Another new Brexit thread

[blueinsa]

Can anybody name a sensible Brexiteer? Serious question. All the ones I meet appear to be fools.

You can nominate anyone famous, any politician or any poster on this forum.

Maybe I’m missing someone, but I can’t think of any.

Me, I'm sensible. I even wanted rid of Mancini.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I would be shocked to hear that there is anyone who is genuinely of the view that he has not acted outside convention and in favour of Remain

I can understand people supporting him because he has favoured their side and increased the chances of Remaining - but surely nobody genuinely thinks that he has been impartial?

He hasn’t been impartial, it would be absurd to suggest otherwise, but has stood up to an Executive that has itself acted outside convention and tried to undermine the primacy of Parliament. Given that, he has fulfilled his duty.

 

[west didsblue]

I would be shocked to hear that there is anyone who is genuinely of the view that he has not acted outside convention and in favour of Remain

I can understand people supporting him because he has favoured their side and increased the chances of Remaining - but surely nobody genuinely thinks that he has been impartial?

Poor post.

 

[i kne albert davy]

He hasn’t been impartial, it would be absurd to suggest otherwise, but has stood up to an Executive that has itself acted outside convention and tried to undermine the primacy of Parliament. Given that, he has fulfilled his duty.

I'm sure 48% of the electorate agree with you,( well less chippy )

 

[mcfc1632]

I case you forgot...

I think that people are missing the point on this

In all honesty - do you not think/realise that the stance he has taken / games he has played on this have done his popularity and 'electability' a lot of good.

So - some people, including quite a few on here, use it to pour out their hate for him. These are people that were never going to vote for him anyway - do you think he is bothered about their vitriol?

I cannot imagine why he should give a single fuck about what such people think

 

[mcfc1632]

He hasn’t been impartial, it would be absurd to suggest otherwise, but has stood up to an Executive that has itself acted outside convention and tried to undermine the primacy of Parliament. Given that, he has fulfilled his duty.

You agree that he has not been impartial - that is enough to confirm him as a failure in his role, a key responsibility of which is:

"The Speaker is the chief officer and highest authority of the House of Commons and must remain politically impartial at all times."

https://www.parliament.uk/business/commons/the-speaker/the-role-of-the-speaker/role-of-the-speaker/

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

He has not been impartial - that is enough to confirm him as a failure in his role, a key responsibility of which is:

"The Speaker is the chief officer and highest authority of the House of Commons and must remain politically impartial at all times."

https://www.parliament.uk/business/commons/the-speaker/the-role-of-the-speaker/role-of-the-speaker/

Is there a similar rule book that says the Prime Minister shouldn’t be a lying ****?

 

[i kne albert davy]

Is there a similar rule book that says the Prime Minister shouldn’t be a lying ****?

Nope that's always been the essential part of the job.

 

[Ric]

I guess that when you post in the role of ' just another poster' on this thread - rather than as a Mod - it is OK to reply to you in that manner?

Respectfully I genuinely think that you are really wrong on this and you are simply reflecting your opinion based on the way you read things - or do you have some analytics to support/prove that there is balance?

Equally - I can fully accept that my firm opinion that the scale of hostile/snide/demeaning posts on here is massively one-sided - could also just be down to my bias and therefore I also could have it really wrong.

As you know - I tend to keep strange hours and catch up during the wee hours - so I am willing to put some effort in to bring an end to the uncertainty and establish the truth of the situation by undertaking some analysis

I can guarantee I will do so in a manner that ensures any grey areas are decided against my personal view just to make sure that the results cannot be called into question.

Who knows - perhaps some of the more casually hostile/snide posting will reduce if those that do it know that it is being counted. I am happy to include myself in that - even though I am pretty certain that my more exasperated posts are almost exclusively in response to someone being personally argumentative.

As this will only be an expense of my time - I think that you will agree that it would help if I take the trouble to do this and that the results will be informative.

Ha, thanks for the kind offer but I really don’t think such analysis is necessary.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Ha, thanks for the kind offer but I really don’t think such analysis is necessary.

Can’t you at last allow him to keep a tally of how many times I call Johnson a ****?

 

[bluethrunthru]

I think going forward everybody in the UK should have concerns about the events of the last 8 weeks. Johnson has prorogued Parliament illegally. He is seeking to get a treaty through Parliament without proper scrutiny. His letter to the EU was in keeping with his attitude to his office - unsigned, disreputable and potentially misconduct in public office. He has lied without shame and refused to own up to it.

Where we should be concerned is that these actions and this attitude sets precedents for future PM's to act in a Presidential manner effectively trying to force through their own will for simple political gain. His supporters should consider this. Suppose at some time in the future we have a Labour leader elected to PM who sits to the left of Corbyn. What is to stop him or her doing whatsoever they wish pointing to precedent as justification for their moves?

Johnson may well get the Brextremists the No Deal crash out they wish for but as ever you have to be careful about what you wish for.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I think going forward everybody in the UK should have concerns about the events of the last 8 weeks. Johnson has prorogued Parliament illegally. He is seeking to get a treaty through Parliament without proper scrutiny. His letter to the EU was in keeping with his attitude to his office - unsigned, disreputable and potentially misconduct in public office. He has lied without shame and refused to own up to it.

Where we should be concerned is that these actions and this attitude sets precedents for future PM's to act in a Presidential manner effectively trying to force through their own will for simple political gain. His supporters should consider this. Suppose at some time in the future we have a Labour leader elected to PM who sits to the left of Corbyn. What is to stop him or her doing whatsoever they wish pointing to precedent as justification for their moves?

Johnson may well get the Brextremists the No Deal crash out they wish for but as ever you have to be careful about what you wish for.

Someone sitting to the left of Corbyn is unlikely to ever be elected as PM of this country.

 

[mcfc1632]

Is there a similar rule book that says the Prime Minister shouldn’t be a lying ****?

Why are you changing the topic?

I commented upon the post about Bercow - so did you

Given the responsibilities of his role it is my opinion that he is clearly a failure in that role

Given that you are also clear that he has not been impartial it follows that you must acknowledge that to be true

Now I can understand Remainers enjoying how he has gone against his responsibility to be impartial to favour their side - much as I could understand the Everton fans finding no fault with Peter Walton whenever he refereed our matches - but that does not change the fact that he was also a failure

 

[bluethrunthru]

You agree that he has not been impartial - that is enough to confirm him as a failure in his role, a key responsibility of which is:

"The Speaker is the chief officer and highest authority of the House of Commons and must remain politically impartial at all times."

https://www.parliament.uk/business/commons/the-speaker/the-role-of-the-speaker/role-of-the-speaker/

The office of speaker and his partiality has only become an issue as a result of Brexit. Unfortunately - as is often the case - if someone does their job and that job isn't to Brexiteers liking its suddenly called into question. Its funny how Bercow wasn't an issue for most of his time as speaker then suddenly he was - and that coincided with Brexit frustrations. As predicted from the outset failure to execute Brexit was always going to be blamed on others rather than those trying to execute it owning up to their own political inadequacies - if the speaker brings up a measure that frustrates an attempt because it is against Parliamentary rules or if he allows a challenge because it is allowed under Parliamentary rules its not his fault - maybe those attempting to effect change via Parliament need to wise up

 

[bluethrunthru]

Someone sitting to the left of Corbyn is unlikely to ever be elected as PM of this country.

It was just an example - however Johnson got the top job therefore its now open to anybody regardless of ability and morality.

 

[mcfc1632]

Ha, thanks for the kind offer but I really don’t think such analysis is necessary.

Seriously - it would not be a problem and would ensure that we have a genuine and shared view of the truth of things

 

[FlemishDuck]

Someone sitting to the left of Corbyn is unlikely to ever be elected as PM of this country.

Not a communist i assume, but otoh i also think contemporary politics might be underestimating how fast the green movement could rise in the near future. Well tbh i'm not making any prediction's but i wouldn't exclude anything either, the point is still correct in that Johnsonn has set a dangerous precedent.

 

[Vic]

I would be shocked to hear that there is anyone who is genuinely of the view that he has not acted outside convention and in favour of Remain

I can understand people supporting him because he has favoured their side and increased the chances of Remaining - but surely nobody genuinely thinks that he has been impartial?

He's been partial, favouring MPs over a minority government that can't be trusted.

 

[mcfc1632]

Someone sitting to the left of Corbyn is unlikely to ever be elected as PM of this country.

I think that there is an argument that - should Johnson win the upcoming election with a majority and then undertakes a more extreme form of Brexit - then there is a responsibility for that attributable to those who have kept Corbyn in the position of leader of the opposition and thereby allowed that hard Brexit to come about

But that is a different thread I guess

 

[Vic]

I think that people are missing the point on this

In all honesty - do you not think/realise that the stance he has taken / games he has played on this have done his popularity and 'electability' a lot of good.

So - some people, including quite a few on here, use it to pour out their hate for him. These are people that were never going to vote for him anyway - do you think he is bothered about their vitriol?

I cannot imagine why he should give a single fuck about what such people think

Exactly. Pandering to the likes of people who like liars.