• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

REFERENDUM RESULTS AND DISCUSSION THREAD

I see the Scottish Courts are showing that Cummings and his puppet Boris are, huge shock incoming, massive liars.

Not that it will make any difference mind.
 
Kenny said:
I see the Scottish Courts are showing that Cummings and his puppet Boris are, huge shock incoming, massive liars.

Not that it will make any difference mind.
Click to expand...

They're in good company. Well hopefully on October 14 there will be a chance to get rid of them. Westminster needs an enema.
 
For a moment let’s assume that this opposition legislation passes today and that Boris is not able to get his election on any date. We then hit October 19 and then Boris has to go the EU and ask for the extension. Such EU business has to be unanimously ratified by all 28 states as I understand things. So what if the other 27 all agree to the extension and then our dear leader uses his veto on his own business???
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
For a moment let’s assume that this opposition legislation passes today and that Boris is not able to get his election on any date. We then hit October 19 and then Boris has to go the EU and ask for the extension. Such EU business has to be unanimously ratified by all 28 states as I understand things. So what if the other 27 all agree to the extension and then our dear leader uses his veto on his own business???
Click to expand...

Whatever happens there will be a clear definition as to whether there is desire to leave (with a deal) or the stance is purely to overturn the referendum result and remain. The problem with a GE is that Farage is still hanging around but it is hoped Johnson can go to Brussels and get some type of resolution in respect of the back-stop. If that doesn't happen then the only alternative to constant stalemate is to go GE ..
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
For a moment let’s assume that this opposition legislation passes today and that Boris is not able to get his election on any date. We then hit October 19 and then Boris has to go the EU and ask for the extension. Such EU business has to be unanimously ratified by all 28 states as I understand things. So what if the other 27 all agree to the extension and then our dear leader uses his veto on his own business???
Click to expand...

We're not part of the special committee that rules on A50 affairs (for obvious reasons!). So we can't veto ourselves.
 
Papper said:
No, it definately isn't a peoples democracy when a remain parliament fails to deliver the results of a national referendum. The current situation just shows how dysfunctional proportional representation could be. As has been pointed out manifestos are loose and they take decisions on our behalf - guess that's why we end up bombing the fuck out of the Middle East despite large scale protestation. Just go the whole hog and fuck the proles and let them decide global strategy at places like Bilderberg - which is probably closer to the reality than we imagine. It is unikely a democracy can ever be served by high consensus but each day goes by I get more cynical and more apolitical because I strongly feel corporations are put before people. Society is fucked ....
Click to expand...

well woe is you

the point is, it never has been a people's democracy. philosophers have described similar systems as 'elite rule'. democratic principles are sacrificed to enable supposedly stable government and the populace are given the very minimum of choice. the two leading parties would both probably wish it was just the one choice and if they are anti-democratic by nature it's because the system allows them to be, and enough of the populace allows them to be. typically that's because the populace has been tribal, and many people identify with one side or the other, usually accepting as a matter of faith the demonisation of the other, led through the nose by typically partisan media. so the "people" have not, in the end, wanted enough of a change.

a truer democracy would need a different mindset based upon some degree of consensus and would have to be worked at constantly. it's the sort of thing most normal people have to deal with in everyday matters and get on with it, but when it comes to politics it's 'winner' takes all and god bless the rest. your comment on PR is a dead giveaway of an anti-democrat and illogical based on your very constant moaning at a consequence of the existing system. for instance, if TM had got a few more seats at the last election her deal would have got through parliament, we'd be out on those terms and no doubt you'd be moaning about that even if the majority of the country had accepted it. and was it a PR system that delivered the wars in the Middle East?

i've railed against corporate control in certain areas more than most. but I don't see how that's going to change significantly. i've asked you how you'd do it and you just present a fantasy end direction with no idea how to get there and hopeful of a to be formed political party that you can't name. you may as well have been in charge of post brexit planning, it has similar substance. the best we can hope is to put safeguards in to limit corporate influence, to ensure they are taxed properly on their operations etc etc and you won't achieve that without international consensus because the corps will just choose the easiest places to do business and set themselves up via tax schemes etc. and imo that will be your post brexit scenario based on a no deal - how it make it easier for the corporates to decide to trade and invest here, not harder. you'll end up giving them more control.
 
Looks like the Conservative MP, Phillip Lee has defected to the LibDems. He's just walked across the house from the Conservative side to sit with the Liberals whilst Johnson was speaking.

So Johnson no longer has a majority?
 
Philip Lee has left the Tories for the Lib Dems. Government now has a working majority of 0
 
Yay! More chaos. We could share this daily TBH.

C9sWZYkXsAArKA1.jpg
 
nimrod said:
the point is, it never has been a people's democracy. philosophers have described similar systems as 'elite rule'. democratic principles are sacrificed to enable supposedly stable government and the populace are given the very minimum of choice. the two leading parties would both probably wish it was just the one choice and if they are anti-democratic by nature it's because the system allows them to be, and enough of the populace allows them to be. typically that's because the populace has been tribal, and many people identify with one side or the other, usually accepting as a matter of faith the demonisation of the other, led through the nose by typically partisan media. so the "people" have not, in the end, wanted enough of a change.
Click to expand...

No, I get you on this – especially when it comes to stable government. I am not entirely of the opinion that the human race is so evolved as that doesn’t necessitate some degree of authoritarianism. I guess it’s a matter of judgement who is fit to lead/make decisions on our behalf that is the crux of the matter.

nimrod said:
a truer democracy would need a different mindset based upon some degree of consensus and would have to be worked at constantly. it's the sort of thing most normal people have to deal with in everyday matters and get on with it, but when it comes to politics it's 'winner' takes all and god bless the rest. your comment on PR is a dead giveaway of an anti-democrat and illogical based on your very constant moaning at a consequence of the existing system. for instance, if TM had got a few more seats at the last election her deal would have got through parliament, we'd be out on those terms and no doubt you'd be moaning about that even if the majority of the country had accepted it. and was it a PR system that delivered the wars in the Middle East?
Click to expand...

If the system is best served by a majority then proportional representation is by default limited in it’s application where there is no desire for compromise and consensus with blind ignorance of the people – see the current state of affairs in Parliament where a democratic mandate of a referendum, two general elections and the recent EU election means fuck all ..

nimrod said:
i've railed against corporate control in certain areas more than most. but I don't see how that's going to change significantly. i've asked you how you'd do it and you just present a fantasy end direction with no idea how to get there and hopeful of a to be formed political party that you can't name. you may as well have been in charge of post brexit planning, it has similar substance. the best we can hope is to put safeguards in to limit corporate influence, to ensure they are taxed properly on their operations etc etc and you won't achieve that without international consensus because the corps will just choose the easiest places to do business and set themselves up via tax schemes etc. and imo that will be your post brexit scenario based on a no deal - how it make it easier for the corporates to decide to trade and invest here, not harder. you'll end up giving them more control.
Click to expand...

I have ideas – it is centred on redistribution of wealth - a concentrated approach to the trillionaires and billion profit companies rather than aggressive taxation that affects all business. I would therefore focus on the 1% of the 1%. Furthermore I am more inclined to promote social enterprise and take the profit motive out of essential services. I am a globalist in terms of a peoples movement but perhaps my focus is on the type of people who can advance change rather than those who put corporates before people.
 
Agreeing with Jeremy Clarkson is not really a thing to be doing but...

Jeremy Clarkson
@JeremyClarkson
I’ve had a really good idea. Why don’t we all just agree this Brexit business is far too complicated and pretend it never happened?
 
Oddly Clarkson is actually quite strong in his pro-EU beliefs. You'd think he'd be exactly the kind of blowhard to be bawling nonsense about GATT 24 to anyone who'll listen.
 
Phillip Hammond called out the PM to publish the progress made on the alternative to the backstop so that members of the house can consider this when voting tonight. Surprisingly the reply was bluff and bluster and no such information will be forthcoming. Why could that be?
 
I remember a time when I thought Letwin was a right wing nut:

It begins. Sir Oliver Letwin rises to ask for an emergency SO24 debate to seize control of the order paper- around 15 Tory MPs stand up to back him. Speaker Bercow grants it.
Click to expand...
 
Soames will be voting against the Government.

So let's see if the big fat bastard with delusions of being Winston Churchill really will deselect Winston Churchill's grandson.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

darlowolf64
  • Locked
The Clique and how to join it...
Replies
6
Views
2K
The Bear
The Bear
lemonjelly
The Mental Health thread
49 50 51
Replies
1K
Views
102K
The Bear
The Bear
Back
Top