Yes, so what!
Raab and Patel in some of the key positions. God help us, the lunatics have taken over the asylum. And to think tories get all upset about Dianne Abbot and her dodgy maths, at least she can't do any damage.
Wow! That's really loading the dice in favour of Remain. How about saying that Remain needs to score a minimum of 60%? Bet you won't like that. A simple majority is the only fair way to decide.
OMG he has just appointed a Scottish secretary who wants to abolish the Scottish Parliament. [and does not seem to like paying taxes]
This is brilliant, Esther McVey next up followed by Jim Davidson as equities secretary.
Even the most die hard Tory must be concerned that McVey has been given a top job after failing miserably in her previous job.
OK - I said I didn't know - so 60% of the total electorate and a 15% margin. My point was simply that for the decision to be changed and for us to Remain would require an almost incontestable result that indicates that preference. There would be no point of Remain winning by a straight majority on a turnout of - let's say - less than 75% - so in fact I am recognising that it would have to be loaded against Remain.
Do you believe all the MPs that say they want to deliver Brexit? Like the Labour MPs who stood in the last election with a manifesto pledge of delivering Brexit but now want a 2nd referendum and will campaign to remain. To me that doesn't sound much like wanting to deliver Brexit.
You come across as yet another remainer that thinks that their views are more important than those of leave voters. If there is another referendum and remain wins then you disenfranchise the 52 percent that originally voted leave. But I suspect you don't care as long as you get the result you want. If remain were to win the 2nd referendum would you then support a 3rd referendum as each side would have won one each? Or would that be the end of it as we got the right result?
Our negotiators were poor and weak from the beginning, and I suspect that came from May. As soon as the EU said that we couldn't discuss a future relationship until the WA was agreed we should have walked away. If a future relationship had been agreed then there would have been no need for the Irish backstop and the WA would probably have been voted through.
Fortunately I don't have to have a solution, but with where we find ourselves now to me the only option is to tell the EU that unless they are willing to renegotiate then we will be leaving on 31st October and going on to WTO rules. We would then see if the EU were willing to throw the Irish economy under a bus or not.
If Priti Patel can be Home Sec after the reasoning behind her departure then anyone can be up for a job.I see Gavin I can't keep a secret Williamson got a seat at the table...
OMG he has just appointed a Scottish secretary who wants to abolish the Scottish Parliament. [and does not seem to like paying taxes]
This is brilliant, Esther McVey next up followed by Jim Davidson as equities secretary.
And this is a bad thing because????? Do you see the English constantly moaning because they don't have a Parliament of their own? Or even that other countries have a say in whatever they want to do? Well, yes, I moan about this and this is maybe another reason that the English want to get away from others interfering with their decision making.
It's about time the whole lot (Uk) was split up. Then the other countries can shut the heck up and go and join up with Europe and we can stay separate and make our own laws and decisions.
If remain won, that makes it 1-1 so do we then go to a third vote or will you insist that result over rides the first as that’s what you want?
It's about time the whole lot (Uk) was split up. Then the other countries can shut the heck up and go and join up with Europe and we can stay separate and make our own laws and decisions.