UK Politics Thread XI: Boris' Big Bombastic Brexit Bash

[The New California Republic]

Heard on the radio there on the way back from work, that the recall today was a "missed opportunity" for the assembly to come back, it was not a missed opportunity, It was a fucking farce and nothing more.

Yup, but the price was having the DUP take a DUmP on human rights. Not a price worth paying.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Heard on the radio there on the way back from work, that the recall today was a "missed opportunity" for the assembly to come back, it was not a missed opportunity, It was a fucking farce and nothing more.

Yup, but the price was having the DUP take a DUmP on human rights. Not a price worth paying.

They knew it was never gona work anyway, it was nothing more than a new flag for them to wave in future elections

"Oh well we tried to prevent it from happening but those pesky Sinn Fein IRA's didnt show up so it passed"

And their voters will no doubt lap it all up.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Shoutout to the SDLP though showing up and going "No" then leaving, that was hilarious even if it was also nothing more than a stunt.

[The New California Republic]

Yup, but the price was having the DUP take a DUmP on human rights. Not a price worth paying.

They knew it was never gona work anyway, it was nothing more than a new flag for them to wave in future elections

"Oh well we tried to prevent it from happening but those pesky Sinn Fein IRA's didnt show up so it passed"

And their voters will no doubt lap it all up.

It was actually quite funny because they can't even use that as a stick to beat SF with, since technically it was the SDLP walking out that scuppered Stormont being rebooted.

[Hirota]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50128740

I do find it utterly disgusting that a legally recognised referendum result is being completely ignored by the saboteur Labour-DUP-LD-Tory Rebel alliance.

How dare they.

Fuck it.

Go for no deal.

I honestly give zero shits anymore.

I may never vote in my future.

48% of the population voted remain. They deserve representation in parliament too.

You do know what percentage of MPs voted to remain in 2016 right?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics- ... m-35616946

http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/how-mps ... 4110245462

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europ ... -eu-stance

Go ahead, tell us we need more MPs representing remain when all evidence shows the vast majority voted remain in 2016.

And do you know which party represents a disproportionately large number of constituencies which voted leave? Go on, guess.

[The Blaatschapen]

48% of the population voted remain. They deserve representation in parliament too.

You do know what percentage of MPs voted to remain in 2016 right?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics- ... m-35616946

http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/how-mps ... 4110245462

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europ ... -eu-stance

Go ahead, tell us we need more MPs representing remain when all evidence shows the vast majority voted remain in 2016.

And do you know which party represents a disproportionately large number of constituencies which voted leave? Go on, guess.

2016 parliament is irrelevant for the current voting results in parliament. There was an election in 2017. Brexit was clearly an item back then and the various MPs could (and have) been asked on their stances. And people still voted them in. And since the 2017 election is more recent than the referendum, it is more relevant than the referendum.

[Hirota]

You do know what percentage of MPs voted to remain in 2016 right?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics- ... m-35616946

http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/how-mps ... 4110245462

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europ ... -eu-stance

Go ahead, tell us we need more MPs representing remain when all evidence shows the vast majority voted remain in 2016.

And do you know which party represents a disproportionately large number of constituencies which voted leave? Go on, guess.

2016 parliament is irrelevant for the current voting results in parliament. There was an election in 2017. Brexit was clearly an item back then and the various MPs could (and have) been asked on their stances. And people still voted them in. And since the 2017 election is more recent than the referendum, it is more relevant than the referendum.

I believe there were 87 newly elected MPs in 2017. Claiming the vote of the other 560ish of them is somehow irrelevant is an Incredibly stupid argument.

Moreover, burden of proof is upon you to prove the 48% are underrepresented is the original claim and you are yet to provide evidence to support that claim.

You claim the 2017 election is relevant because they were elected on their stance and presumably their party manifesto should be included in that stance - and I'd agree. Given Labour said they would respect the result of the 2016 ref, I'd say they absolutely should be judged on their stance and if they have honoured that stance. Do you honestly think MPs - in particular Labour MPs - have honoured the stance they took in 2017?

But you know what would be an ever better way to get a truly representative parliament? General election,.right now. Let's see what the people think about this bunch of MPs and get a truly representative bunch chosen by the people.

[Fartsniffage]

2016 parliament is irrelevant for the current voting results in parliament. There was an election in 2017. Brexit was clearly an item back then and the various MPs could (and have) been asked on their stances. And people still voted them in. And since the 2017 election is more recent than the referendum, it is more relevant than the referendum.

I believe there were 87 newly elected MPs in 2017. Claiming the vote of the other 560ish of them is somehow irrelevant is an Incredibly stupid argument.

Moreover, burden of proof is upon you to prove the 48% are underrepresented is the original final claim and the burden of proof falls upon you to support your claim.

You claim the 2017 election is relevant because they were elected on their stance and presumably their party manifesto should be included in that stance - and I'd agree. Given Labour said they would respect the result of the 2016 ref, I'd say they absolutely should be judged on their stance and if they have honoured that stance. Do you honestly think MPs - in particular Labour MPs - have honoured the stance they took in 2017?

But you know what would be an ever better way to get a truly representative parliament? General election,.right now. Let's see what the people think about this bunch of MPs and get a truly representative bunch chosen by the people.

A second referendum would be easier...

[Thermodolia]

I believe there were 87 newly elected MPs in 2017. Claiming the vote of the other 560ish of them is somehow irrelevant is an Incredibly stupid argument.

Moreover, burden of proof is upon you to prove the 48% are underrepresented is the original final claim and the burden of proof falls upon you to support your claim.

You claim the 2017 election is relevant because they were elected on their stance and presumably their party manifesto should be included in that stance - and I'd agree. Given Labour said they would respect the result of the 2016 ref, I'd say they absolutely should be judged on their stance and if they have honoured that stance. Do you honestly think MPs - in particular Labour MPs - have honoured the stance they took in 2017?

But you know what would be an ever better way to get a truly representative parliament? General election,.right now. Let's see what the people think about this bunch of MPs and get a truly representative bunch chosen by the people.

A second referendum would be easier...

Something something will of the people!!!

[Hirota]

A second referendum would be easier...

Something something will of the people!!!

Obviously you've not read my multiple previous posts saying I'm fine with a referendum.

I'd prefer the people be given the chance to make a stronger message, mind you.

[Fartsniffage]

Something something will of the people!!!

Obviously you've not read my multiple previous posts saying I'm fine with a referendum.

I'd prefer the people be given the chance to make a stronger message, mind you.

I'd prefer that we don't have a general election based on a single issue.

[Hirota]

Obviously you've not read my multiple previous posts saying I'm fine with a referendum.

I'd prefer the people be given the chance to make a stronger message, mind you.

I'd prefer that we don't have a general election based on a single issue.

Oh, if we are doing what we'd prefer, I'd prefer we didn't have to go to the polls at all to tell MPs what to do when we told them last time. But c'est la vie right?

[Fartsniffage]

I'd prefer that we don't have a general election based on a single issue.

Oh, if we are doing what we'd prefer, I'd prefer we didn't have to go to the polls at all to tell MPs what to do when we told them last time. But c'est la vie right?

Circumstances have changed. Before the last referendum we were told that leaving would be easy, we could have a Norway or Canada type deal, and that everyone would get a free unicorn.

We now know differently.

[Hirota]

Oh, if we are doing what we'd prefer, I'd prefer we didn't have to go to the polls at all to tell MPs what to do when we told them last time. But c'est la vie right?

Circumstances have changed. Before the last referendum we were told that leaving would be easy, we could have a Norway or Canada type deal, and that everyone would get a free unicorn.

We now know differently.

And that's one reason why I'm personally fine with a second ref.

[Fartsniffage]

Circumstances have changed. Before the last referendum we were told that leaving would be easy, we could have a Norway or Canada type deal, and that everyone would get a free unicorn.

We now know differently.

And that's one reason why I'm personally fine with a second ref.

Then why are we arguing?

[The Huskar Social Union]

And that's one reason why I'm personally fine with a second ref.

Then why are we arguing?

Because this is the UK politics thread.

[Hirota]

And that's one reason why I'm personally fine with a second ref.

Then why are we arguing?

Are we arguing? I thought you and Therm were trying to derail from Blaat talking some silliness by wrongly assuming I was opposed to a referendum.

I'm glad we've cleared that up. We should be in government - we'd do a much better job getting things done and establishing consensus than the 650 idiots in Westminster!

Umm, I'd like to apologise to other UK pol thread viewers for this unseemly and unbritish display of agreement. You are all, quite obviously, wrong to think what you are thinking and normal service will be resumed shortly.

[SD_Film Artists]

Bercowpower. Hahahahahahahaaa

[Gormwood]

Yup, but the price was having the DUP take a DUmP on human rights. Not a price worth paying.

They knew it was never gona work anyway, it was nothing more than a new flag for them to wave in future elections

"Oh well we tried to prevent it from happening but those pesky Sinn Fein IRA's didnt show up so it passed"

And their voters will no doubt lap it all up.

... DUrP.

[Hirota]

Yup, but the price was having the DUP take a DUmP on human rights. Not a price worth paying.

They knew it was never gona work anyway, it was nothing more than a new flag for them to wave in future elections

"Oh well we tried to prevent it from happening but those pesky Sinn Fein IRA's didnt show up so it passed"

And their voters will no doubt lap it all up.

It's quite odd that the Unionist parties with their opposition towards abortion have more in common with their traditionalist Catholic Irish cousins more than the people the other side of the Irish sea.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Bercowpower. Hahahahahahahaaa

[The New California Republic]

They knew it was never gona work anyway, it was nothing more than a new flag for them to wave in future elections

"Oh well we tried to prevent it from happening but those pesky Sinn Fein IRA's didnt show up so it passed"

And their voters will no doubt lap it all up.

It's quite odd that the Unionist parties with their opposition towards abortion have more in common with their traditionalist Catholic Irish cousins more than the people the other side of the Irish sea.

It's certainly ironic that the DUP is actively resisting having two things that the rUK already has, and acting all pissy about Westminster enacting said things that would bring them more in line with the rest of the union. I think the DUP should just drop the U from their name, as it clearly no longer applies.

[SD_Film Artists]

They knew it was never gona work anyway, it was nothing more than a new flag for them to wave in future elections

"Oh well we tried to prevent it from happening but those pesky Sinn Fein IRA's didnt show up so it passed"

And their voters will no doubt lap it all up.

It's quite odd that the Unionist parties with their opposition towards abortion have more in common with their traditionalist Catholic Irish cousins more than the people the other side of the Irish sea.

What seems more weird is that they're more conservative and anti-abortion than their Catholic rivals, when in the rest of the UK it's the CoE/CoS* which is relatively more liberal than Catholicism. It's like they're trying to look cool in front of their friends but ended up taking it too far out of despiration, like how Quebec is more French than France.

*The Welsh don't go to church, they're already faithful enough.

(Image)

It's....it's beautiful...*cries*

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Well, the DUP might be bad people, but perhaps even they draw the line at abortion.

Cannot parse this statement. Please restate.

Have children, raise or give them away. Your lack of responsibility does not give you the right to kill.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Cannot parse this statement. Please restate.

Have children, raise or give them away. Your lack of responsibility does not give you the right to kill.

I don't think you have as much budget as you think you have to make proclamations on morality like this.