PM Boris forms a government

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Maybe they are worried about those that didn't vote or the increasing number that have changed their mind.

oh look, here it is again. The strongest and most important argument against the 'vote of the century'

Originally Posted by Mr K

Ermmm, Boris?

---------- Post added at 09:42 ---------- Previous post was at 09:39 ----------



Maybe they are worried about those that didn't vote or the increasing number that have changed their mind. Even those that voted yes weren't expecting the chaos of no deal, no one suggested that at the time.

There is no increasing number that have changed their mind.

The only chaos being caused is by pathetic Remainers, trying to overturn the result. Those who didn’t vote, that were eligible, don’t matter, they had the chance and if they blew it when they sat on their arses and couldn’t be bothered.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Ermmm, Boris?.

Boris is the leader of the party with the most MP’s in the Commons, as of the last election.

He was elected by the members of that party to lead it.

If Corbyn does the same, no argument.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Boris is the leader of the party with the most MP’s in the Commons, as of the last election.

He was elected by the members of that party to lead it.

If Corbyn does the same, no argument.

Difference being Boris wasn't leader of his party at the last election, when the public knew which Muppet would end up being PM.

---------- Post added at 07:21 ---------- Previous post was at 07:13 ----------

Originally Posted by Mick

There is no increasing number that have changed their mind.

The only chaos being caused is by pathetic Remainers, trying to overturn the result. Those who didn’t vote, that were eligible, don’t matter, they had the chance and if they blew it when they sat on their arses and couldn’t be bothered.

Theres been enough of a change.
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/question...ould-you-vote/

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Mick

There is no increasing number that have changed their mind.

The only chaos being caused is by pathetic Remainers, trying to overturn the result. Those who didn’t vote, that were eligible, don’t matter, they had the chance and if they blew it when they sat on their arses and couldn’t be bothered.

But nobody who wants to leave is confident enough to put that to the test.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Difference being Boris wasn't leader of his party at the last election, when the public knew which Muppet would end up being PM.

---------- Post added at 07:21 ---------- Previous post was at 07:13 ----------



Theres been enough of a change.
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/question...ould-you-vote/

No one asked me. I voted remain and now would vote leave. So did and would Mrs Pierre.

I suspect we’re not alone.

---------- Post added at 08:11 ---------- Previous post was at 08:10 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

But nobody who wants to leave is confident enough to put that to the test.

I’ve always advocated that I would be happy to re-run the Referendum on the exact same question.

I believe the result would be the same or too close to be definitive.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

But nobody who wants to leave is confident enough to put that to the test.

The problem with re-running the referendum is that a lot of people will protest and stay at home, because they feel that they have already answered the question. That might well lead to a different result, but it would not mean a vote to remain (with that lower turnout) amounted to a change of mind.

People were promised that the result would be implemeented. I am surprised that so many people are happy for promises to be broken.

Originally Posted by jfman

But nobody who wants to leave is confident enough to put that to the test.

Morally, this is about as valid as Biff Tannen asking Marty McFly if he’s chicken.

We’re making no demand beyond that which was promised in 2016: that the result be respected. The result has not been implemented. We must leave, as promised. If that doesn’t work out then why not start campaigning for a referendum on joining?

Nothing, incidentally, has changed since 2016 in our knowledge of what leaving looks like, except for what we have “learned” thanks to the machinations of an EU, a UK civil service and a cabinet made predominantly of people who didn’t want us to leave. We haven’t actually left so there’s no valid reason for holding a new vote on the same question.

Originally Posted by Chris

Morally, this is about as valid as Biff Tannen asking Marty McFly if he’s chicken.

We’re making no demand beyond that which was promised in 2016: that the result be respected. The result has not been implemented. We must leave, as promised. If that doesn’t work out then why not start campaigning for a referendum on joining?

Nothing, incidentally, has changed since 2016 in our knowledge of what leaving looks like, except for what we have “learned” thanks to the machinations of an EU, a UK civil service and a cabinet made predominantly of people who didn’t want us to leave. We haven’t actually left so there’s no valid reason for holding a new vote on the same question.

Not true - we have learned that we will be stockpiling food, medicines, reserving cross-Channel ferry capacity and specialist warehousing and stockpiling space, hiring more Border Force officers, having contingency plans to manage bottlenecks in freight traffic, spending around £130m on a huge public information campaign, and under Operation Yellowhammer, the MOD will have 3,500 troops available for deployment if needed.

We didn’t know that in 2016...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47652280

Originally Posted by Hugh

Not true - we have learned that we will be stockpiling food, medicines, reserving cross-Channel ferry capacity and specialist warehousing and stockpiling space, hiring more Border Force officers, having contingency plans to manage bottlenecks in freight traffic, spending around £130m on a huge public information campaign, and under Operation Yellowhammer, the MOD will have 3,500 troops available for deployment if needed.

We didn’t know that in 2016...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47652280

Quite. And I’m certain that none of the details of the worst case planning for the transition period ... the transition, not, notably, our life permanently outside the EU ... have in any way been used to insinuate that this is what being a non-member looks like and therefore we should all vote to remain instead.

We don’t know what being by far the largest European economy outside the EU is like, because we’ve not been there yet. We can - and have - debated the risks and the possibilities, all of which resulted in the leave vote in 2016.

When we have been permanently outside for a while, if it’s truly awful and, somehow, unlike every other non-EU state in the world we have permanently to worry about stockpiling essentials, then perhaps is the time to start arguing for a referendum on joining the EU. Before we get there, all we have is an argument based on deception, which is awfully rich coming from those who complain that the leave vote was carried in that way.

Originally Posted by Hugh

Not true - we have learned that we will be stockpiling food, medicines, reserving cross-Channel ferry capacity and specialist warehousing and stockpiling space, hiring more Border Force officers, having contingency plans to manage bottlenecks in freight traffic, spending around £130m on a huge public information campaign, and under Operation Yellowhammer, the MOD will have 3,500 troops available for deployment if needed.

We didn’t know that in 2016...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47652280

Yes we did - all that kind of crap came out before and it is still fear mongering nonsense!

Would always ALWAYS vote to leave the corrupt and cancerous EU every time because we have the right to live in a independent country, shame on you for believing that we need the EU when we certainly do not.

---------- Post added at 14:15 ---------- Previous post was at 14:13 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

But nobody who wants to leave is confident enough to put that to the test.

We should not have to - one vote is enough, the democratic decision in 2016 must be enacted, enough of demanding second and third votes so you can throw your toys out the pram and can keep trying to get the result you want.
Pathetic!

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Chris

Quite. And I’m certain that none of the details of the worst case planning for the transition period ... the transition, not, notably, our life permanently outside the EU ... have in any way been used to insinuate that this is what being a non-member looks like and therefore we should all vote to remain instead.

We don’t know what being by far the largest European economy outside the EU is like, because we’ve not been there yet. We can - and have - debated the risks and the possibilities, all of which resulted in the leave vote in 2016.

When we have been permanently outside for a while, if it’s truly awful and, somehow, unlike every other non-EU state in the world we have permanently to worry about stockpiling essentials, then perhaps is the time to start arguing for a referendum on joining the EU. Before we get there, all we have is an argument based on deception, which is awfully rich coming from those who complain that the leave vote was carried in that way.

Lol, I think the EU would tell us where to go if we asked to rejoin !

---------- Post added at 15:25 ---------- Previous post was at 15:22 ----------

Originally Posted by Mick

Yes we did - all that kind of crap came out before and it is still fear mongering nonsense!

Don't know who you listened to Mick, no one suggested anything about a no deal chaos.

Project Fear might just prove to be something we can only dream of.

Originally Posted by Mick

Yes we did - all that kind of crap came out before and it is still fear mongering nonsense!

Would always ALWAYS vote to leave the corrupt and cancerous EU every time because we have the right to live in a independent country, shame on you for believing that we need the EU when we certainly do not.

---------- Post added at 14:15 ---------- Previous post was at 14:13 ----------



We should not have to - one vote is enough, the democratic decision in 2016 must be enacted, enough of demanding second and third votes so you can throw your toys out the pram and can keep trying to get the result you want.
Pathetic!

How can it be "fear mongering nonsense" if it’s actually happening? (all these things are part of the U.K. Government’s contingency planning - these things have been budgeted for and are being put in place).

Originally Posted by Hugh

How can it be "fear mongering nonsense" if it’s actually happening? (all these things are part of the U.K. Government’s contingency planning - these things have been budgeted for and are being put in place).

Perhaps, as I suggested earlier, it’s not that it’s being planned for that’s the problem, but that worst-case transition planning is being deliberately conflated with preparation for the permanent impoverishment of the country.

Life outside the EU is a long term prospect, not to be confused with the short-term complications of leaving - at least some of which are perhaps more complicated than they might have needed to be, given the disposition of both sides of the negotiations from 2016 until very recently.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

How can it be "fear mongering nonsense" if it’s actually happening? (all these things are part of the U.K. Government’s contingency planning - these things have been budgeted for and are being put in place).

All the things you list may be required for a time as we transition out of the EU. They will not be the permanent new arrangement and if they happened would be temporary if needed at all.

So to list these things and propose them, as you seem to be, as how things will work going forward is scaremongering.