[arista]

And Trouble Maker Gina Miller
is on the Paper Review

Also James Rubin


Perfect Show For One Active Arm Marr
What a tropper

[arista]

Blimey he is Now sitting Next to Gina




Well done Farage
making Gina Blink more as the Camera
zoomed into her face


Gina Accepts Farage View
but says she is talking about right now

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ger-RIOTS.html

[joeysteele]

The only thing I agreed with Nigel Farage on was a possible need to have an election.
A lot more as to what plans the govt has for leaving would then have to be forthcoming and would be under greater scrutiny too from the media and TV interviewing.
It would also of course give the insight to how well prepared other parties are too on the issue.

If she really believes the polling and really thinks she is over 10% ahead in the polling too, she should go for it as well.

As it is, it would seem with her huffing and puffing that she doesn't even believe her own party would support her plans in a parliamentary vote.
She has an overall majority and on paper her majority is at least 14,however Sinn Feinn are not there,she also would have the support of the poodle party of the Conservatives, the DUP, in addition to the UKIP solitary vote as well.
Effectively giving her at least a 32 overall majority in the Commons.

So she must believe many of her own party will vote against her ideas and plans to be so against getting this over and done with.

I felt Gina made her point really well, I actually also felt Nigel Farage was near seeing her point on a fair bit too.
Farage does believe in democracy, I have no doubt on that being fair to him.
So why he would be against the UK parliament voting on this beyond me.
Also if MPs of other parties did use this to try to stop leaving, he could have a great time exposing all that.

I support the court action still and for me Gina was right as to what she said on this programme Marr this morning.
Hopefully it will come to a general election on this issue, that would not only be a test of the plans for leaving from the parties that wish to, it would also be a test as to where the mood of the voters really is at this time too.
What is to fear if all is really as it was in June.

[Withano]

She destroyed him lol

[Kizzy]

Of course he agreed, a huge part of his argument for leaving the EU was that we abide by OUR laws...Well, this was one so abide away.

The problem with sovereignty is we don't have a politically active sovereign, and we certainly don't want Theresa assuming the role of sovereign in parliament, the air has a pungent Cromwellian aroma to it atm.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

The only thing I agreed with Nigel Farage on was a possible need to have an election.
A lot more as to what plans the govt has for leaving would then have to be forthcoming and would be under greater scrutiny too from the media and TV interviewing.
It would also of course give the insight to how well prepared other parties are too on the issue.

If she really believes the polling and really thinks she is over 10% ahead in the polling too, she should go for it as well.

As it is, it would seem with her huffing and puffing that she doesn't even believe her own party would support her plans in a parliamentary vote.
She has an overall majority and on paper her majority is at least 14,however Sinn Feinn are not there,she also would have the support of the poodle party of the Conservatives, the DUP, in addition to the UKIP solitary vote as well.
Effectively giving her at least a 32 overall majority in the Commons.

So she must believe many of her own party will vote against her ideas and plans to be so against getting this over and done with.

I felt Gina made her point really well, I actually also felt Nigel Farage was near seeing her point on a fair bit too.
Farage does believe in democracy, I have no doubt on that being fair to him.
So why he would be against the UK parliament voting on this beyond me.
Also if MPs of other parties did use this to try to stop leaving, he could have a great time exposing all that.

I support the court action still and for me Gina was right as to what she said on this programme Marr this morning.
Hopefully it will come to a general election on this issue, that would not only be a test of the plans for leaving from the parties that wish to, it would also be a test as to where the mood of the voters really is at this time too.
What is to fear if all is really as it was in June.

Totally disagree! Who does she think she is, too full of her own importance.

The democratic voting process in this country will cease to exist if people like her get their way. A democratic public vote cannot be overturned because certain people don't like the outcome and attempt to overrule it because they think they know best. Sheer arrogance!

If another vote went the other way and then someone from the leave camp challenged it through the courts where would it stop? Agree or disagree a democratic vote has to be respected. The woman is simply a sore loser with enough money to throw a tantrum.

[arista]

"Totally disagree! Who does she think she is, too full of her own importance.

The democratic voting process in this country will cease to exist if people like her get their way. A democratic public vote cannot be overturned because certain people don't like the outcome and attempt to overrule it because they think they know best. Sheer arrogance!"


Bang on Right Brillo

[jaxie]

I agreed with the guy who said Parliament voted for a referendum, the people voted to leave, there should be a certain amount of ability for the government to use executive powers to get on with the job. After they had already said they would come back to parliament to discuss any potential deal afterwards.

It seems to me completely bizarre that suddenly every facet of Brexit must be analysed and scrutinised. We've been to war with less complaining about soveriegnity of Parliament from the very people who want to give our democracy away. I feel like I'm living in the twilight zone. Hopefully the Supreme Court will have some sense.

Now Corbin says he will block Brexit if he doesn't get a list of things and Sturgeon is getting in on the Supreme Court appeal. The political point scoring abounds. What Corbin is forgetting is that a lot of those Brexit voters were traditional Labour supporters. He is shamefully selling them out with his attitude.

For once I agree with Joey, we should probably have a general election at this point so that Corbin can finally go and give his party a chance in 5 years time and people can bring back the Tories with the biggest majority of all time. If this keeps up and there is an election. I might vote Tory myself for the first time in my life, I might even campaign for them.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I agreed with the guy who said Parliament voted for a referendum, the people voted to leave, there should be a certain amount of ability for the government to use executive powers to get on with the job. After they had already said they would come back to parliament to discuss any potential deal afterwards.

It seems to me completely bizarre that suddenly every facet of Brexit must be analysed and scrutinised. We've been to war with less complaining about soveignity of Parliament from the very people who want to give our democracy away. I feel like I'm living in the twilight zone. Hopefully the Supreme Court will have some sense.

No Corbin says he will block Brexit if he doesn't get a list of things and Sturgeon is getting in on he Supreme Court appeal.

For once I agree with Joey, we should probably have a general election at this point so that Corbin can finally go and give his party a chan e in 5 years time and people can bring back the Tories with the biggest majority of all time. If this keeps up and there is an election. I might vote Tory !myself for the time in my life, I might even campaign for them.

THAT is what FRUSTRATION does Jaxie.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

[/B]

THAT is what FRUSTRATION does Jaxie.

It all just beggers belief. We drop bombs on people and sanctimonious twits barely mutter a peep but leaving the EU must have every word examined. Some people should have thought all this scrutiny was meaningful before now if they really believed it was about our parliamentary democracy.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Totally disagree! Who does she think she is, too full of her own importance.

The democratic voting process in this country will cease to exist if people like her get their way. A democratic public vote cannot be overturned because certain people don't like the outcome and attempt to overrule it because they think they know best. Sheer arrogance!

If another vote went the other way and then someone from the leave camp challenged it through the courts where would it stop? Agree or disagree a democratic vote has to be respected. The woman is simply a sore loser with enough money to throw a tantrum.

I like you.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I like you.

Great minds etc

[jaxie]

What I want to know is where were all these naysayers and belief that referendums aren't valid BEFOREHAND. Why weren't any of these concerns brought up before or when Scotland had theirs?

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Totally disagree! Who does she think she is, too full of her own importance.

The democratic voting process in this country will cease to exist if people like her get their way. A democratic public vote cannot be overturned because certain people don't like the outcome and attempt to overrule it because they think they know best. Sheer arrogance!

If another vote went the other way and then someone from the leave camp challenged it through the courts where would it stop? Agree or disagree a democratic vote has to be respected. The woman is simply a sore loser with enough money to throw a tantrum.

Originally Posted by jaxie

I agreed with the guy who said Parliament voted for a referendum, the people voted to leave, there should be a certain amount of ability for the government to use executive powers to get on with the job. After they had already said they would come back to parliament to discuss any potential deal afterwards.

It seems to me completely bizarre that suddenly every facet of Brexit must be analysed and scrutinised. We've been to war with less complaining about soveriegnity of Parliament from the very people who want to give our democracy away. I feel like I'm living in the twilight zone. Hopefully the Supreme Court will have some sense.

Now Corbin says he will block Brexit if he doesn't get a list of things and Sturgeon is getting in on the Supreme Court appeal. The political point scoring abounds. What Corbin is forgetting is that a lot of those Brexit voters were traditional Labour supporters. He is shamefully selling them out with his attitude.

For once I agree with Joey, we should probably have a general election at this point so that Corbin can finally go and give his party a chance in 5 years time and people can bring back the Tories with the biggest majority of all time. If this keeps up and there is an election. I might vote Tory myself for the first time in my life, I might even campaign for them.

Its because we live in a democratic country that isnt run by a dictator that this is happening. Sure 52% wants May to trigger it but she cant just go ahead and do it with a snap of the fingers cos we're not living in a dictatorship. I dont understand why youre mad about this, well I do, but you shouldnt be.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by jaxie

What I want to know is where were all these naysayers and belief that referendums aren't valid BEFOREHAND. Why weren't any of these concerns brought up before or when Scotland had theirs?

Because Farage spent his adult life fighting for something he never researched.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Withano

Its because we live in a democratic country that isnt run by a dictator that this is happening. Sure 52% wants May to trigger it but she cant just go ahead and do it with a snap of the fingers cos we're not living in a dictatorship. I dont understand why youre mad about this, well I do, but you shouldnt be.

I probably shouldn't bother to reply dingbat dardang wibbet but governments have always had the executive powers to do the job. I'm not at all mad I don't know why you'd think I am. Diddly plot doodly wobbly be careful what you wish for, I don't think you'll like it.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Totally disagree! Who does she think she is, too full of her own importance.

The democratic voting process in this country will cease to exist if people like her get their way. A democratic public vote cannot be overturned because certain people don't like the outcome and attempt to overrule it because they think they know best. Sheer arrogance!

If another vote went the other way and then someone from the leave camp challenged it through the courts where would it stop? Agree or disagree a democratic vote has to be respected. The woman is simply a sore loser with enough money to throw a tantrum.

And that is what it all boils down to...A tantrum.
This woman doesn't give a crap about parliamentary democracy aslong as she's making money.
All they are trying to do is delay and make the whole thing harder than it needs to be.
While in the process causing more and more uncertainty and instability and will more than likely end up getting themselves a hard Brexit(which remainers apparently don't want).
'Democracy, literally, rule by the people. The term is derived from the Greek dēmokratiā, which was coined from dēmos (“people”) and kratos (“rule”) in the middle of the 5th century bc to denote the political systems then existing in some Greek city-states, notably Athens.'
It's amusing how childish it all looks tbh
They were never going to let it run smoothly and knuckle down and get on with it.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

And that is what it all boils down to...A tantrum.
This woman doesn't give a crap about parliamentary democracy aslong as she's making money.
All they are trying to do is delay and make the whole thing harder than it needs to be.
While in the process causing more and more uncertainty and instability and will more than likely end up getting themselves a hard Brexit(which remainers apparently don't want).
'Democracy, literally, rule by the people. The term is derived from the Greek dēmokratiā, which was coined from dēmos (“people”) and kratos (“rule”) in the middle of the 5th century bc to denote the political systems then existing in some Greek city-states, notably Athens.'
It's amusing how childish it all looks tbh
They were never going to let it run smoothly and knuckle down and get on with it.

Quite right and democracy, rule by the people, not over rule the people. Or ask the people then give the people what we think is best for them.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Quite right and democracy, rule by the people, not over rule the people. Or ask the people then give the people what we think is best for them.

Exactly

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

Exactly

I need to get myself some new boots and a warmer coat for the March. "What do we want, Hard Brexit, when do we want it now!"

[Withano]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I probably shouldn't bother to reply dingbat dardang wibbet but governments have always had the executive powers to do the job. I'm not at all mad I don't know why you'd think I am. Diddly plot doodly wobbly be careful what you wish for, I don't think you'll like it.

Theyve never had the power to specifically remove the country from the EU, never, at any point in history. Never ever.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Withano

Theyve never had the power to specifically remove the country from the EU, never, at any point in history. Never ever.

Then they also didn't have the power to take us into the EU, or indeed to pass the Maastrict or the Lisbon treaties through into our law. Other countries had a referendum on Maastrict we didn't. It was actually squeezed into law via unprecedented pressure by John Major. I bet a legal challenge would be interesting. We might not even legally be in the EU at all.

I could live with that.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Totally disagree! Who does she think she is, too full of her own importance.

The democratic voting process in this country will cease to exist if people like her get their way. A democratic public vote cannot be overturned because certain people don't like the outcome and attempt to overrule it because they think they know best. Sheer arrogance!

If another vote went the other way and then someone from the leave camp challenged it through the courts where would it stop? Agree or disagree a democratic vote has to be respected. The woman is simply a sore loser with enough money to throw a tantrum.

Yes it can,if it is the law that it can be and that however is not the issue, the court case is about the right of MPs who all canvassed in a Nationwide referendum on the issue to be consulted and vote on the process of when to and also the leaving of the EU.

It is not at all about overturning the decision of the voters to leave it is only about when and how and who really oversees that.

It mystifies me why people who wanted full democracy and the authority of the UK parliament to be returned from the EU back to the UK parliament now fear so amazingly and aggressively any votes on it, whether that be public voting or even the elected MPs in Parliament as to it.

Parliament only sanctioned holding a referendum. not how the process should go or when following that referendum.


I will address jaxie now being very careful what I say, a general election is a good idea in my view,pleased you agree, for many reasons but that would test all the parties as to their plans for leaving and when to start it too.
A lot of in depth scrutiny from the likes of Andrew Neill, Marr and others would be very welcome in an election campaign.

However the voters could then decide what parties they trust more too with this, from hearing all the plans presented but more to the point vote for the leaving process the voters really want.
So it would also be a good test of where public opinion is on all the ways of leaving too and whoever got elected, would then have the clear mandate to carry out what was then voted for.

I think you may well find you could be disappointed at what may result however, the Conservatives would not get the biggest majority ever, even on the current polling with them about 14% ahead of Labour in the best polls for them, that would only get them an 80 to 90 overall majority.
Much better than the 12 they have now and for sure and certainly a strong mandate to go ahead solely with their plans.

No way however the biggest majority ever, not even to Tony Blair's overall majority in excess of 170 in 1997 and almost duplicated in 2001, and nowhere near the 200+ overall majority for the Conservatives in 1924.

The thing about general elections is they do usually bind minimum support for parties, while some voters regularly switch and float, there is a level certainly the 2 main parties will not likely go below.
I would put that at just over 25% for Labour in the worst of elections for them and more like 30% for the Conservatives in the worst likely election for them too.
That leaves little, in fact no room in this awful electoral system of first past the post, for any other party to really make any breakthrough.
With PR that would be a different matter altogether.
Also in general elections often odd things happen that turn the tide too, you may just get a shock at any result that comes about after a strongly scrutinised campaign.


Back to brillopad, who wasn't going to let it run smoothly, Theresa May was elected by some of her MPs to lead the party before the Autumn recess of parliament.
Once back in September, she could have held a vote right off to trigger article 50, she has an overall majority, she has the support of the DUP from Northern Ireland and also the one lone voice for UKIP in the Commons, Douglas Carswell.
That should have been an effective and easy majority to trigger article 50.

What did she do, she delayed the whole process right up to, for the present, the end of March next year, no one else, she did.
She has instigated the delay and allowed suspicion and frustration to build, no one else.
Why.

I will never grasp why anyone and it seems to be only some of those who voted leave now fear the democratic votes of voters or elected MPs when they screamed for same until they got this referendum.

However too, for the present very learned Judges after listening for weeks to submissions from both arguments have concluded in UK law, the elected parliament, not just govt, must have a vote on the process.
In UK law.
It seems now there are thoughts that this govt, should be able to act above the law and if people support that, that sets a very dangerous precedent indeed for the UK.

Now lets see if this appeal is overturned or upheld, if it is upheld,I wonder if all against this court action will then support Theresa May and the govt taking the issue on appeal then to the European court after that, which she and the govt would be in their rights to do so to try to get them to overturn the high court and Supreme court rulings..
What an irony that would be then however.

Yet all she had to do, and in fact still only needs to do, is simply hold a vote in Parliament for all elected MPs from all parties elected to have their say and sanction the process,just as they did to 'only' hold the referendum in the first place.
Avoiding all this bitterness,division and possible further delay.

Had I been PM, I know the route I would have preferred to take as to getting this process going, fairly quick votes with as much support and consensus I could have got from across the duly elected UK Parliament.

At the moment,were the govt to press on with leaving and triggering article 50, they would now be acting against UK law.
That could cause a massive constitutional crisis as well as actually being illegal.
Are you saying govts should be able to be above the law and no one should dare challenge them if they think they are.
Not a road I want to go down for my Country, no way.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Yes it can,if it is the law that it can be and that however is not the issue, the court case is about the right of MPs who all canvassed in a Nationwide referendum on the issue to be consulted and vote on the process of when to and also the leaving of the EU.

It is not at all about overturning the decision of the voters to leave it is only about when and how and who really oversees that.

It mystifies me why people who wanted full democracy and the authority of the UK parliament to be returned from the EU back to the UK parliament now fear so amazingly and aggressively any votes on it, whether that be public voting or even the elected MPs in Parliament as to it.

Parliament only sanctioned holding a referendum. not how the process should go or when following that referendum.


I will address jaxie now being very careful what I say, a general election is a good idea in my view,pleased you agree, for many reasons but that would test all the parties as to their plans for leaving and when to start it too.
A lot of in depth scrutiny from the likes of Andrew Neill, Marr and others would be very welcome in an election campaign.

However the voters could then decide what parties they trust more too with this, from hearing all the plans presented but more to the point vote for the leaving process the voters really want.
So it would also be a good test of where public opinion is on all the ways of leaving too and whoever got elected, would then have the clear mandate to carry out what was then voted for.

I think you may well find you could be disappointed at what may result however, the Conservatives would not get the biggest majority ever, even on the current polling with them about 14% ahead of Labour in the best polls for them, that would only get them an 80 to 90 overall majority.
Much better than the 12 they have now and for sure and certainly a strong mandate to go ahead solely with their plans.

No way however the biggest majority ever, not even to Tony Blair's overall majority in excess of 170 in 1997 and almost duplicated in 2001, and nowhere near the 200+ overall majority for the Conservatives in 1924.

The thing about general elections is they do usually bind minimum support for parties, while some voters regularly switch and float, there is a level certainly the 2 main parties will not likely go below.
I would put that at just over 25% for Labour in the worst of elections for them and more like 30% for the Conservatives in the worst likely election for them too.
That leaves little, in fact no room in this awful electoral system of first past the post, for any other party to really make any breakthrough.
With PR that would be a different matter altogether.
Also in general elections often odd things happen that turn the tide too, you may just get a shock at any result that comes about after a strongly scrutinised campaign.


Back to brillopad, who wasn't going to let it run smoothly, Theresa May was elected by some of her MPs to lead the party before the Autumn recess of parliament.
Once back in September, she could have held a vote right off to trigger article 50, she has an overall majority, she has the support of the DUP from Northern Ireland and also the one lone voice for UKIP in the Commons, Douglas Carswell.
That should have been an effective and easy majority to trigger article 50.

What did she do, she delayed the whole process right up to, for the present, the end of March next year, no one else, she did.
She has instigated the delay and allowed suspicion and frustration to build, no one else.
Why.

I will never grasp why anyone and it seems to be only some of those who voted leave now fear the democratic votes of voters or elected MPs when they screamed for same until they got this referendum.

However too, for the present very learned Judges after listening for weeks to submissions from both arguments have concluded in UK law, the elected parliament, not just govt, must have a vote on the process.
In UK law.
It seems now there are thoughts that this govt, should be able to act above the law and if people support that, that sets a very dangerous precedent indeed for the UK.

Now lets see if this appeal is overturned or upheld, if it is upheld,I wonder if all against this court action will then support Theresa May and the govt taking the issue on appeal then to the European court after that, which she and the govt would be in their rights to do so to try to get them to overturn the high court and Supreme court rulings..
What an irony that would be then however.

Yet all she had to do, and in fact still only needs to do, is simply hold a vote in Parliament for all elected MPs from all parties elected t have their say and sanction the process just as they did to only hold the referendum in the first place.
Avoiding all this bitterness,division and possible further delay.

Had I been PM, I know the route I would have preferred to take as to getting this process going, fairly quick votes with as much support and consensus I could have got from across the duly elected UK Parliament.

At the moment,were the govt to press on with leaving and triggering article 50, they would now be acting against UK law.
That could cause a massive constitutional crisis as well as actually being illegal.
Are you saying govts should be able to be above the law and no one should dare challenge them if they think they are.
Not a road I want to go down for my Country, no way.

Please clarify what you mean by that statement?

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Then they also didn't have the power to take us into the EU, or indeed to pass the Maastrict or the Lisbon treaties through into our law. Other countries had a referendum on Maastrict we didn't. It was actually squeezed into law via unprecedented pressure by John Major. I bet a legal challenge would be interesting. We might not even legally be in the EU at all.

I could live with that.

I stated this many times before Jaxie - We are NOT legally in the EU.