Before Being Given A Rice Cooker I'd Use...
Food & Drink0 min ago
Answers
May has said said that the person to negotiate will not be her. So who will it be I wonder?
11:31 Thu 30th Jun 2016
Very strange all this, although Boris was late in joining Brexit, he then became the leader, not accepting Farage to join in.
Then once we voted to come out, which in turn managed to get rid of Cameron.
He then finally withdrew his bid to become PM so leaving the path clear for May a pro-Eu candidate to bid for the position.
Makes one wonder if all this wasn't a planned conspiracy on behalf of the establishment?
Then once we voted to come out, which in turn managed to get rid of Cameron.
He then finally withdrew his bid to become PM so leaving the path clear for May a pro-Eu candidate to bid for the position.
Makes one wonder if all this wasn't a planned conspiracy on behalf of the establishment?
// the next elect is 2020, gromit, long way away. //
They will not risk another Referendum on accepting the New Deal. They might lose again. So they will call a quick election that the Conservatives can't lose. The 3 main parties will all campaign to accept the New Deal. Only UKIP will campaign for full Brexit. UKIP would have to get over 50% of the seats for Brexit to happen, and that will never happen.
They will not risk another Referendum on accepting the New Deal. They might lose again. So they will call a quick election that the Conservatives can't lose. The 3 main parties will all campaign to accept the New Deal. Only UKIP will campaign for full Brexit. UKIP would have to get over 50% of the seats for Brexit to happen, and that will never happen.
"Cameron encouraged us to expect that brexit would start world war three, are you saying he promised another war?"
While for sure the Remain campaign made a few howlers, this isn't really one of them. Cameron merely suggested that there would be an increased risk of destabilisation in Europe if we left the EU, and subsequently it broke up. This neither promises, nor gives reason to expect, World War III, and it was a massive misrepresentation of what he was saying. It's not clear that the risk is quantifiable anyway, let alone the change to it, but there was never a threat of WWIII.
While for sure the Remain campaign made a few howlers, this isn't really one of them. Cameron merely suggested that there would be an increased risk of destabilisation in Europe if we left the EU, and subsequently it broke up. This neither promises, nor gives reason to expect, World War III, and it was a massive misrepresentation of what he was saying. It's not clear that the risk is quantifiable anyway, let alone the change to it, but there was never a threat of WWIII.
"They will not risk another Referendum on accepting the New Deal. They might lose again. So they will call a quick election that the Conservatives can't lose." - err no, they need 2 thirds to dissolve parliament and there are a lot of marginals, Labour are not exactly top of the pops, they wont want to risk their seats and if the public get a wiff this they'll vote UKIP in enough numbers to boot the lot of the traitors out. The current system is not set up for UKIP we know that but once you get to the tipping point, goodbye ABT, hello Nigel. the content of the commons know this and won't want to be out on their arises any quicker than they need to be. But even if you are correct is it not a disgusting dereliction to ognore the people in this way?
Garaman, this is a silly argument. The Brexit camp made no promises. It was not in a position to make promises. It simply promoted the fact that by leaving the EU this country would no longer be constrained by EU rules – and if we do it, and do it properly, we won’t be constrained by EU rules. What’s the problem?
