The Brexit process

[DotCommunist]

but the Hedge Fund Manager and her supporters

ha! had to be didn't it

 

[editor]

I agree with the second part... but not the first. It is just the nature of voting that people can choose not to vote.

Or the complete lack of informed debate leading up to the vote. No wonder some people had no idea what voting 'leave' would actually mean to their lives. In fact, no one actually knows even now.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

ha! had to be didn't it

Gina Miller, look her up, right Bobby Dazzler. Her husband (another hedge fund cunt) said of his last divorce that it would have been cheaper to run his ex-wife over than pay her what's owed.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Add in those who didn't vote and it's anything but an overwhelming mandate for Brexit. The whole referendum was insane.

Presumably those who didn't vote, like those who don't vote in union elections, are happy to go along with the majority?

 

[DotCommunist]

as for those quibbling over wether 4% is a thumping margin- on turnout its a lot of people. Turnout higher than most GE's.

 

[rutabowa]

Or the complete lack of informed debate leading up to the vote. No wonder some people had no idea what voting 'leave' would actually mean to their lives. In fact, no one actually knows even now.

And you could say the same for "remain".

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Add in those who didn't vote and it's anything but an overwhelming mandate for Brexit. The whole referendum was insane.

The turnout was pretty high as these things go. Compare and contrast with Switzerland, which voted irrc 50.3%-49.7% to end free movement of people from the EU with a 40% turnout. Just one registered voter in five voted for it.

They're on course for a constitutional crisis over that one, which is again one of the contradictions of referendums - what are you prepared to give up in order to end free movement? That wasn't put in the referendum question, but it goes to the heart of any negotiation to make that referendum result happen.

 

[butchersapron]

Gina Miller, look her up, right Bobby Dazzler. Her husband (another hedge fund cunt) said of his last divorce that it would have been cheaper to run his ex-wife over than pay her what's owed.

Half of their joint work now seems to be managing philanthropy as a tax-avoidance strategy. Oddly enough they direct a lot of this bountifulesque stuff to the Margaret Thatcher Infirmary.

 

[rutabowa]

as for those quibbling over wether 4% is a thumping margin- on turnout its a lot of people. Turnout higher than most GE's.

basically it is a big enough margin to make arguing about whether it is enough look like sour losing, rather than a reasonable point.

 

[editor]

And you could say the same for "remain".

Yes. And that's why the fucking thing should never have happened in the way that it did. How can you ask people to vote on their future when no one's bothered to offer anything approaching a rational analysis of what impact the decision will have on their lives?

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Half of their joint work now seems to be managing philanthropy as a tax-avoidance strategy. Oddly enough they direct a lot of this bountifulesque stuff to the Margaret Thatcher Infirmary.

Yeah saw that and felt quite ill. Not ill enough to be admitted, thank fuck.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Gina Miller, look her up, right Bobby Dazzler. Her husband (another hedge fund cunt) said of his last divorce that it would have been cheaper to run his ex-wife over than pay her what's owed.

Both cunts are major supporters of Thatcher's institute as well.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

How can you ask people to vote on their future when no one's bothered to offer anything approaching a rational analysis of what impact the decision will have on their lives?

We ask everyone to do that every 5 years.

 

[editor]

We ask everyone to do that every 5 years.

Nice bon mot but that's not really comparable, is it?

 

[Raheem]

We ask everyone to do that every 5 years.

And, naturally, we spend the intervening time deriding anyone who doesn't support the government in everything it does as "sore losers".

 

[DotCommunist]

I see the groan is going through a state-the-bleedin-obvious moment

It also risks driving an even bigger wedge between leavers and remainers, particularly since the leavers are likely to interpret this as one more desperate attempt by the Metropolitan liberal elite to thwart the will of the people (a suspicion that is going to shape the thinking of a lot of MPs)

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Nice bon mot but that's not really comparable, is it?

So you if you voted Labour at the last GE you did so for the farrago that is the current Labour party, yeah? Cos that was on the table?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

We ask everyone to do that every 5 years.

Different kind of thing though. That's a vote intended to create a parliament and give it a set period in which to make a bunch of decisions, after which, they have to come back and defend those decisions in order to win another mandate. Those making the decisions are, theoretically at least, held accountable for the consequences of those decisions.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Different kind of thing though. That's a vote intended to create a parliament and give it a set period in which to make a bunch of decisions, after which, they have to come back and defend those decisions in order to win another mandate. Those making the decisions are, theoretically at least, held accountable for the consequences of those decisions.

That wasn't what was being asked. ed stated that you can't ask people to vote unless they know upfront what the affect of that vote will be on their lives.

 

[rutabowa]

And, naturally, we spend the intervening time deriding anyone who doesn't support the government in everything it does as "sore losers".

No, "sore losers" would be those who spent the intervening time questioning whether the winning party did actually win the election.

Do whatever you want, support or oppose whatever you want, but you've got to accept that "leave" won the referendum.

 

[Raheem]

No, "sore losers" would be those who spent the intervening time questioning whether the winning party did actually win the election.

So, that's pretty much no-one.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

That wasn't what was being asked. ed stated that you can't ask people to vote unless they know upfront what the affect of that vote will be on their lives.

The principle is that you can 'boot them out' after five years if you think you've made a mistake. There's no such provision in this referendum. It is a different kind of thing, and I think ed has a point. We knew what 'remain' meant - basically, as you were, carry on. But 'leave'? What did that mean? What does it mean now? There was no proposed course of action by which to judge the effects on your life. And virtually everything said on the issue by both sides of the official campaigns was lies.

 

[rutabowa]

We knew what 'remain' meant - basically, as you were, carry on.

I'm not sure this is true.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I'm not sure this is true.

It was the 'no change' option.

I'm not going to quibble over the result of the referendum, but the campaigns and level of debate, from both sides, were dismal. And we have people like Johnson and Fox now in govt directing brexit and not being held to account for the particular bunch of lies they told, with no real democratic option to call them on it.

 

[butchersapron]

I think that a big part of what drove the leave vote was precisely not knowing what remain meant given the massive changes that were slyly and undemocratically introduced after the first referendum - effectively turning a limited economic semi-union into an attempted political union with no popular participation or democratic input. A lot of people did not think remain meant remain as status quo - because they had the example of the past.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

But 'leave'? What did that mean? What does it mean now?

It means leave.

No longer be a member of the European Union.

OK?

 

[brogdale]

for fucks sake

Tory MP calls for BBC 1 to mark Brexit with national anthem at the end of each day

"
Conservative MP is calling for BBC 1 to restore the tradition of playing the national anthem at the end of each day’s programmes, in honour of Brexit.
Andrew Rosindell, the MP for Romford, said the BBC should be "unashamedly British" and celebrate the UK's exit from the EU with a clear statement that "Britain is back."
He has tabled an early day motion this morning calling for the anthem to be played before the switch over to BBC News 24.
It is the Tory MP's second attempt to restore the practice in Parliament, since it was scrapped in 1997. "

severed head on a stick front runner right there

Friend of mine was unlucky enough to go through sec. school with this clown; said he was genuinely limited.

 

[hot air baboon]

I'm not sure this is true.

...neither do I ..infact its the heart of the whole campaign...do you want your mystery-tour coach-driver to be someone you can dump at the next service station if they start weaving all over the road and going the wrong way up an exit or someone locked inside a bullet-proof pilot's cabin...

 

[brogdale]

It means leave.

No longer be a member of the European Union.

OK?

Unless you represent a globalised, manufacturing corporation; then you can be assured that Brexit does not mean Brexit. Costly, but true.

 

[Pickman's model]

It was the 'no change' option.

I'm not going to quibble over the result of the referendum, but the campaigns and level of debate, from both sides, were dismal. And we have people like Johnson and Fox now in govt directing brexit and not being held to account for the particular bunch of lies they told, with no real democratic option to call them on it.

yeh. you won't quibble with the result of the referendum but you will quibble over the position of people like johnson and fox. you won't quibble over the major issue but you will quibble over the minor one. that's you all over.