charon 4,943 Posted June 24, 2016 http://brokennews.com.au/2016/06/24/australia-leave-au-stralia/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RoverAndOut 4,746 Posted June 24, 2016 Dunno if it is the biggest single f**k-up by a British PM since the Suez, but if not it's close. He's basically deaded his whole career and political legacy because he didn't have the balls to tell John Redwood to f**k off. He deleted his career because he assumed, wrongly, that because he won the last election with a clear majority, against all bets and forecasts, he thought that his support to remain was a given. He was well effing wrong. It had nothing to do with the majority (which was only 12). It was that he never intended to get a majority in the first place. Miliband's weakness royally fucked the Tories. Osborne pledged £10 billion of spending cuts, knowing that in a coalition agreement this would get watered down to, say, half that. Cameron promised an In-Out referendum if we gave his party an overall majority, a safe bet because we were heading for another hung parliament and Labour were most likely going to form the next government anyway. Once the Tories got their majority, he had no option but to stand by the £10 billion cuts and that he had no option but to hold his promised referendum. His majority should never have entered into it, he knew even those who voted for his party were largely Eurosceptic, let alone the Ukippers. The reason governments have been so reticent to give an In-Out referendum, rightly or wrongly, is because of precisely this - the fear was it would be a close Out vote. Cameron boxed himself in a corner and then couldn't successfully get out of it. Where do you get 12 from? The last election was won with a big majority ( seats) there is no argument about it. Every pollster, every 'expert' all predicted an outright win for Labour and it didn't happen. Im not even sure how you can think that Cameron went into the election on the basis that he would become part of another coalition? If that had happened again, he would have had to go, he would have failed to secure an overall majority for the second successive time. He would have known about the Eurosceptics, however, he wouldn't have known that so many would have gone against his advice, and we are talking about the public not politicians, nor would he, or for that matter Corbyn and the other Labour 'ins' have even begun to understand that Party Politics meant jack shit to traditional Labour supporters. He had to offer a referendum, if he hadn't he would have been accused of being undemocratic, we are not yet North Korea. Once he made that choice he banked on the public backing him as they did in the election. We shall have to agree to disagree. A majority isn't the number of seats you get, it's the number of seats more than all the other parties you get. 2015 Parliament: 650 seats (326 needed for a majority) Conservatives: 330 seats Labour: 232 seats SNP: 50 seats Lib Dems: 8 seats DUP: 8 seats Sinn Fein: 4 seats (but they don't sit in Parliament) Plaid Cymru: 3 seats SDLP: 3 seats UUP: 2 seats UKIP: 1 seat Greens: 1 seat Independent: 1 seat Speaker: 1 seat Government: 330 Opposition 320 Sinn Fein don't take their seats (4), Speaker is neutral, as are his three deputies (2 Labour, 1 Con), all of which reduces the Opposition numbers by 8 more. 330-308 = Difference of 22 and a Working Majority of 12 (i.e. if 12 Conservatives vote with the opposition, the opposition has a majority and the government lose the vote). For comparison, Mrs T. had majorities of 44 (1979), 144 (1983) and 102 (1987). Blair had majorities of 179 (1997), 167 (2001) and 66 (2005). Major, on the other hand had a majority of 21 and I'm assuming you remember how unstable that government was - 12 is nothing. Almost all the polls in the run-up to the election said the most likely result was a hung parliament with Labour as the largest party. That's why there was so much talk about a Labour-SNP pact post-election, it was likely the only way to form a government. Ruling parties rarely gain seats (1983 was the last time before 2015) so a Tory majority was seen as unlikely. You are correct that there would have been pressure on Cameron if they had been in another coalition, and he would naturally have been finished had they lost the election. Instead, he won a majority, the first for the Tories since 1992. The thing nobody seems to understand about 2010 is that while Cameron pledged a referendum, he was in coalition with the Lib Dems, who would never allow a referendum. The only way to get a referendum was to get a Tory majority, if he'd fallen short and done another deal with the Lib Dems, or - as some were suggesting in the event of a fragmented Parliament - a 'Grand Coalition' with Labour, he wouldn't have got the referendum through Parliament as the other parties would vote against it. The fact that we are not North Korea is exactly the reason he couldn't give a referendum - we have a Parliament and you need a majority of the Parliament to pass anything. A Tory majority was the only way he'd get a referendum and once he got it he had to win it. He didn't and that's his cross to bear. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,218 Posted June 24, 2016 I cannot say Im surprised at the vicious tone taken by the IN supporters. Pretty fucking venomous TBH, nasty, vindictive, fuck, you would have thought that THEY were the Right Wing Sun readers!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
themaninblack 2,112 Posted June 24, 2016 Dunno if it is the biggest single f**k-up by a British PM since the Suez, but if not it's close. He's basically deaded his whole career and political legacy because he didn't have the balls to tell John Redwood to f**k off. He deleted his career because he assumed, wrongly, that because he won the last election with a clear majority, against all bets and forecasts, he thought that his support to remain was a given. He was well effing wrong. It had nothing to do with the majority (which was only 12). It was that he never intended to get a majority in the first place. Miliband's weakness royally fucked the Tories. Osborne pledged £10 billion of spending cuts, knowing that in a coalition agreement this would get watered down to, say, half that. Cameron promised an In-Out referendum if we gave his party an overall majority, a safe bet because we were heading for another hung parliament and Labour were most likely going to form the next government anyway. Once the Tories got their majority, he had no option but to stand by the £10 billion cuts and that he had no option but to hold his promised referendum. His majority should never have entered into it, he knew even those who voted for his party were largely Eurosceptic, let alone the Ukippers. The reason governments have been so reticent to give an In-Out referendum, rightly or wrongly, is because of precisely this - the fear was it would be a close Out vote. Cameron boxed himself in a corner and then couldn't successfully get out of it. Where do you get 12 from? The last election was won with a big majority ( seats) there is no argument about it. Every pollster, every 'expert' all predicted an outright win for Labour and it didn't happen. Im not even sure how you can think that Cameron went into the election on the basis that he would become part of another coalition? If that had happened again, he would have had to go, he would have failed to secure an overall majority for the second successive time. He would have known about the Eurosceptics, however, he wouldn't have known that so many would have gone against his advice, and we are talking about the public not politicians, nor would he, or for that matter Corbyn and the other Labour 'ins' have even begun to understand that Party Politics meant jack shit to traditional Labour supporters. He had to offer a referendum, if he hadn't he would have been accused of being undemocratic, we are not yet North Korea. Once he made that choice he banked on the public backing him as they did in the election. We shall have to agree to disagree. A majority isn't the number of seats you get, it's the number of seats more than all the other parties you get. 2015 Parliament: 650 seats (326 needed for a majority) Conservatives: 330 seats Labour: 232 seats SNP: 50 seats Lib Dems: 8 seats DUP: 8 seats Sinn Fein: 4 seats (but they don't sit in Parliament) Plaid Cymru: 3 seats SDLP: 3 seats UUP: 2 seats UKIP: 1 seat Greens: 1 seat Independent: 1 seat Speaker: 1 seat Government: 330 Opposition 320 Sinn Fein don't take their seats (4), Speaker is neutral, as are his three deputies (2 Labour, 1 Con), all of which reduces the Opposition numbers by 8 more. 330-308 = Difference of 22 and a Working Majority of 12 (i.e. if 12 Conservatives vote with the opposition, the opposition has a majority and the government lose the vote). For comparison, Mrs T. had majorities of 44 (1979), 144 (1983) and 102 (1987). Blair had majorities of 179 (1997), 167 (2001) and 66 (2005). Major, on the other hand had a majority of 21 and I'm assuming you remember how unstable that government was - 12 is nothing. Almost all the polls in the run-up to the election said the most likely result was a hung parliament with Labour as the largest party. That's why there was so much talk about a Labour-SNP pact post-election, it was likely the only way to form a government. Ruling parties rarely gain seats (1983 was the last time before 2015) so a Tory majority was seen as unlikely. You are correct that there would have been pressure on Cameron if they had been in another coalition, and he would naturally have been finished had they lost the election. Instead, he won a majority, the first for the Tories since 1992. The thing nobody seems to understand about 2010 is that while Cameron pledged a referendum, he was in coalition with the Lib Dems, who would never allow a referendum. The only way to get a referendum was to get a Tory majority, if he'd fallen short and done another deal with the Lib Dems, or - as some were suggesting in the event of a fragmented Parliament - a 'Grand Coalition' with Labour, he wouldn't have got the referendum through Parliament as the other parties would vote against it. The fact that we are not North Korea is exactly the reason he couldn't give a referendum - we have a Parliament and you need a majority of the Parliament to pass anything. A Tory majority was the only way he'd get a referendum and once he got it he had to win it. He didn't and that's his cross to bear. Which is why he looked so shit-scared the day after the election when it sank in that he had a majority. That was not the plan! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
charon 4,943 Posted June 24, 2016 Mrs Cameron looks in ptsd , fucking boot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lard Bazaar 3,799 Posted June 24, 2016 Well I voted in. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,218 Posted June 24, 2016 Things have become more serious. Geldof is, apparently, handing back his knighthood. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DevonDeathTrip 2,358 Posted June 24, 2016 Ah, good times. Nothing like a bit of chaos and confusion to blow the cobwebs away. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eesti 151 Posted June 24, 2016 LIKE this post if you are British and pro-Brexit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eesti 151 Posted June 24, 2016 LIKE this post if you are British and anti-Brexit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eesti 151 Posted June 24, 2016 LIKE this post if you were pro-Brexit but are starting to regret Brexit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eesti 151 Posted June 24, 2016 LIKE this post if you are not British but are pro-Brexit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eesti 151 Posted June 24, 2016 LIKE this post if you are not British but are anti-Brexit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Mad Hatter 1,092 Posted June 24, 2016 Like this post if you think eesti is an idiot who's desperate for likes. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gcreptile 10,966 Posted June 24, 2016 If only they'd done an obituary for Michel Delpech, the media could have shown they did have faith in Europe. I had to think about this again. With all the Australian obits appearing in the British press, and people like Andrew Smith getting a Guardian obit, obituary-wise the UK (press) has indeed regarded itself more as a member of the Five Eyes coalition than of the EU. It's indeed a bit symbolic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
themaninblack 2,112 Posted June 24, 2016 Ah, good times. Nothing like a bit of chaos and confusion to blow the cobwebs away. Makes the 1970s look like a piece of piss... 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,218 Posted June 24, 2016 Ah, good times. Nothing like a bit of chaos and confusion to blow the cobwebs away. ....and then there is the 'alternative Christmas message, allegedly. A Prime Minister resigned. The £ plummeted. The FTSE 100 lost significant ground. But then the £ rallied past February levels, and the FTSE closed on a weekly high: 2.4% up on last Friday, its best performance in 4 months. President Obama decided we wouldn't be at the 'back of the queue' after all and that our 'special relationship' was still strong. The French President confirmed the Le Touquet agreement would stay in place. The President of the European Commission stated Br...exit negations would be 'orderly' and stressed the UK would continue to be a 'close partner' of the EU. A big bank denied reports it would shift 2,000 staff overseas. The CBI, vehemently anti-Brexit during the referendum campaign, stated British business was resilient and would adapt. Several countries outside the EU stated they wished to begin bi-lateral trade talks with the UK immediately. If this was the predicted apocalypse, well, it was a very British one. It was all over by teatime. Not a bad first day of freedom. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eesti 151 Posted June 24, 2016 Like this post if you think eesti is an idiot who's desperate for likes. How about a little fuck you twat? Just curious about question among local Deathlist users. Don't care enough to read the whole topic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Mad Hatter 1,092 Posted June 24, 2016 Like this post if you think eesti is an idiot who's desperate for likes. How about a little f**k you twat? Just curious about question among local Deathlist users. Don't care enough to read the whole topic. no shut up you desperate loser why don't you just ask people what side are you on rather than spam the forum with horseshit. If I was mod I would have given you a warning point for spam which is what your posts were. Meaningless worthless spam. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lard Bazaar 3,799 Posted June 24, 2016 See? See what you've done Britain? EVERYONE HATES EACH OTHER NOW! 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rockhopper penguin 2,265 Posted June 24, 2016 In times of crisis we can still turn to Vera. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rockhopper penguin 2,265 Posted June 24, 2016 In times of crisis we can still turn to Vera. Well we could if someone would sort the fucking You Tube posting out. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rockhopper penguin 2,265 Posted June 24, 2016 And I didn't type effing. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paul Bearer 6,101 Posted June 24, 2016 LIKE this post if you are not British but are anti-Brexit LIKE this post if you want me to slap a warning on Eesti. :-D 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cat O'Falk 3,290 Posted June 24, 2016 DON'T like this post if you are happy with the aftermath of the recent site upgrade! 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
