- Joined
- Oct 22, 2010
- Messages
- 62,851
Sky: The government has over 200 gagging orders on different companies over Brexit.
Well now that’s just bullshit, if that were the case, leave wouldn’t have won.
Gove. Have you ever seen them together at the same time?Who's POB?
Democracy, will of the people etc etc!Sky: The government has over 200 gagging orders on different companies over Brexit.
What? No it isn't, I don't have the numbers in front of me now but when I did earlier if you look at number of votes who voted leave (17m ish) as a total of total registered it works out around that.
But instead of looking at the figures yourself just say bullshit, it's easier
Edit: can't find the numbers now, maybe the voting population number it gave me was off, searched on work pc and now can't find it in my phone.
It is bullshit. It's off by 10%.
72.2% turnout. 52% voted leave. 72.2% * 52% = 37.5%.
34.7% of the population support remain if we use turnout as the true metric to measure these things.
That is correct.
It is bullshit. If you use turnout there are less remain supporting people.
It is bull, though. She hasn't got all of her own on side.Isn't May correct though? Everybody is playing party politics here that has ground the process down to a halt.
Your parliament has very little comeback to that in my opinion.
Anna Soubry on TV saying the police have had advised her it's not safe to go home, she says she's not the only one, she is not going home this weekend, May stirred up a lot of anger up yesterday.
Brexit is like a bloke trying to show off in front of the lads by farting really loudly, but he follows through and soils himself. With turds running down his legs, he tries to pretend that he knew he was going to follow through, and that’s exactly what he farted for.
I don't even know what to expect from the EU today / tomorrow... Next week seems a long time awayI honestly don't know what to expect next week.
so we only get an extension if we pass May's deal next week, right? But didn't matey in parliament say they couldn't have another vote on May's deal unless its significantly changed?
There are ways round that in parliment I think... Eg if MP's vote to overule the speaker .. and if there is enough to overrule there is probably enough to pass itso we only get an extension if we pass May's deal next week, right? But didn't matey in parliament say they couldn't have another vote on May's deal unless its significantly changed?
Sounds like the EU are debating giving a very short unconditional extension or a slightly longer conditional one.
It is, when you break it down chief.This is not democracy.
It is, when you break it down chief.
Democracy
Demo - short for demonstration
C - short for see, to look
Racy - something that is sexually titillating
Therefore, democracy is short for "a demonstration at watching a country get fecked hard".
What kind of plan should be expected beyond putting a negotiating team together, triggering art. 50 and beginning the negotiations? I think we're reaching a bit here.
Far from it. I was talking from the narrow perspective of handling the Brexit/EU situation.
Yup, it seems that the initial reports were true, France at the least do not want an extension at all but is willing to compromise for something very short. If I'm not mistaken Austria and Denmark are the ones that want a longer extension while the others are silent.
There isn't a majority to revoke A50. We're ultra fecked.7th may and it will be stated if no EU election the UK can't extend again...
If that's true may will have succeeded in the binary options of her deal or no deal she wanted
Assuming there isn't a majority for recind a50
That article is a little unfair though, isn't it?
She can't rule out No Deal. How could she? It's the default position: that is what will happen unless a deal is accepted or Article 50 is revoked. May cannot do either of those things without Parliament's approval. How do they expect her to rule out no deal? Say that it won't happen? It's not up to her at this point actually.She has refused to rule out no deal despite the fact that, again, the House of Commons voted for such a move twice.
But it is true that Parliament has only decided AGAINST things. We know what isn't acceptable to the current House of Commons. We have no clue what is it they would accept.Her spokesman explains this by saying she is frustrated with parliament's "inability to take a decision".
The truth is it has, repeatedly on all manner of things - they're just not decisions to her liking.
That is because the PM in an entirely authoritarian manner took no counsel from Parliament and offered a series of proposals guided by "red lines" no one agreed to.That article is a little unfair though, isn't it?
She can't rule out No Deal. How could she? It's the default position: that is what will happen unless a deal is accepted or Article 50 is revoked. May cannot do either of those things without Parliament's approval. How do they expect her to rule out no deal? Say that it won't happen? It's not up to her at this point actually.
But it is true that Parliament has only decided AGAINST things. We know what isn't acceptable to the current House of Commons. We have no clue what is it they would accept.
A million people think responding to our Prime Minister's appalling tactics of trying to turn the public, who she's of course on the side off, require immediate clarification. She's played a very dangerous card in a very volatile situation.
I doubt it makes a difference, but a million signatures in 24 hours is at least a howl of protest against these self serving and self aggrandising bastards.
That article is a little unfair though, isn't it?
She can't rule out No Deal. How could she? It's the default position: that is what will happen unless a deal is accepted or Article 50 is revoked. May cannot do either of those things without Parliament's approval. How do they expect her to rule out no deal? Say that it won't happen? It's not up to her at this point actually.
But it is true that Parliament has only decided AGAINST things. We know what isn't acceptable to the current House of Commons. We have no clue what is it they would accept.