Government to ask Queen to suspend Parliament

[RAyMO]

By purging the party of 21 mps, the DUP become irrelevant in maintaining a majority. Consequently One option Boris could avail of, is the NI only backstop.

Polls have consistently shown that people in NI support a NI only Backstop (circa 60%) in the event of a brexit.  Thus he could claim it has the support of the people.

If an election is called, polls show that the DUP (10 seats) will lose 1 seat to an anti brexit party with 2 more becoming competitive (these seats if lost would be taken by parties that would take their seats in parliament).  So possibly possible 6 seat swing in the house, as the new incumbents would actually vote against Brexit policies - which doesn't happen at present.  

so Boris could go in October offer an NI backstop only - which I think the commons would narrowly pass. Boris could claim democratic legitimacy for this. He could then call an election and not give 2 hoots about the DUP loosing seats.

Edited September 7, 2019 by RAyMO

[Duke Wellington]

33 minutes ago, spud the mackem said:

In your opinion who do you think would make a  good P.M., obviously democracy is dead , as you want to stay in Europe against the wishes of the 2016 vote , so supposing remainers get their way and we don't leave ,what happens next. 

Its like a cup final with 2 minutes to go when Man City get a penalty and score ,and the Man Utd crowd say that's unfair it wasn't a penalty and we want it taken again ,and the Ref is wrong.

Cameron , May and Johnson have all failed so do you want Corbyn to be the next P.M. (which I hope not) , so who is going to take us forward ,and stand up to the unelected Britain haters in Europe.  

The game where you can have you vote and we will implement the result only if we agree with it, is a national disgrace.

[Duke Wellington]

Just now, RAyMO said:

By purging the party of 21 mps, the DUP become irrelevant in maintaining a majority. Consequently One option Boris could avail of, is the NI only backstop.

Polls have consistently shown that people in NI support a NI only Backstop (circa 60%) in the event of a brexit.  Thus he could claim it has the support of the people.

If an election is called, polls show that the DUP (10 seats) will lose 1 seat to an anti brexit party with 2 more becoming competitive (these seats if lost would be taken by parties that would take their seats in parliament).  So possibly possible 6 seat swing in the house, as the new incumbents would actually vote against Brexit policies - which doesn't happen at present.  

The EU has said it will not remove the backstop.

So we cannot take that out of the offered deal.

[RAyMO]

5 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

The EU has said it will not remove the backstop.

So we cannot take that out of the offered deal.

I  am not saying remove it, keep it as NI only - which was what they (EU) originally offered. It was May who was forced convert it to a UK wide backstop in a failed attempt to placate the DUP.

Edited September 7, 2019 by RAyMO

[RAyMO]

With the NI only backstop. The Scottish will get annoyed. But I don't think Boris really expects to pick up many seats in Scotland. 

So seriously I can see the Boris and dom going for it as an easy win on the 17th and 19th of October. Whereby he meets his do or die promise. 

[hetrodoxly]

10 hours ago, stevewinn said:

Democracy isn't dead. Its alive and well in each and everyone of us who are willing to stand up and be counted. That's why 17.4million stood up and voted leave. To leave the undemocratic EU and to make our parliament and those who sit in it 100% accountable to us. Who'd have thought they'd shirk that responsibility. 

What's happening is parliament versus the people and it never turns out well for parliament. That's why the remainers are running from the people. They can't face us. They know their actions are at odds with the people. That's why them and their supporters now prefer a referendum to a general election. I'll say it again let the people show their gratitude. 

The houses of parliament were not only the seat of democracy but the mother of it. how things have changed it did die there this week , but you are right the 'majority' of the people still feel strong about it and all the cowards and quislings days are numbered.

[hetrodoxly]

9 hours ago, Setton said:

Uhuh. 

 

When was this taken? your going to tell us there was 18 million there i suppose.

[Duke Wellington]

1 hour ago, RAyMO said:

I  am not saying remove it, keep it as NI only - which was what they (EU) originally offered. It was May who was forced convert it to a UK wide backstop in a failed attempt to placate the DUP.

We should leave immediately, with no backstop, and no £39 billion paid to the EU per year.

Give the EU a few months without us then open negotiations for a trade deal. Only then will we get the appropriate level of respect during talks. No one else pays to have a trade deal and we shouldn't have to either because trade deals are two-way agreements instead of existing to benefit one side more than the other.

No one can legally force us to erect a hard border in NI, we need to tell the EU to sod off. 

If we get short-term instability will we deal with it, pick ourselves up, and move on. We saw off the Germans twice, we can see them off again.

Edited September 7, 2019 by RabidMongoose

[stevewinn]

2 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

Fair is fair. Leave won the referendum. The result should be implemented. Even if it is economic suicide.   

What economic suicide? remind us of The forecast for worst, WORST case scenario from the Bank of England. oh heck, I'll do it. its 0.53% a year and there is a 67% chance this NOT happening. and like i pointed out to you only the other month, 98% of British Business are ready for leaving. something which is now echoed by the Mark Carney at the Bank of England. When the worst case forecast was 8%, (0.53% a year) downgraded now to 5.5%. (0.36% a year) with the same 67% chance of this NOT happening. AND THIS IS WORST CASE.

So we leave the EU and the worst case happens GDP is reduced by 0.36% our EU contributions a year are 0.7% a year. this is why i keep pointing it out the UK benefit from EU membership to the economy is only 0.9% per year. (this is why the worst case scenario figure is so small to what the remainers want to believe, they have this weird notion that something like 40% of GDP is going to be wiped away, because 40% of our trade is with the EU hence your Economic suicide.

So i ask you where is this economic suicide coming from?

[RAyMO]

7 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

We should leave immediately, with no backstop, and no £39 billion paid to the EU per year.

Give the EU a few months without us then open negotiations for a trade deal. Only then will we get the appropriate level of respect during talks. No one else pays to have a trade deal and we shouldn't have to either because trade deals are two-way agreements instead of existing to benefit one side more than the other.

No one can legally force us to erect a hard border in NI, we need to tell the EU to sod off. 

If we get short-term instability will we deal with it, pick ourselves up, and move on. We saw off the Germans twice, we can see them off again.

The only way you can do that is after an election if tories brexit party win majority. You won't get an election this side of 31 October. Boris said he would leave on 31st October do or die. An ni only backstop would allow him to meet that promise. 

 

[stevewinn]

9 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

The only way you can do that is after an election if tories brexit party win majority. You won't get an election this side of 31 October. Boris said he would leave on 31st October do or die. An ni only backstop would allow him to meet that promise. 

 

and what about the rest of the putrid WA agreement.

[RAyMO]

9 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

and what about the rest of the putrid WA agreement.

I think he will go with it, if he thinks he can get it through. He has afterall voted for it before? with the whole UK in the backstop. 

Edited September 7, 2019 by RAyMO

[Torchwood]

On 9/5/2019 at 11:04 PM, OverSword said:

 Nobody said because they are afraid of England losing sovereignty, not because of strangling regulations placed on Britain by an unelected body of bureaucrats, 

Nobody I've spoken to used the word Sovereignty.  The word Burkqa was used a bit. Though I think from their description they meant Niqqab.  They seem to think banning things is a good idea.

I'm not sure what strangling regulation you're referring to (i'd like to hear which regulations you don't like) but they did oppose EU laws, but when asked for examples rather struggled to come up with any. Vacuum cleaners were mentioned in this context, but the one person that mentioned this floundered for a bit and then ranted about why muslim woman shouldn't be allowed to wear burqas in a Christian country, which was a bit weird 'cos in the same conversation she also told me that she wanted to see religion of all sorts destroyed.

She seemed a bit confused..but Brexit seems to do that to Brexiteers...

 

 

I would put it to you that so many different people voted for Brexit for so many different reasons (some real, but mostly imaginary) that no matter what form it finally emerges in almost all Brexiteers will be disappointed with the outcome.  Whatever problem you think Brexit solves, it won't. This should be obvious as it was sold as a panacea, a cure-all , all things to all men. And it can never , no matter what form it takes, live up to all that expectation.

[stevewinn]

20 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

I think he will go with it, if he thinks he can get it through. He has afterall voted for it before? with the whole UK in the backstop. 

He did on the last occasion. lets remind ourselves even the EU supporters voted it down three times. and it contains a hell of a lot more than just the backstop. its a International Treaty. one in which favours the EU to the point the UK cannot leave without the EU's permission. and we'd have to follow and apply EU tariffs to all UK imports. hence the name of it BRINO. Its a Treaty a country defeated in war would be expected to sign.

I cant see him going for it, I think we've run out of time and the inevitable is going to happen that is Leave the EU.

[stevewinn]

6 minutes ago, Torchwood said:

Nobody I've spoken to used the word Sovereignty.  The word Burkqa was used a bit. Though I think from their description they meant Niqqab.  They seem to think banning things is a good idea.

I'm not sure what strangling regulation you're referring to (i'd like to hear which regulations you don't like) but they did oppose EU laws, but when asked for examples rather struggled to come up with any. Vacuum cleaners were mentioned in this context, but the one person that mentioned this floundered for a bit and then ranted about why muslim woman shouldn't be allowed to wear burqas in a Christian country, which was a bit weird 'cos in the same conversation she also told me that she wanted to see religion of all sorts destroyed.

She seemed a bit confused..but Brexit seems to do that to Brexiteers...

 

 

I would put it to you that so many different people voted for Brexit for so many different reasons (some real, but mostly imaginary) that no matter what form it finally emerges in almost all Brexiteers will be disappointed with the outcome.  Whatever problem you think Brexit solves, it won't. This should be obvious as it was sold as a panacea, a cure-all , all things to all men. And it can never , no matter what form it takes, live up to all that expectation.

I keep reading your anecdotal evidence, where are you located and at what locations are these conversations taking place. its sounds like you've accidentally attended your local National front meeting without knowing. I have no reason to disbelieve you, as im sure you wouldn't stoop so low as to make things up to make a point. But as a Brexiteer and by default one of the racists on the forum i've not come across such conversations or views. hence why i ask the question were are you from.

 

 

[Unusual Tournament]

3 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

I rubbed my eyes in astonishment.

Then I realised it was sarcasm lol.

No, I'm serious. 

[stevewinn]

13 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

No, I'm seriously. lacking

 

[Duke Wellington]

36 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

No, I'm serious. 

No really, stop it now lol.

[Torchwood]

1 hour ago, stevewinn said:

I keep reading your anecdotal evidence, where are you located and at what locations are these conversations taking place. its sounds like you've accidentally attended your local National front meeting without knowing. I have no reason to disbelieve you, as im sure you wouldn't stoop so low as to make things up to make a point. But as a Brexiteer and by default one of the racists on the forum i've not come across such conversations or views. hence why i ask the question were are you from.

 

 

I live within 12 miles of liverpool , and work a stones throw from liverpool airport, though I'm also connected by family with the Rochdale and Oldham area. I trust that is sufficiently specific for you?  This probably explains why I have found relatively few Brexiteers in person- Liverpool IIRC largely voted Remain.

Brexiteers are I hasten to add not necessarily racist...but I've not yet met a racist who didnt vote for brexit.  I should perhaps add that the folk who we might consider racist in the context of brexit don't consider themselves racist. What they are opposed to isn't so much one Race or Another, but CHANGE . Things have changed in their home towns/country and they don't like that its changed. They seem to think Brexit will solve this somehow, even though the nature of that change has nothing to do with the EU, and even predates it by rather a lot

Rather a lot of the Brexit campaign fed into this dislike of change but played on its Racial elements...with for e.g the Breaking Point Poster, which I think Cummings said clinched it for Leave. The problem Brexit has now is that "True" Brexiteers will say that Brexit has nothing to do with Race, but all the folk who voted for it on that basis are the ones who got it across the line. How will the two positions be reconciled?  

 

[RAyMO]

2 hours ago, stevewinn said:

lets remind ourselves even the EU supporters voted it down three times. and it contains a hell of a lot more than just the backstop.

and don't forget Kinnock amendment which was passed by accident it seems allows for the May Agreement to be brought back to the house, though even that is doubtful about that particular amendment.

[Torchwood]

2 hours ago, stevewinn said:

He did on the last occasion. lets remind ourselves even the EU supporters voted it down three times. and it contains a hell of a lot more than just the backstop. its a International Treaty. one in which favours the EU to the point the UK cannot leave without the EU's permission. and we'd have to follow and apply EU tariffs to all UK imports. hence the name of it BRINO. Its a Treaty a country defeated in war would be expected to sign.

I cant see him going for it, I think we've run out of time and the inevitable is going to happen that is Leave the EU.

I cant see Boris going for it, but there seems to be some movement back to Mays deal from the likes of Rory Stewart. Apparently there's some thought that if they can't stop Boris pushing for No deal then they might be able to scare enough of the commons into getting Mays Deal across the line. 

Hilarious in its way if true, and if they manage it, imagine if Boris's legacy as PM is that he lost 100% of all votes in the Commons and the only bills passed on his watch were by the Opposition and the Previous PM! For me, It'd almost make Brexit worth it...

[Duke Wellington]

For those who missed it, this week the UK Parliament voted to stop a General Election and voted to extend Article 50. The majority of our MPs are not with the people and are blocking all possible routes to Brexit.

Today Boris has said he will not ask for that extension so when Parliament reconvenes there will be some fireworks. Will the UK PM go down in world history as the only ever leader of a Democracy to be imprisoned for Contempt of Parliament for actually representing the Democratic Will of the people? I bet Cromwell never thought such a day would come. Disgraceful!

Why do I suspect we are a month out from mass rioting?

[Duke Wellington]

1 hour ago, Torchwood said:

I live within 12 miles of liverpool , and work a stones throw from liverpool airport, though I'm also connected by family with the Rochdale and Oldham area. I trust that is sufficiently specific for you?  This probably explains why I have found relatively few Brexiteers in person- Liverpool IIRC largely voted Remain.

Brexiteers are I hasten to add not necessarily racist...but I've not yet met a racist who didnt vote for brexit.  I should perhaps add that the folk who we might consider racist in the context of brexit don't consider themselves racist. What they are opposed to isn't so much one Race or Another, but CHANGE . Things have changed in their home towns/country and they don't like that its changed. They seem to think Brexit will solve this somehow, even though the nature of that change has nothing to do with the EU, and even predates it by rather a lot

Rather a lot of the Brexit campaign fed into this dislike of change but played on its Racial elements...with for e.g the Breaking Point Poster, which I think Cummings said clinched it for Leave. The problem Brexit has now is that "True" Brexiteers will say that Brexit has nothing to do with Race, but all the folk who voted for it on that basis are the ones who got it across the line. How will the two positions be reconciled?  

Racist or not, this is a Democracy.

The people voted to leave, why haven't we left?

Edited September 7, 2019 by RabidMongoose

[stevewinn]

1 hour ago, Torchwood said:

I live within 12 miles of liverpool , and work a stones throw from liverpool airport, though I'm also connected by family with the Rochdale and Oldham area. I trust that is sufficiently specific for you?  This probably explains why I have found relatively few Brexiteers in person- Liverpool IIRC largely voted Remain.

Brexiteers are I hasten to add not necessarily racist...but I've not yet met a racist who didnt vote for brexit.  I should perhaps add that the folk who we might consider racist in the context of brexit don't consider themselves racist. What they are opposed to isn't so much one Race or Another, but CHANGE . Things have changed in their home towns/country and they don't like that its changed. They seem to think Brexit will solve this somehow, even though the nature of that change has nothing to do with the EU, and even predates it by rather a lot

Rather a lot of the Brexit campaign fed into this dislike of change but played on its Racial elements...with for e.g the Breaking Point Poster, which I think Cummings said clinched it for Leave. The problem Brexit has now is that "True" Brexiteers will say that Brexit has nothing to do with Race, but all the folk who voted for it on that basis are the ones who got it across the line. How will the two positions be reconciled?  

 

When you say a stones throw away from the airport. If you threw that stone would it land by a water tower? 

[Setton]

29 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

For those who missed it, this week the UK Parliament voted to stop a General Election and voted to extend Article 50. The majority of our MPs are not with the people and are blocking all possible routes to Brexit.

Today Boris has said he will not ask for that extension so when Parliament reconvenes there will be some fireworks. Will the UK PM go down in world history as the only ever leader of a Democracy to be imprisoned for Contempt of Parliament for actually representing the Democratic Will of the people? I bet Cromwell never thought such a day would come. Disgraceful!

Why do I suspect we are a month out from mass rioting?

The Prime Minister is not above the law.