoroughly bad lot, having contempt for Parliament. Oh, hang on a minute!

 

[Puddy_Tat]

Some beautiful Freeman of the land lite bollocks being chucked about at the minute about withdrawing consent of the people and handing ourselves over to the UN as a displaced people living in an occupied land

is that arguing that the land is being occupied by the EU, or by the current UK government? I'm not sure it makes a great deal of sense either way, but can see both arguments being made.

 

[Pickman's model]

Tories have just lost the first bit of the contempt of parliament vote. lol.

What a thoroughly bad lot, having contempt for Parliament. Oh, hang on a minute!

We freely admit our contempt tho