|
Post by shrewder on Jun 26, 2016 16:05:30 GMT 1
The lesson from all this MPs are paid to govern the country and make all the big decisions. Putting such decisions in the hands of the electorate will probably always get the decision which is not in the best interests of the country. MP's are there to represent the people who elected them and their views. As has been shown the majority of MP's are out of touch with their voters. They need to change this and quickly. So in other words you are saying out is the right decision!!!
|
|
tosalop
Shropshire County League
Posts: 33
|
Post by tosalop on Jun 26, 2016 16:08:53 GMT 1
MP's are there to represent the people who elected them and their views. As has been shown the majority of MP's are out of touch with their voters. They need to change this and quickly. You mean all 52% of voters who wanted to leave Europe? 48% most MP'S were in tune with on this subject If you look at all the political parties who were campaigning I'd estimate 85% of politicians were in the remain camp. 48% and 52% were the voting public hence my comment.
|
|
|
Post by shrewder on Jun 26, 2016 16:17:31 GMT 1
You mean all 52% of voters who wanted to leave Europe? 48% most MP'S were in tune with on this subject If you look at all the political parties who were campaigning I'd estimate 85% of politicians were in the remain camp. 48% and 52% were the voting public hence my comment.
So I get what your saying. MPs should always represent the views of the voters even if it is damaging to the country and the economy.
|
|
|
Post by SouthStandShrew on Jun 26, 2016 16:31:40 GMT 1
Anyone seen George Osborne?
|
|
tosalop
Shropshire County League
Posts: 33
|
Post by tosalop on Jun 26, 2016 16:34:35 GMT 1
I of course see your point Shrewder and you hopefully mine. Perhaps we should have more referendums as its given the people a chance to have their say without being bound to one political party? If so I might suggest we start on something not quite as important next time...
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 26, 2016 16:45:35 GMT 1
I think that is the reason why a good few folk in the shires voted the way they did. To shake things up a bit. Many people feel that they have been left behind. They wanted change. I think a fair few won't be too unhappy to see the chaos unfold. Bet the good farming community in the Shires didn't vote to leave . Many exist solely because of the subsidies they receive from the EU. which is not inconsiderable . Dont see how those who felt " left behind " will feel any better when the cost of living rises , the NHS suffers and their local authorities begin to review their budget settlements and cut even more of the essential services they provide . What we don't need in this period of transition is chaos . If Cameron had held his nerve , faced down those on his back benches who were against anything eminating from Europe and not offered a referendum , we wouldn't be in this mess . Of course he thought he would win the " remain " referendum . How wrong he was leading to his own resignation, the Country out of Europe and every possibilty that Scotland will leave the Union . Another worry for those voting to leave the EU is the question of our border. Does it start in Calais or in Dover ? The chaos is certainly unfolding but not in the way anyone with an ounce of sense would want to witness . During the period of our exit and the task of unraveling how we would continue we need a cross party consensus . How are we going to achieve this when both major parties are in such a state of flux, it's disasterous for all of us . The more I think about it the more depressed I become . Come on our kid!! Where's that British spunk!! Some farmers did for sure. No idea how many but some did for sure as I caught something on the box the other week where they were interviewing folk and their intentions at the referendum. One or two farmers interviewed said they would be voting to leave despite the subsidies because they believe they would do better out of the EU. If indeed the cost of living rises , the NHS suffers and their local authorities begin to review their budget settlements and cut even more of the essential services they provide for the years ahead then you might be right, they won't feel any better. But lets wait and see. Obviously many people weren't happy with their lot, didn't think their voice was being heard. Will they come to regret it. Who knows. If Scotland leaves the union then so be it. I won't lose any sleep over it and I suspect that goes for many others in England and Wales. They should do what they deem best for them. The question of EU membership was never going to go away. Cameron obviously wanted to get it out of the way and done with but miscalculated massively (and no surprise that he did considering most politicians seem to be living in some bubble and haven't got a clue about the strength of feeling around the country). Bit until this was concluded one way or the other it would have continued to dominate UK politics (the measure of feeling was pretty clear in the turnout). Sure we can blame Cameron but throughout this I am more concerned by the fact that so many felt that the EU wan't worth belonging to. That so many deemed it expendable ain't on Cameron alone. You are right about the political turmoil not being the best situation currently but hopefully that will be resolved soon and they can start working on a amicable withdrawal and a future outside the EU. Easy for me to say this over here of course but let me just say this...it's been a couple of days hasn't it? Lets wait and see. It could well go tits up big time. It may not. I don't think anyone can be sure 100% can they?
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 26, 2016 16:48:50 GMT 1
Which parts is he talking out of his arse? Specifics please... "...undemocratic, neoliberal, corrupt and a bad foreign policy actor in a dangerous world." Because this is his default position on pretty much any modern democracy, which not only ignores pragmatic politics, but also geo-political and socio-economic factors around Europe and the rest of the world. He is so entrenched in his own political dogma he can't see over the parapet and see the world for what it is. It's all very well posting links like this, but you need to understand the context and political position he writing from. Tend to play the ball meself Nicko rather than the man. Lets agree to disagree. I dread to think where this thread would go if we started to dissect that little lot. The article itself is long enough.
|
|
|
Post by shrewder on Jun 26, 2016 16:57:27 GMT 1
I of course see your point Shrewder and you hopefully mine. Perhaps we should have more referendums as its given the people a chance to have their say without being bound to one political party? If so I might suggest we start on something not quite as important next time... I see your point as well. More referendums would lead to chaos. You only needed to be on public transport on Friday and listen to some of the conversations. A huge part of the electorate hadn't got a clue about the implications of how they voted. If some spent more time watching the news and reading a broad range of newspapers instead of following the antics of plastic so called celebrities on reality TV, they may have been able to have made a more informed decision on the referendum. There I have had my rant.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2016 17:06:43 GMT 1
"...undemocratic, neoliberal, corrupt and a bad foreign policy actor in a dangerous world." Because this is his default position on pretty much any modern democracy, which not only ignores pragmatic politics, but also geo-political and socio-economic factors around Europe and the rest of the world. He is so entrenched in his own political dogma he can't see over the parapet and see the world for what it is. It's all very well posting links like this, but you need to understand the context and political position he writing from. Tend to play the ball meself Nicko rather than the man. Lets agree to disagree. I dread to think where this thread would go if we started to dissect that little lot. The article itself is long enough. But I am playing the ball. He talks about being a Social Democrat, but he's actually advocating revolutionary socialism by suggesting leaving the EU and becoming 'internationalist' in a Neo-Liberal world. He's basically expounding his own political and economic theory, while ignoring the pragmatic geo-political situation. And look, you stared this by asking me to explain myself when I said he was talking out of his @rse.
|
|
|
Post by thesensationaljt on Jun 26, 2016 17:07:17 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by The Shropshire Tenor on Jun 26, 2016 17:12:24 GMT 1
how many people round the country vote purely for the party. Most people I would suggest. Very few vote for the candidate as a person Agreed, but that's not the fundamental principle of our parliamentary democracy, which is that we elect an MP to represent our constituency. It's therefore legitimate to call it ridiculous that people elect someone that many deem unfit for the job. The alternative is to scr@p the constituency principle, or base it on regional representatives, as we do/did for our MEPs. I guess the original point was that if a sub standard MP is elected in a safe seat it's very difficult to get rid of him/her. I also live in a very safe constituency, our MP is not an idiot and is popular among the Tory majority in the area. However, I believe that the fact that his seat is so safe is a problem for democracy in that the opposition parties do not bother to put any effort into contesting the seat in elections. During the past 2 general elections I have been to meetings in which there have been debates between the candidates and the sitting MP has wiped the floor with his opponents. This was to be expected as he's a career politician wirh 19 years as an MP and debate is his job. The other candidates were a nurse, a schoolteacher and a local businessman. His opponents were obvious cannon fodder as their parties knew they had no chance and so weren't going to put their best people into a hopeless contest. The result is that there is no credible challenge to the sitting MP.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2016 17:23:16 GMT 1
Agreed, but that's not the fundamental principle of our parliamentary democracy, which is that we elect an MP to represent our constituency. It's therefore legitimate to call it ridiculous that people elect someone that many deem unfit for the job. The alternative is to scr@p the constituency principle, or base it on regional representatives, as we do/did for our MEPs. I guess the original point was that if a sub standard MP is elected in a safe seat it's very difficult to get rid of him/her. I also live in a very safe constituency, our MP is not an idiot and is popular among the Tory majority in the area. However, I believe that the fact that his seat is so safe is a problem for democracy in that the opposition parties do not bother to put any effort into contesting the seat in elections. During the past 2 general elections I have been to meetings in which there have been debates between the candidates and the sitting MP has wiped the floor with his opponents. This was to be expected as he's a career politician wirh 19 years as an MP and debate is his job. The other candidates were a nurse, a schoolteacher and a local businessman. His opponents were obvious cannon fodder as their parties knew they had no chance and so weren't going to put their best people into a hopeless contest. The result is that there is no credible challenge to the sitting MP. Maybe the time has come again to agitate for a proper alternative to FPTP. That will really change lives for the better, not leaving the EU.
|
|
|
Post by MartinB on Jun 26, 2016 17:25:12 GMT 1
You mean all 52% of voters who wanted to leave Europe? 48% most MP'S were in tune with on this subject If you look at all the political parties who were campaigning I'd estimate 85% of politicians were in the remain camp. 48% and 52% were the voting public hence my comment.
no you are saying the MP'S are out of tune with the public. Only 52% of the public voted to leave to EU. In fact 44 million could have voted, only 38% of that number voted to leave the EU so tough to say MP'S were out of tune. Had there been a bigger majority I could agree with you
|
|
|
Post by thesensationaljt on Jun 26, 2016 17:35:04 GMT 1
I see the referendum to have another go at getting the "right" result is going well. It's under investigation after 39,000 registered their address as Vatican City, which has a population of just 800. Also, well done to the 23,000 from North Korea who've taken part!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2016 17:55:46 GMT 1
Bet the good farming community in the Shires didn't vote to leave . Many exist solely because of the subsidies they receive from the EU. which is not inconsiderable . Dont see how those who felt " left behind " will feel any better when the cost of living rises , the NHS suffers and their local authorities begin to review their budget settlements and cut even more of the essential services they provide . What we don't need in this period of transition is chaos . If Cameron had held his nerve , faced down those on his back benches who were against anything eminating from Europe and not offered a referendum , we wouldn't be in this mess . Of course he thought he would win the " remain " referendum . How wrong he was leading to his own resignation, the Country out of Europe and every possibilty that Scotland will leave the Union . Another worry for those voting to leave the EU is the question of our border. Does it start in Calais or in Dover ? The chaos is certainly unfolding but not in the way anyone with an ounce of sense would want to witness . During the period of our exit and the task of unraveling how we would continue we need a cross party consensus . How are we going to achieve this when both major parties are in such a state of flux, it's disasterous for all of us . The more I think about it the more depressed I become . Come on our kid!! Where's that British spunk!! Some farmers did for sure. No idea how many but some did for sure as I caught something on the box the other week where they were interviewing folk and their intentions at the referendum. One or two farmers interviewed said they would be voting to leave despite the subsidies because they believe they would do better out of the EU. If indeed the cost of living rises , the NHS suffers and their local authorities begin to review their budget settlements and cut even more of the essential services they provide for the years ahead then you might be right, they won't feel any better. But lets wait and see. Obviously many people weren't happy with their lot, didn't think their voice was being heard. Will they come to regret it. Who knows. If Scotland leaves the union then so be it. I won't lose any sleep over it and I suspect that goes for many others in England and Wales. They should do what they deem best for them. The question of EU membership was never going to go away. Cameron obviously wanted to get it out of the way and done with but miscalculated massively (and no surprise that he did considering most politicians seem to be living in some bubble and haven't got a clue about the strength of feeling around the country). Bit until this was concluded one way or the other it would have continued to dominate UK politics (the measure of feeling was pretty clear in the turnout). Sure we can blame Cameron but throughout this I am more concerned by the fact that so many felt that the EU wan't worth belonging to. That so many deemed it expendable ain't on Cameron alone. You are right about the political turmoil not being the best situation currently but hopefully that will be resolved soon and they can start working on a amicable withdrawal and a future outside the EU. Easy for me to say this over here of course but let me just say this...it's been a couple of days hasn't it? Lets wait and see. It could well go tits up big time. It may not. I don't think anyone can be sure 100% can they? No, you're right . I will try and cultivate a more optimistic view of our future outside of the EU. The second referendum campaign is growing although it is now being investigated for fraud . 77,000 names have been removed as bogus and yet , as I type this yet another shadow minister has resigned making 7 in all. No one can be 100% sure that everything will work out but over here the situation is changing hourly. Oh s**t, I'm feeling depressed again .
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 26, 2016 17:57:24 GMT 1
Tend to play the ball meself Nicko rather than the man. Lets agree to disagree. I dread to think where this thread would go if we started to dissect that little lot. The article itself is long enough. But I am playing the ball. He talks about being a Social Democrat, but he's actually advocating revolutionary socialism by suggesting leaving the EU and becoming 'internationalist' in a Neo-Liberal world. He's basically expounding his own political and economic theory, while ignoring the pragmatic geo-political situation. And look, you stared this by asking me to explain myself when I said he was talking out of his @rse. Sure. OK. I just don't think he is talking out of his arse when discussing the flaws and fallacies that he lists. I think it provides some very good and relevant information on the EU that I think people should understand better.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Jun 26, 2016 18:42:22 GMT 1
Won't he just run again and get back in though if they try to get rid of him? Labour are in a bigger mess than the tories and that takes some doing. Labour are in a bigger mess than the Tories because Labour tends to do its blood letting with a cudgel rather than a dagger. There will be two parliamentary labour parties by the end of the week. Corbyn will be bypassed and it is by no means clear that his name will be on a future ballot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2016 18:45:15 GMT 1
But I am playing the ball. He talks about being a Social Democrat, but he's actually advocating revolutionary socialism by suggesting leaving the EU and becoming 'internationalist' in a Neo-Liberal world. He's basically expounding his own political and economic theory, while ignoring the pragmatic geo-political situation. And look, you stared this by asking me to explain myself when I said he was talking out of his @rse. Sure. OK. I just don't think he is talking out of his arse when discussing the flaws and fallacies that he lists. I think it provides some very good and relevant information on the EU that I think people should understand better. It's a one-eyed view heavily influenced by his own political dogma, he's no better than Farage in that matter. As a Social Democrat he's ignored that overall the standard of living has increased for Europeans and that Europeans can travel freely to facilitate that better standard of living. But mainly he's talking out of his @rse because his alternative is a pipe dream and we shouldn't have been voting over pipe dreams. Just hard headed reality.
|
|
|
Post by another fine mess on Jun 26, 2016 19:04:42 GMT 1
What a hysterical bunch some “remainders” are. Of course there’s been some upheaval; who was so naïve that they thought there wouldn’t be? Markets like certainty. The FTSE finished 3% down but is up vs the start of the month and the pound is down to the level (against the dollar) it was at in February. The sky hasn’t fallen in.
The EU is fast assuming the same sort of mythical status as a former Shrewsbury Town player whose flaws are immediately forgotten once he has gone.
Europeans are saying that this is a wake-up call for the EU and that it has to reform. They recognise that we’ve left a broken institution that has failed its members and which is underperforming. Mourn its loss by all means but don’t kid yourself that it was great. Jeremy Corbyn’s 7.5 out of 10 rating was honest and generous (albeit tactically unwise).
Some of the condescending, ageist and bitter complaints I’ve read (not all on here by the way) from some “remainders” are typical of the attitudes that caused so many ordinary people to feel isolated and ignored in the first place.
How about we all accept the democratic decision of the referendum, show some dignity, resist the urge to panic and get on with it?
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 26, 2016 19:07:39 GMT 1
Sure. OK. I just don't think he is talking out of his arse when discussing the flaws and fallacies that he lists. I think it provides some very good and relevant information on the EU that I think people should understand better. It's a one-eyed view heavily influenced by his own political dogma. But what he includes in that article with regards to the flaws and fallacies he lists is correct or? That is the EU and how it functions. Or not? What information do you have that shows what he has included (and what he references) to be incorrect? Just because you may not like where this chap is coming from (and Farage too) doesn't mean that what they say is not correct. Play the ball, not the man.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2016 20:03:05 GMT 1
What a hysterical bunch some “remainders” are. Of course there’s been some upheaval; who was so naïve that they thought there wouldn’t be? Markets like certainty. The FTSE finished 3% down but is up vs the start of the month and the pound is down to the level (against the dollar) it was at in February. The sky hasn’t fallen in. The EU is fast assuming the same sort of mythical status as a former Shrewsbury Town player whose flaws are immediately forgotten once he has gone. Europeans are saying that this is a wake-up call for the EU and that it has to reform. They recognise that we’ve left a broken institution that has failed its members and which is underperforming. Mourn its loss by all means but don’t kid yourself that it was great. Jeremy Corbyn’s 7.5 out of 10 rating was honest and generous (albeit tactically unwise). Some of the condescending, ageist and bitter complaints I’ve read (not all on here by the way) from some “remainders” are typical of the attitudes that caused so many ordinary people to feel isolated and ignored in the first place. How about we all accept the democratic decision of the referendum, show some dignity, resist the urge to panic and get on with it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2016 20:06:42 GMT 1
Well said. Couldn't agree more
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2016 20:16:31 GMT 1
It's a one-eyed view heavily influenced by his own political dogma. But what he includes in that article with regards to the flaws and fallacies he lists is correct or? That is the EU and how it functions. Or not? What information do you have that shows what he has included (and what he references) to be incorrect? Just because you may not like where this chap is coming from (and Farage too) doesn't mean that what they say is not correct. Play the ball, not the man. Either you haven't read what I've and others have explained up thread, or you have willfully ignored it. Nobody has denied that he EU isn't flawed, but he just concentrates on the flaws based on his own political theory cherry picking qoutes to back up his argument and because he's an academic we're supposed accept what he says is correct. He willfully ignores that the standard of living, overall has improved, that the health, safety and welfare of workers has improved, that we can buy cheap consumer goods. The EU match funds training to improve the lives of workers and we can move around the EU to find even better opportunities. It's not so much that I don't like where Johnson is coming from, that his is a biased argument based around his Marxist/Trot beliefs and the offering of a pipe dream as an alternative. And there's the fundamental problem Political theorists like Johnson. They write academic papers on how Democracy should work, while the rest of us live the reality of finding secure work to secure decent standard of living. In short that thesis you posted is dishonest.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 26, 2016 20:31:40 GMT 1
But what he includes in that article with regards to the flaws and fallacies he lists is correct or? That is the EU and how it functions. Or not? What information do you have that shows what he has included (and what he references) to be incorrect? Just because you may not like where this chap is coming from (and Farage too) doesn't mean that what they say is not correct. Play the ball, not the man. Either you haven't read what I've and others have explained up thread, or you have willfully ignored it. Nobody has denied that he EU isn't flawed, but he just concentrates on the flaws based on his own political theory cherry picking qoutes to back up his argument and because he's an academic we're supposed accept what he says is correct. He willfully ignores that the standard of living, overall has improved, that the health, safety and welfare of workers has improved, that we can buy cheap consumer goods. The EU match funds training to improve the lives of workers and we can move around the EU to find even better opportunities. It's not so much that I don't like where Johnson is coming from, that his is a biased argument based around his Marxist/Trot beliefs and the offering of a pipe dream as an alternative. And there's the fundamental problem Political theorists like Johnson. They write academic papers on how Democracy should work, while the rest of us live the reality of finding secure work to secure decent standard of living. In short that thesis you posted is dishonest. He voted leave. He was asked to pen why. He put this together (and he suggests hurriedly). He is providing the reasons why he decided to vote leave. He did so because he believes the EU is flawed. He then went on to explain how. If you can disprove anything that he has said or has referenced then by all means explain where and how and we can then talk about being dishonest. Is anything he has included or referenced incorrect? I think you need to consider the focus of this article. The reason why he penned it. Most people when explaining why they voted one way or the other will most certainly focus exclusively on those reasons. And I disagree with this 'Nobody has denied that he EU isn't flawed'. There are people I speak to who think the EU can do no wrong. It would seem to me that many people aren't fully aware on how the EU functions. And I think that the EU very much counts on that. There is absolutely no harm in pointing out it's flaws and any fallacies surrounding it. No harm in more people being aware of such things.
|
|
|
Post by thatcherschild on Jun 26, 2016 20:42:48 GMT 1
I think you mean "have surfaced from THEIR hole in the ground again." And to think that your mother was Secretary of State for Education! If anyone could endure trawling through this character's past posts (I know, I know, three lifetimes would be too short for spending time on that), you'd find corrections of other people's spelling & grammar. I wouldn't bother doing it but I love how uppity they get when the mirror's held up to them. Hmmm,so you must have trawled through my posts to find said corrections? Very very creepy. you sound a strange kind of person with an obviuosly exciting lifestyle (not) to have time to go through people's posts...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2016 21:01:32 GMT 1
Either you haven't read what I've and others have explained up thread, or you have willfully ignored it. Nobody has denied that he EU isn't flawed, but he just concentrates on the flaws based on his own political theory cherry picking qoutes to back up his argument and because he's an academic we're supposed accept what he says is correct. He willfully ignores that the standard of living, overall has improved, that the health, safety and welfare of workers has improved, that we can buy cheap consumer goods. The EU match funds training to improve the lives of workers and we can move around the EU to find even better opportunities. It's not so much that I don't like where Johnson is coming from, that his is a biased argument based around his Marxist/Trot beliefs and the offering of a pipe dream as an alternative. And there's the fundamental problem Political theorists like Johnson. They write academic papers on how Democracy should work, while the rest of us live the reality of finding secure work to secure decent standard of living. In short that thesis you posted is dishonest. He voted leave. He was asked to pen why. He put this together (and he suggests hurriedly). He is providing the reasons why he decided to vote leave. He did so because he believes the EU is flawed. He then went on to explain how. If you can disprove anything that he has said or has referenced then by all means explain where and how and we can then talk about being dishonest. Is anything he has included or referenced incorrect? I think you need to consider the focus of this article. The reason why he penned it. Most people when explaining why they voted one way or the other will most certainly focus exclusively on those reasons. And I disagree with this 'Nobody has denied that he EU isn't flawed'. There are people I speak to who think the EU can do no wrong. It would seem to me that many people aren't fully aware on how the EU functions. And I think that the EU very much counts on that. There is absolutely no harm in pointing out it's flaws and any fallacies surrounding it. No harm in more people being aware of such things. It's not hurriedly put together, like I said it's his default position. He was involved with this in 2006. eustonmanifesto.org/the-euston-manifesto/Like I said, before reading that we have to understand his politics and position and treat it with caution. I find it unusual that a self proclaimed Socialist ignores the benefits that the EU has brought to millions of workers. But anyway here's more balanced view of how democratic, or not the EU is, or isn't. theconversation.com/how-democratic-is-the-european-union-59419Or this. researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP14-25/. Which leads with this qoute. “While the real, philosophical, ideal or essential meaning of democracy remains the same, the actual practice of democracy may be said to be in the eye of the beholder”. Daniel Tetteh OsabuKle, Carleton University, 2002
|
|
|
Post by frankwellshrews on Jun 26, 2016 23:02:13 GMT 1
A large part of the leave campaign was built around the idea that the fears and concerns of a certain demographic shouldn't be trivialised. How many times did we hear "it's not racist to be concerned about immigration"?
Valid point, but the same works both ways.
Leave now need to come out and reassure remainers. Many people, myself included, have genuine concerns about the property market, jobs, university for their kids, pensions, etc.
So far, leave have managed to contradict two of the main planks of their campaign strategy and failed to offer even a token element of reassurance, with one leave mp even going on record as saying "there is no plan." It's hardly surprising people are seeing this as a crisis to be honest.
For my part, I sincerely hope we get EU ref two or, better yet, the next PM after a snap election ignores the result. 37% is no mandate for a decision of this magnitude.
When all's said and done, the referendum is a glorified opinion poll. Cameron's genius here was not to invoke article 50 himself but put the responsibility for pushing the red button on to BoJo. Judging by the way he's been walking around looking like he's just seen a ghost, the prospect of being a Brexit pm is a lot less appealing now he's got that on his conscience.
|
|
|
Post by Bordershrew on Jun 26, 2016 23:08:41 GMT 1
For my part, I sincerely hope we get EU ref two or, better yet, the next PM after a snap election ignores the result. 37% is no mandate for a decision of this magnitude. And if the result was the opposite of what happened would you be supporting another referendum? Career suicide if any MP tried to block what the majority of voters want, although I see that idiot Lammy wants to try.
|
|
|
Post by frankwellshrews on Jun 26, 2016 23:14:03 GMT 1
To be honest, if leave could achieve a real majority I'd feel a lot more comfortable accepting the result. Farage himself said a 52 48 win for remain would be "unfinished business."
As it is, it just feels yet again like minority rule. I suspect David Lammy will be the tip of the iceberg particularly if the government can't get its act together.
Also, the wave of hate crime over the weekend is hardly helping. Leave need to do something before this dissolves into a toxic mess.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2016 23:20:15 GMT 1
|
|