I guess they thought that if they somehow actually won, Cameron would have to deal with it. Which wouldnât be entirely unjust considering that his recklessness created the situation.
Who would want to deal with it though? The markets and sterling are in a precarious state. Scottish independence is back on the table and is an even bigger threat this time. The border situation in Ireland is a time bomb. Farage is admitting that a recession is inevitable and there are trade agreements to be renegotiated with practically the entire world. And thatâs before the tedious task of replacing EU law in large number of areas with countless organised stakeholders is to be tackled.
Itâs a nightmarish situation. A quagmire of epic proportions awaits those who stake their careers on it.
iâm sure most have seen this on social media, in case any havenât itâs starting to make sense, and be plagiarised by Alaistair Campbell and others, as the days goes on
Surely, dense and all as you are, you can see the distinction between being intolerant of an ideology and being intolerant of those that believe it? Or maybe you canât, sadly.
I could only back something if I had some influence on the outcome, voting in this case. Unless you think the inhabitants of the UK are glued to TFK and desperate to hear our guidance.
You are a bit dim here Sidney. Can you not join the dots on Unite and many of the other Unions throwing their support behind Corbyn over Andy Burnham (he was the other leading candidate Sidney, Iâll save you the Google) late on.
One could guess that maybe Watson saw that Corbyn was going to be such an unelectable and toxic leader that inevitably he would have to go, leaving Watson in a nice position to take the position. There has always been the suspicion though that Unite swung to get revenge over the Labour hierarchy, who they believed stiched up McCloskey and Watson in 2013 over parliamentary selections.
Look, mate, try and stick to your opinions rather than obfuscating. If youâre not articulate enough to voice your actual opinions accurately, itâs not my problem.
I may be wrong but I thought the whole campaign was based on restoring UK sovereignty, and making decisions impacting the UK in the UK and not in Brussels. Immigration policy is obviously one of those decisions, but hardly the only one.
If you were to be consistent youâd apply this to the discussions on the US Presidential election, given that I donât have a vote. Somehow, I donât think youâll do that.
It is a bit rich of people who voted against Lisbon and Nice criticising the Brits. The misinformation campaign was the same and the Irish as well as Brits were giving a âfuck youâ to the political establishment when they thought there were no consequences. Lisbon for example, was a totally nonsense referendum which did not need to happen. Misinformation ruled the day and people thought it was an easy one to stick their fingers up to the government with few consequences.
The Brits are going to realise that there is going to be serious consequences in their pockets for voting this way soon enough though.
I know who Andy Burnham is, pal, and I bet I knew who he is a long time before you.
Can you please answer the question as to how Tom Watson had anything to do wityh Corbyn being elected, because you still havenât even begun to address the question, nor do I suspect you will do so.
Members of the EU are no more sovereign than Texas is in the US. You would think someone in Ireland would understand that. Would a sovereign nation accept the terms of the bank bailout in 2008? or was it done under threat from the ECB? If the latter, then not a sovereign nation, sorry.
