Put Brexit at the heart of that election and anything could happen but it is only the Conservatives who have a chance of a majority.
Have you forgotten that a majority of Conservative MPs are remainers? Are you somehow assuming that all Conservatives did, do, or will support Brexit? Why would you imagine that a Conservative majority in the House of Commons = a Brexiteer majority? The UK's relationship with Europe has been a major issue in every General Election for the past 40 years. Whichever party has been anti-Europe has lost, and whichever party has been pro-Europe has won (and the parties have swapped their policies during that time).
No I haven't forgotten it, no I don't and yes you are quite right. I am acutely aware the majority of ALL MPs are remainers, who are currently saying "of course we will respect the will of the people", but which people ? That the establishment, whoever they are, could engineer a reversal from this point would cause such a crisis that it is hard to imagine where it could go. It would be the end of democracy as we thought we knew it.
Don't panic! In democracies an election is held, somebody wins it, and they proceed to pass legislation, nationalise/privatise industries, increase/reduce taxes, start/end military operations, etc etc. Then a few years later the next election is held, voters change their minds, somebody else wins it with different policies, and they proceed to repeal that legislation, reverse the nationalisation/privatisation, increase and reduce different taxes, end/start other military operations, etc etc. That is the way democracies work, and very few things are irreversible - at least until they have actually gone past a point of no return. The advisory referendum result was what it was - a political reality of 2016. In 2017, 2018, or 2019 the political reality might be the same again - or it might be quite different. Who knows? I repeat, that not the "end of democracy", it's just the way democracies work.
Not a fact in my book, merely a highly biased interpretation. It could equally be interpreted that the non voters were content with the status quo, i.e.remaining within the EU.
Had the referendum been arranged in such a way that not-voting was a vote for the status quo, I could agree with you. It was not arranged that way. Intentions are not counted in a referendum, only votes cast. The intentions of non-voters cannot be determined but they can be inferred, on the basis that there are only three possible actions in a referendum - vote Yes, vote No or not vote at all. Voting Yes, statistically speaking, is a vote in favour of the proposition and voting No, its opposite. By not voting at all, the only meaningful statistical interpretation one can infer is that the non-voter is content to follow whoever wins. You can argue otherwise but on what basis? To disprove my hypothesis, you will need to demonstrate that, statistically speaking, a non-voter expects that by not voting, he hopes to achieve the particular result he desires. I submit that this counter-argument is complete nonsense. The majority of non-voters were happy to go along with whichever result the majority had voted for. Had the Remoaners carried the day, the non-voters would have been content with that result, too. To argue otherwise is as meaningless as arguing about the number of angels that can dance on a pin.
What I said was "the end of democracy as we know it". The political class will have shown it's true colours and we the electorate will well and truly know where we stand.
Haven't we known that for a long time? The will of the people and the economic/democratic reality might not be the same thing. If ( and i am talking hypothetically for the moment) the Government went through with a hard Brexit and they had first hand knowledge that it would decimate jobs and the economy, would you still want them to go through with it regardless and keep that from the population, or would you prefer to have it debated in parliament first?
The brass neck of some people: Is Baroness Scotland more shameless than ever? Chandeliers, cronies, £33,000 of paint - and a whistleblower hounded for exposing naked greed | Daily Mail Online
With or without first hand knowledge, I wouldn't trust government to find their arses with either hand. The scenario you are describing is a fantasy. Replace the terms "jobs" and "economy" with "foreknowledge of an alien invasion" - that argument has about as much legitimacy.
no it doesn't. it means those that don't vote don't care who wins. that could be for a gazillion reasons, but for what ever reason they have dropped out and so does their vote. they don't want their vote counted. that's democracy.
So we can agree then that non-voters are irrelevant for all voting purposes and that 51.9% of Britain voted for Brexit? And that we don't have to hear about how the 27.8% who didn't vote, didn't vote for Brexit? We can put that whole non-issue to bed then? Go on, you can agree to that. No harm done.
deffo loz, you/the uk voted to leave Europe. yip deffo a done deal. thought we had moved on? wee are 5months away from triggering, i thought we where talking about who gets what and when. hows the nation going to get funded, what are we going to do with the extra cash, not about the 48odd% plus the already disenfranchised?' thats a lot of disenfranchised people. or maybe if the government has made a bit of a cockup legally, at best you could call that incompetent, at worst? or maybe its just the guinness.
er no finm,, ( i thot you of all people might have understood a little better ),, it is more like they ( well maybe not all but certainly most ) realise that the vote or the count or the result dont matter a fk ,,, the establishment will proceed as they always do and one way or another will cajole / herd Andy Caps into the same corall as they always do, just with a different name,, and we do not wish to partake and give them a mandate to fake lie fk about in our name ,,, i say again,, THERE WILL BE NO BREXIT,,,,,,,,,, dont play the game ....
finm, some of this may have slipped through your filter but there are people bleating about how 27.8% of people who didn't vote in favour of Brexit or against, are somehow an argument that there was no majority in favour of Brexit. It was important to give that particular delusion a decent burial. As for the rest of those issues, the opportunities and problems that remain to be managed will be a matter for the democratically elected UK Government (and not for an un-elected foreign power). As for cock-ups ... are you under the impression that these are uncommon occurrences for Government?
fully aware. it's a process, expose the government of the day as being incompetent, errode the arguments of a brexit, easier as every day passes, start a process to gain a no confidence vote, re elect a brexit with a plan party, or a remain party. brexit, done deal.
Not at all. Imagine if Nissan and all the other motor companies and all the banks had told the government privately that a hard Brexit would mean they would have no choice but to leave the UK. Would you not want to know that before Brexit? Would you think that the government had a responsibility to tell the people of the Country that that is what they had been told?
Are the CEOs of Nissan, the other motor companies and the banks all extra-terrestrials in this scenario? What you are really asking is, if the Government *knew* that Brexit was a really bad idea, wouldn't you want Parliament to debate it and then vote against it? Like I said, it's a fantasy. Government knows no such thing, Nissan et al aren't going to tell Government any such thing and if they do, it's for the purposes of manipulating Government - it isn't advanced warning of actions to be taken. Your question is to all intents and purposes meaningless. Sorry.
