Brexit

Tea anyone?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

No name Bertie wrote:One of the options available is for Jeremy Corbyn to call a vote of no confidence in Boris Johnson within the next few days.  

Does Corbyn have any leadership qualities to call it and win it?  Some political commentators have said he should have called one earlier.

.

More to it than that....If Johnson is successfully No confidenced...He gets to name the date of the subsequent Election...Which will give him the chance to guarantee No Deal..By taking Parliamentary time off the clock..Have it on the 31 October.

At the moment Corbyn or a surrogate don't have the numbers for a Unity Govt..

Your post is too simplistic..

Parliament would have to vote on whether there should be an election. It could decline to have one.

Soul Requiem wrote:So basically the man derided as being incompetent has outmanoeuvred the opposition exactly how he wanted to?

Not just Boris, Cummings and Mogg. This has been carefully planned out for a long time.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Tea anyone?

Just had some thanks, might have some with Rick again tomorrow.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

No name Bertie wrote:One of the options available is for Jeremy Corbyn to call a vote of no confidence in Boris Johnson within the next few days.  

Does Corbyn have any leadership qualities to call it and win it?  Some political commentators have said he should have called one earlier.

.

More to it than that....If Johnson is successfully No confidenced...He gets to name the date of the subsequent Election...Which will give him the chance to guarantee No Deal..By taking Parliamentary time off the clock..Have it on the 31 October.

At the moment Corbyn or a surrogate don't have the numbers for a Unity Govt..

Your post is too simplistic..

Parliament would have to vote on whether there should be an election. It could decline to have one.

Hard to see how Corbyn could turn one down and save face..

A very smart comment I saw the other day referred to the necessity of a 2/3 majority vote on questions such as this. It said that this is what you need to have a chance to be able to formulate legislation for the problem. Don't get that kind of majority and you have sod all chance of getting agreement on the solution.

Guess where we are at.

lostinwales wrote:A very smart comment I saw the other day referred to the necessity of a 2/3 majority vote on questions such as this. It said that this is what you need to have a chance to be able to formulate legislation for the problem. Don't get that kind of majority and you have sod all chance of getting agreement on the solution.

Guess where we are at.

Indeed. A bit late now though, eh?

If only someone had thought to remind the politicians (and thereby the public) ~3 years ago that the Referendum was 'advisory'. In another Universe, a David Cameron döppleganger was saying "Thanks for the vote. We'll take it under advisement. We're now going to commission many independent expert surveys of the probable Brexit impact. When they report back, if there's a demonstrable and likely 'win' for Brexit, we'll trigger A50. If it's marginal/risky or obviously detrimental, we'll be staying in the EU and fighting for change from within. Thank-you for engaging in this democratic process.".

navyblueshorts wrote:

lostinwales wrote:A very smart comment I saw the other day referred to the necessity of a 2/3 majority vote on questions such as this. It said that this is what you need to have a chance to be able to formulate legislation for the problem. Don't get that kind of majority and you have sod all chance of getting agreement on the solution.

Guess where we are at.

Indeed. A bit late now though, eh?

If only someone had thought to remind the politicians (and thereby the public) ~3 years ago that the Referendum was 'advisory'. In another Universe, a David Cameron döppleganger was saying "Thanks for the vote. We'll take it under advisement. We're now going to commission many independent expert surveys of the probable Brexit impact. When they report back, if there's a demonstrable and likely 'win' for Brexit, we'll trigger A50. If it's marginal/risky or obviously detrimental, we'll be staying in the EU and fighting for change from within. Thank-you for engaging in this democratic process.".

Yes. The sensible option.

I just can't see the point in what they are doing at all. There is no plan, no capability to deal with any of the likely results of no deal, no chance of a deal with the EU if they decide to keep back the '£39B'. They are spending more money on hiding evidence and trying to kid us things will be OK than on actual planning, and it seems that any civil servant with any ability involved in the process has left.

lostinwales wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

lostinwales wrote:A very smart comment I saw the other day referred to the necessity of a 2/3 majority vote on questions such as this. It said that this is what you need to have a chance to be able to formulate legislation for the problem. Don't get that kind of majority and you have sod all chance of getting agreement on the solution.

Guess where we are at.

Indeed. A bit late now though, eh?

If only someone had thought to remind the politicians (and thereby the public) ~3 years ago that the Referendum was 'advisory'. In another Universe, a David Cameron döppleganger was saying "Thanks for the vote. We'll take it under advisement. We're now going to commission many independent expert surveys of the probable Brexit impact. When they report back, if there's a demonstrable and likely 'win' for Brexit, we'll trigger A50. If it's marginal/risky or obviously detrimental, we'll be staying in the EU and fighting for change from within. Thank-you for engaging in this democratic process.".

Yes. The sensible option.

I just can't see the point in what they are doing at all. There is no plan, no capability to deal with any of the likely results of no deal, no chance of a deal with the EU if they decide to keep back the '£39B'. They are spending more money on hiding evidence and trying to kid us things will be OK than on actual planning, and it seems that any civil servant with any ability involved in the process has left.

Yep. Truly FUBAR. Hard to know what BJ is after - can only think he's hoping the EU will blink first and before Oct 31st. Mogg and his ilk have, I'm sure, hedged against UK staying in and so want out w/ no deal to make a killing. Mark Francois is just a moron.

It seems to me that their thinking is 'if we don't deliver Brexit on 31st October come what may, we're finished.' They haven't paused to consider that if they go to extreme lengths to deliver Brexit on 31st October, they may also be finished. Brexit was marginally popular in 2016; is a no-deal Brexit in 2019?

And these are extreme lengths, let's be honest. The government isn't even trying to take the rest of the parliamentary party with them, never mind anyone else. They've decided that the end justifies all possible means.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Trumps in power so says everything you need to know about the 48% who voted for him.

Truman? First and only world leader to ever authorise a nuclear attack, yes that's the one.

Suggest you go away and learn about the times/circumstances in which Truman made that decision.

I'm well aware of the circumstances and there is no justification for ever using nuclear weapons against another country.

If you say so...

Personal opinion is it not? If you're happy with the use of nuclear weapons then well...

Of course it's your opinion; wrong, but definitely your opinion. As I said, you weren't there then, you almost certainly don't know enough about why Truman agreed to drop them and, given the man, I reckon he would have done so only in extremis. Given what we know of the weaponry and the modern power thereof, I'd probably agree with you going forward, but then? At that moment in time? Glad you're so morally perfect - must be easy to sleep at night.

Morally perfect? So executing 250,000 people with a click of the finger is now seen as acceptable?

Wartime or not, it was an act of terrorism, it just so happens that the so called moral side were the perpetrators.

It was politically obvious the Conservatives had to deliver Brexit otherwise they would lose their Conservative vote.  It really is surprising that most self identified remainers never seemed to accept that reality.  

Instead self identified remainers and the left wing anti-brexit media - which seems to form the bullk of the mainstream media - judging by the type of "output" they generate - have been mainly developing arguments and attacks that are entirely impotent - and has just resulted in an overwhelming pile of ordure attacking individual politicians and anyone who didn't vote remain as racists, evil, liars, gammon, little englanders, old white people who deserve everthing coming to them et cetera.

It has been Hobbesian, impotent and partisan.  

I stick by my thoughts that as soon as David Cameron resigned that was when the referendum result should have been argued that it was voided.  Not because Brexiters ran rather simplistic messaging campaigns - the money saved COULD not Will go into extra funding of the NHS etc.  You can put 100% of your taxes into the NHS and it still won't be enough because that is the nature of the beast. But because David Cameron did lie and did mislead - his resignation and the fall of his government was proof of it.  Yet remainers surprisingly seem to defend David Cameron and go after others.

As a minimum with Cameron's resignation and the fall of his government - if the argument that the referendum results had been voided would not stick - then it should have led to arguments focusing on the absolute need of some sort of second "confirmatory" referendum.

ps: And of course these arguments should have come from and been the main focus of all those on the remain side or all those concerned for a no-deal brexit. Because all those politicans committed to a brexit at any cost are not going to put those arguments forward - they won the referendum - the public voted OUT. David Cameron had already mentioned it was an irrevocable choice - and presented arguments of a worst case scenario that included a no deal. But despite project fear the vote was still for OUT.

Soul Requiem wrote:So executing 250,000 people with a click of the finger is now seen as acceptable?

Not if it's done for a laugh, but if it were done as the only way to save a billion other lives, then I would consider it acceptable.

No name Bertie wrote:It was politically obvious the Conservatives had to deliver Brexit otherwise they would lose their Conservative vote.  It really is surprising that most self identified remainers never seemed to accept that reality.  

Instead self identified remainers and the left wing anti-brexit media - which seems to form the bullk of the mainstream media - judging by the type of "output" they generate - have been mainly developing arguments and attacks that are entirely impotent - and has just resulted in an overwhelming pile of ordure attacking individual politicians and anyone who didn't vote remain as racists, evil, liars, gammon, little englanders, old white people who deserve everthing coming to them et cetera.

It has been Hobbesian, impotent and partisan.  

I stick by my thoughts that as soon as David Cameron resigned that was when the referendum result should have been argued that it was voided.  Not because Brexiters ran rather simplistic messaging campaigns - the money saved COULD not Will go into extra funding of the NHS etc.  You can put 100% of your taxes into the NHS and it still won't be enough because that is the nature of the beast. But because David Cameron did lie and did mislead - his resignation and the fall of his government was proof of it.  Yet remainers surprisingly seem to defend David Cameron and go after others.

As a minimum with Cameron's resignation and the fall of his government - if the argument that the referendum results had been voided would not stick - then it should have led to arguments focusing on the absolute need of some sort of second "confirmatory" referendum.

ps: And of course these arguments should have come from and been the main focus of all those on the remain side or all those concerned for a no-deal brexit.  Because all those politicans committed to a brexit at any cost are not going to put those arguments forward - they won the referendum - the public voted OUT.  David Cameron had already mentioned it was an irrevocable choice - and presented arguments of a worst case scenario that included a no deal.  But despite project fear the vote was still for OUT.

Sorry this is all a waste of time. Things are much simpler right now.
1) Brexit is still a dumb idea, there is not enough momentum behind it to find a workable solution, and the damage it's causing now willl take years to recover from
2) Lack of planning, lack of preparation, lack of leadershp - and it is all leading to the crumbling of the government and its support structure.

They have had 3 years to come up with something, anything, and all they have come up with is blame the remainers and the EU

lostinwales wrote:Things are much simpler right now.
1) Brexit is still a dumb idea ...
2) Lack of planning, lack of preparation, lack of leadershp ...

Your point 1 is irrelevant.  Brexit was decided with the referendum result in 2016.  Now it is a question of enacting brexit.
Your point 2 is now being addressed under Boris Johnson's leadership.  David Cameron ran away, Theresa May lacked leadership qualities.  Boris Johnson has it in abundance.

So your point 1 is irrelevant.  And you point 2 is being addressed with Boris Johnson.   So I  assume that means you are satisfied?

But from your previous comments it seems to me you are not satisfied and are making a great deal of noise over your dissatisfaction.

Remainers ultimately have to work with Brexiters in a post-referendum, post-Brexit environment for the economic good of Britain - rather than acting to create civil disobedience, revolutionary struggle, division, its downfall.

No name Bertie wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Things are much simpler right now.
1) Brexit is still a dumb idea ...
2) Lack of planning, lack of preparation, lack of leadershp ...

Your point 1 is irrelevant.  Brexit was decided with the referendum result in 2016.  Now it is a question of enacting brexit.
Your point 2 is now being addressed under Boris Johnson's leadership.  David Cameron ran away, Theresa May lacked leadership qualities.  Boris Johnson has it in abundance.

So your point 1 is irrelevant.  And you point 2 is being addressed with Boris Johnson.   So I  assume that means you are satisfied?

But from your previous comments it seems to me you are not satisfied and are making a great deal of noise over your dissatisfaction.

Remainers ultimately have to work with Brexiters in a post-referendum, post-Brexit environment for the economic good of Britain - rather than acting to create civil disobedience, revolutionary struggle, division, its downfall.

Really? What has Boris actually achieved since taking office? Apart from getting sued and causing a constitutional crisis?

They attempted to sue him, he was not sued.

Answer the question. What has he actually achieved?

I'm merely pointing out the barefaced lie in your post.

Oh I see. You also lied. If you're going to be picky, the multiple three cases have not yet concluding. They are attempting to sue his government.

I'm also assuming that, given your rather typical nit-pick, you don't want to answer the question as to whether Johnson has achieved anything yet?

They are attempting to sue the government not his government.

He's 5 weeks into his premiership so it's too early to have an opinion either way not that I've ever said otherwise, if you yourself are going to nitpick every comment by posters you don't like then expect the same back.

No name Bertie wrote:Your point 2 is now being addressed under Boris Johnson's leadership.  David Cameron ran away, Theresa May lacked leadership qualities.  Boris Johnson has it in abundance.

Personally I don't see it - tub-thumping, saying things people want to hear without backing it up in practice, not giving details, further disuniting the country etc isn't my idea of leadership. Do we have any evidence of what his planning is yet and that his planning is actually any good and will work in the future?

No name Bertie wrote:It was politically obvious the Conservatives had to deliver Brexit otherwise they would lose their Conservative vote.  It really is surprising that most self identified remainers never seemed to accept that reality.

Delivering Brexit is one thing; delivering Brexit at any cost, by an arbitrary date, is quite another.

This government seems to have forgotten that the Brexit the Leave campaign promised in 2016 was a good Brexit - benefits galore for the UK. If I was in their shoes, I'd be doing all I could to make sure the Brexit we get is as close to that promise as possible - and I'd certainly be ruling out the possibility of it being as far away from that promise as possible.

They won't be thanked if Brexit is sh!t. They must see that. There's not much political capital to be gained from proving the naysayers right!

I guess what Boris has done is put himself in a good position to win a general election, regardless of whether he holds it mid Oct or early Nov.
Tories polling around 32% in the last week, and I have a feeling they'll siphon off more of the 15% of Brexit Party voters with this parliament suspension strategy. Meanwhile Labour around 25%. Just not close right now.

The problem for Boris is what will he do when he wins the election. What's the point of power? No Deal will bring around an economic catastrophe, and basic WTO is a terrible framework from which to trade- thus no leverage. So Boris will either have to compromise as May did, or keep seeing UK economy lose GDP.

Christ!  You people!  How can there Ever be EVIDENCE that Plans for the Future are Good and will Work?

The Future is Always wishful thinking and no more.  No Time Machines on production lines yet..... we assume!  

We certainly do have evidence, however, that the perfect propaganda about this considered perfect entity with no faults of its own, the totally pure, virtuous and blameless No-State construction called the EU, isn't considered universally Good, and isn't presumed to have 'worked' in the interests of many of those peoples under its influence.
Yep, there is certainly evidence that the EU isn't the perfect Utopia/club its champions endlessly attempt to paint it as.  "Please, please - Please!  Why can't we all just get back to being good EUers?  The European Empire is our only Salvation!  Woe, woe, thrice times woe!"

I doubt any of us here think the EU is perfect, Fly.

Soul Requiem wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Trumps in power so says everything you need to know about the 48% who voted for him.

Truman? First and only world leader to ever authorise a nuclear attack, yes that's the one.

Suggest you go away and learn about the times/circumstances in which Truman made that decision.

I'm well aware of the circumstances and there is no justification for ever using nuclear weapons against another country.

If you say so...

Personal opinion is it not? If you're happy with the use of nuclear weapons then well...

Of course it's your opinion; wrong, but definitely your opinion. As I said, you weren't there then, you almost certainly don't know enough about why Truman agreed to drop them and, given the man, I reckon he would have done so only in extremis. Given what we know of the weaponry and the modern power thereof, I'd probably agree with you going forward, but then? At that moment in time? Glad you're so morally perfect - must be easy to sleep at night.

Morally perfect? So executing 250,000 people with a click of the finger is now seen as acceptable?

Wartime or not, it was an act of terrorism, it just so happens that the so called moral side were the perpetrators.

Moving on...

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I doubt any of us here think the EU is perfect, Fly.

SF is over-reacting? Haven't seen that since...earlier this week.

SecretFly wrote:Christ!  You people!  How can there Ever be EVIDENCE that Plans for the Future are Good and will Work?

The Future is Always wishful thinking and no more.  No Time Machines on production lines yet..... we assume!  

We certainly do have evidence, however, that the perfect propaganda about this considered perfect entity with no faults of its own, the totally pure, virtuous and blameless No-State construction called the EU, isn't considered universally Good, and isn't presumed to have 'worked' in the interests of many of those peoples under its influence.
Yep, there is certainly evidence that the EU isn't the perfect Utopia/club its champions endlessly attempt to paint it as.  "Please, please - Please!  Why can't we all just get back to being good EUers?  The European Empire is our only Salvation!  Woe, woe, thrice times woe!"

More of your nonsense hyperbolae and unfounded extrapolation again, Fly? It's really, really boring.

And the EU having its flaws doesn't make a no-deal Brexit any less damaging.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:And the EU having its flaws doesn't make a no-deal Brexit any less damaging.

Stop it! Stop this daft re-focussing on the actual issue. Honestly...

No name Bertie wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Things are much simpler right now.
1) Brexit is still a dumb idea ...
2) Lack of planning, lack of preparation, lack of leadershp ...

Your point 1 is irrelevant.  Brexit was decided with the referendum result in 2016.  Now it is a question of enacting brexit.
Your point 2 is now being addressed under Boris Johnson's leadership.  David Cameron ran away, Theresa May lacked leadership qualities.  Boris Johnson has it in abundance.

So your point 1 is irrelevant.  And you point 2 is being addressed with Boris Johnson.   So I  assume that means you are satisfied?

But from your previous comments it seems to me you are not satisfied and are making a great deal of noise over your dissatisfaction.

Remainers ultimately have to work with Brexiters in a post-referendum, post-Brexit environment for the economic good of Britain - rather than acting to create civil disobedience, revolutionary struggle, division, its downfall.

Your comments seem to come across as sitting around complaining that someone installed electrics while the house is on fire.

There is no reason to slavishly follow the results of the referendum. The idiots pushing on just play with semantics about it to justify our current path. There is no reason to shut up about the stupidity of it. The way it was conducted has inherently lead to a situation where we are walking into a disaster, with our eyes wide open. Given the margins the only sensible approach would have been to have taken the time to explore the options before article 50. Done the things we are supposedly good at.

As for Boris. He isn't addressing anything at all. He's just talking. He hasn't brought anything to the table with the EU, just doing the minimum so that he can try and put some of the blame on them. His government are also not preparing for what is going to happen. It is just such an utter waste of time, money, energy, reputation. You name it.

lostinwales wrote: ...There is no reason to slavishly follow the results of the referendum. The idiots pushing on just play with semantics about it to justify our current path. There is no reason to shut up about the stupidity of it. The way it was conducted has inherently lead to a situation where we are walking into a disaster, with our eyes wide open. Given the margins the only sensible approach would have been to have taken the time to explore the options before article 50. Done the things we are supposedly good at.

As for Boris. He isn't addressing anything at all. He's just talking. He hasn't brought anything to the table with the EU, just doing the minimum so that he can try and put some of the blame on them. His government are also not preparing for what is going to happen. It is just such an utter waste of time, money, energy, reputation. You name it.

My previous comments have shown my view now of the issue was that the whole decision to put the EU Referendum on the Conservative Manifesto in 2015, Camerons speeches and the reporting of the situation in the lead up to the finalisation of the EU Referendum, the speeches and tactic switching during the EU Referendum campaign and its reporting of it - were all flawed and misleading - and this was demonstrated with the resignation of David Cameron and the fall of his government following the results of the Referendum.

So overall I am sympathetic to some of the things you say in the above comment.

But the nature of the EU Referendum and the nature of what was spoken about it - turned it into a political issue for the conservative party in ensuring that they were seen to act upon the results of the EU Referendum in a TIMELY manner and to bring it into effect.

Rather than questioning the EU Referendum in light of the resignation of David Cameron and the fall of his government - all the energies have been to focus on Brexiter politicians and "brexiters". All that energy was and has turned out to be a waste of time.

And in all of this the media have to a large extent failed us - but then they are not here to properly inform us - they are here to promote themselves and forward their own interests.

YG
Con 33
Lab 22
Lib 21

Got to have a giggle....Coming soon to a Town near you..

"I've lost my job...I'm getting evicted but at least with Boris Brittania rules the waves again"

Have you got a link to that, Truss? I'm just curious to see how other parties polled, not least the Brexit Party.

'Britain elects'...Has the latest polls mate.

Their poll tracker, updated this afternoon, has it as follows:

Conservative 31%

Labour 25%

Liberal Democrats 18%

Brexit Party 13%

Green 6%

The problem with any poll is that with FPTP, it's very difficult to know how that would translate into a predicted number of seats (unless there's an easy way of working it out, and if so I'd like to know what it is).

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Their poll tracker, updated this afternoon, has it as follows:

Conservative 31%
Labour 25%
Liberal Democrats 18%
Brexit Party 13%
Green 6%

Con + Brexit = 44%
Lab + LibDem + Green= 49%

Also, I don't know how useful a poll is that only asks people in England how they're going to vote - if that's what's happened. But even if the SNP's numbers were included, yes it'd be a small percentage, but it's the number of seats you win that matters at Westminster. They carry a lot more clout than any polls would indicate.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Also, I don't know how useful a poll is that only asks people in England how they're going to vote - if that's what's happened. But even if the SNP's numbers were included, yes it'd be a small percentage, but it's the number of seats you win that matters at Westminster. They carry a lot more clout than any polls would indicate.

There are 60 seats across Scotland and I'd say at present SNP are likely to end up with a seat total around the 46 mark (up 12 on 2017), Tories will take a big hit falling to around 6 seats (from 13 in 2017), Lib Dems may hold firm or go up by 1 to 5 seats from 4 in 2017), Labour will also take a hit and will probably end up with 3 seats (down from 5 in 2017).

Do United Kingdom Politicians address any other issues besides Brexit?

In other countries politicians concern themselves with Social issues, the economy, law 'n Order etc?

aucklandlaurie wrote:Do United Kingdom Politicians address any other issues besides Brexit?

In other countries politicians concern themselves with Social issues, the economy, law 'n Order etc?

They used to but they gave up on that years ago

aucklandlaurie wrote:Do United Kingdom Politicians address any other issues besides Brexit?

In other countries politicians concern themselves with Social issues, the economy, law 'n Order etc?

Was thinking exactly the same thing just this morning.

We had a similar long distraction with s.44 dual citizenship debacle which went on and on and on (and could be possibly still be going on)... wasting years of parliament question time instead of actually going about the business of government and being able to address the real issues in the real world. All because a busload of PMs couldn't fill out application forms correctly or provided false information in their declarations.

Then they spend even more hours explaining their blunders live on air all day letting the world know what complete idiots they are. It's unbelievable!
Just makes us all look so pissweak, limp-wristed and incompetent. It's an abuse of the system.

And these people are the ones chosen to represent us?

All the other ministers are doing their jobs and the sun is rising and falling in the UK as usual, but Brexit is whats dominating the news head lines, and has been since 2016.  For all the drama that's gone on over the last 3 years the only effect on my life has been I play an online game called Lords mobile and buy items in the game for $4.99 USA dollars.  Before the referendum i was paying £3.77 to £3.80 a pack and now it's about £4.15 or so.  So for all the fuss that's the extent of the impact on my life.

But to put it in context a Welsh rugby grand slam is what it took to get the staff where I work talking about something else other than Brexit during our dinner break.  Wales beat England in Cardiff and they still talked Brexit, but finally when we won the slam we talked about something else! For one day it was actually nice to have a break.  

Personally I don't care at this point what happens, I started out as a reluctant remainer, ended up voting leave because no one in all the debates during the referendum could actually tell me what benefit to us the EU was, all they did was threaten us.  Rolling out Major and Blair side by side was a massive mistake, so many people hate Tony Blair with a passion that was probably the worst possible mistake they could of made.  Then finally George Osbourne threatening us with that budget was the final straw for my vote.  If Remain was Goliath, and Leave was David, then essentially what happened is Goliath had 20 pints of beer on the way to the fight, tied his own shoe laces together, and managed to trip himself up and decapitate himself on his own sword.  While even after the referendum lining up public school girl Gina Miller who campaigns for remain while never leaving Kensington, and unelected Lords and Ladies talking down to the working classes only serve to increase the venom in the debate.

I will probably just vote for the Brexit party or whatever they guise they take when this is over, I can't see myself voting Labour ever again, I haven't considered voting for them since Tony Blairs second term, and unless Boris delivers a clean Brexit I won't vote Conservative again either.  Both parties have run out of chances for me. But I will be taking an interest in British politics, and I will be voting!

All this mess has proven to me is Britain needs to be independent, and have a massive clear out at the top of our politics / establishment, starting with House of Lords and the main 2 parties in Westminster.  if we can eliminate the BBC license fee along the way because their biased coverage has been a total disgrace from start to finish.  I've got one vote the same as everyone else, but that's the direction in going in after this shambles.

My biggest concern is Britain could be where Germany was in the early 1930's on a slippery rope, and the sheer number of people who consider Tommy Robinson as a working class hero is a real concern.  When Nigel Farage retires I can see all that support going in his direction.  Hitler went to prison and now Tommy is there too, I can see him being the guy who stands up to the establishment and the person the people rally behind.  Not because they agree with his views, but because they simply want something different than the arrogant idiots who are currently running our country.  Throw in an arrogant EU who are a ready made enemy for millions of British people and were all set for another turbulent period in European history.

Tommy Robinson is a **** with a smallish number of hardcore supporters. With any luck he'll die soon, but I doubt we'll be that lucky. We may have to put up with a surge in support for ****s like him, before we realise what we're doing. Could happen like you suggest though, as current generation don't actually have any real memory of Hitler et al and what they were responsible for.

Best thing about Brexit is it'll remove one thing (the EU) which all the t0ssers currently blame for things that have nothing to do with the EU. Wonder who they'll pick on instead?

Dominic Cummings sending out notifications to all Tory MP’s that if they vote for extensive legislation next week they’ll be deselected for the next election by the CCO.

The same Dominic Cummings that had a special advisor to Javid sacked and escorted hy police from No. 10 without Javids knowledge.

Im so glad we voted leave to take power back from unelected bureaucrats. This government act more like tinpot dictators everyday.

Mps voting against the membership should be deselected, that's just basic common sense.

And if they represent Remain seats?

Edit: and I assume that Rees-Mogg, Francois and all their mates in the ERG should he deselected for repeatedly voting against a party policy?

Different situation altogether, the membership are the one who provide the party with a means to survive and the party should be acting in their best interests not the other way round.

Government policy and party policy are two different things.