Area for all other political discussion
:sunglasses: 36.8 % ❤ 2 % :thumbsup: 15.1 % 😯 2.6 % :grinning: 28.3 % 🧥 1.3 % 🙏 1.3 % 😟 8.6 % :cry: 2.6 % :shit: 1.3 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
#560953
The Weeping Angel wrote:
Thu Dec 06, 2018 9:42 pm
I've yet to see any evidence of this.


Andy McDandy wrote:
Thu Dec 06, 2018 10:15 pm
I grew up in Dudley. They're all thick wankers.

Neither am I convinced the Fenlands, South Essex and Lincs, where Tory MPs receive thumping majorities, are making a protest against neoliberalism. These are baseline nativist voters who represent around 30% of the electorate and aren't going to change their minds.
#560984
Andy McDandy wrote:
Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:19 pm
"You couldn't bury the dead..."
Oh, wouldn't it be sweet to lob that one back at these fuckers.
bluebellnutter, spoonman, oboogie and 1 others liked this
#561006
Andy McDandy wrote:
Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:19 pm
"You couldn't bury the dead..."
My Dad used to come out with his remembrances from the '70s when we were discussing the Labour Party, after Corbyn took the leadership.

He'd be doing 100rpm in his grave over what the Tories - a party he walked away from in disgust after over 40 years - are willing to do to the country now.
#561037
Scenario: There's a general election. Party A wins. Two years later Party A calls another GE. Nobody complains that they should "respect democracy, the will of the people, blah blah".

I'm not quite sure why arch-leavers can't or won't accept people change their minds based on new evidence presented to them, or that they might change their minds because they were given misleading information (the bus) the first time around. People on juries change their minds about the defendant during trials. Just have a second and final referendum next June. It will be three years of information given to the public, not just a 3 month propaganda blitz by Leave, in no small way based on lies and misinformation, which was tantamount to just the prosecution presenting their case in a court trial before the jury makes its verdict, giving the defence no chance to discredit witnesses or provide alibis or other information to say why their client is innocent.
#561040
To a certain extent I agree; but given the fact that The Brexiteers are so far down the road of fingers in ears, la-la-la, PROJECT FEAR, we're not likely to get much sense
#561053
Because they got their victory, and know that it was a close run and legally dubious thing, and that in any other circumstances they'd have lost. So never take that risk again.
#561073
AOB wrote:
Sat Dec 08, 2018 7:35 am
Scenario: There's a general election. Party A wins. Two years later Party A calls another GE. Nobody complains that they should "respect democracy, the will of the people, blah blah".

I'm not quite sure why arch-leavers can't or won't accept people change their minds based on new evidence presented to them, or that they might change their minds because they were given misleading information (the bus) the first time around. People on juries change their minds about the defendant during trials. Just have a second and final referendum next June. It will be three years of information given to the public, not just a 3 month propaganda blitz by Leave, in no small way based on lies and misinformation, which was tantamount to just the prosecution presenting their case in a court trial before the jury makes its verdict, giving the defence no chance to discredit witnesses or provide alibis or other information to say why their client is innocent.
Arch leavers know they fluked a win, and won't enter into any discussion.

Meanwhile they still don't have a plan.
AOB liked this
  • 1
  • 649
  • 650
  • 651
  • 652
  • 653
  • 656
Richard Littlejohn

The deeply embarrassed, homo-erotically fixated, d[…]

Brexit Fuckwit Thread

Mr. Fenton covers both the ambulance story and […]

Toby Young

Translation: I bullied my kids. Must admit I […]

Biased BBC

Who do these uppity foreigners think they’re[…]