NPR

tabascoboy wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 6:57 am With luck could be they really will implode in a fit of pique

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 7:09 am

tabascoboy wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 6:57 am With luck could be they really will implode in a fit of pique

If anyone, ever, thought this Tory party was competent enough to govern, they must be re-examining their thoughts on the matter.

Just from a political point of view, what an incredibly stupid act, to make that public threat on the privileges comittee like that.

_Os_ wrote: ↑Sun Oct 23, 2022 11:03 pm

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Fri Oct 21, 2022 12:08 pm We could go back and forth all day point by point I sense.

At the root of this is that you are conflating political crisis with constitutional crisis. The mess Britain is in is entirely one of politics.
We introduced an extra-constitutional step of a referendum, politicians have attempted to deal with the consequences, and by and large have failed to do so. Boris Johnson's government foundered not because the constitution was found to be inadequate but because he was incapable of putting in the graft required to legislate and govern, and was surrounded by mediocrities who wanted cabinet positions for the prestige and the boozy parties. Would that he was replaced by one of those mediocrities rather than a car crash. Truss has come unstuck on parliamentary arithmetic and the bond market.

None of this can be written constitution-ed away, the issue is political. Were there to be an election and Starmer wins the majority I suspect he would, the entire 'constitutional crisis' would disappear, almost as if it never existed.

I get the sense that you'd like to dissolve the people and elect another, and in the absence of that proving possible get judges and their coteries to effect something similar, but that's not how power and authority works in our constitution. The verdict and sanctions lie first with Parliament and ultimately with the electorate, and I don't see by what right a constitution could or should supersede that.

I didn't reply because we're going to go round in circles as you say. But whilst I'm here, there's two parts to your post.

The first isn't really completely at odds with my initial post in this string. Which stated May relied on something outside parliament (the referendum which wasn't legally binding and didn't happen during her parliament) for her legitimacy (she kept making "will of the people" arguments to support her specific deal) and when this proved insufficient to pass her Brexit deal she astonishingly restorted to criticising/attacking parliament itself, and a potential Johnson return would've also relied on something outside parliament (Tory members) for legitimacy and he too would've ended up attacking parliament (the privileges committee). Many then argue as you do that this a political problem which it is, but something as simple as having some more developed rules about how referendums function would've prevented a lot of this (eg NZ's referendum/s on changing their flag were more thought out). And this is where I depart from you, if Starmer gets a majority there's still going to be a political crisis (or maybe people will have just accepted being poorer than their parents generation? Or immigration levels they thought they were voting to reduce?) and the cause of the crisis isn't entirely political.

Since then we've seen Johnson supporters claiming he has a "mandate" to be PM, when the only mandate he has is from his constituency to be an MP. There's a Twitter post from Priti Patel on this thread supporting this "mandate" bullshit, it's what most of his supporters have stated. It's a "will of the people" argument, they tried to use the assumed value many have about general elections in the UK (people think an PM is elected by them at a general election, eg "I'm not voting for Corbyn"). Which supports that making Johnson PM would've been a constitutional crisis, something outside of parliament would've selected the PM for a second time, and there would've been more "will of every fucker outside parliament" type justifications to override the decisions of the actual will of the people (the MPs).

The second part of this, you're just making stuff up I'm afraid. You've said FPTP is separate to a written constitution (I pointed out not really, SA's constitution explicitly states the type but not exact form of electoral system). Now you're saying referendums are "extra-constitutional". This isn't a difficult one, if you're talking about the rules of the game you're talking about the constitution. I think a lot of the UK's issues originate from some of the rules of the game being poor, you've then jumped into the unwritten v written constitution stuff (I didn't bring it up, "constitutional crisis" isn't the same as "immediately start drafting the written constitution!").

It would be pointless saying the UK should have a written constitution, because it's never going to happen (how you then get federalism/subsidiarity to keep your country together long term, I don't know, but it's not my problem). But the means by which the electoral system changes is the continued fragmentation of the party politics (as soon as Labour can't secure a majority but can form coalitions). Someone supporting PR hardly wants to "dissolve the people and elect another", all the BNP and UKIP arguments would've fallen apart in a less damaging way if they had more exposure sooner, one of the things that was said about the Brexit referendum was "it was the first time people were heard" ... well exactly.

SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:05 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 7:09 am

tabascoboy wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 6:57 am With luck could be they really will implode in a fit of pique

If anyone, ever, thought this Tory party was competent enough to govern, they must be re-examining their thoughts on the matter.

Just from a political point of view, what an incredibly stupid act, to make that public threat on the privileges comittee like that.

The thick witch has forgotten that the Blonde Slug is being investigated for knowingly lying to parliament. Sunak is facing no such allegation.

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:18 am You can hide being wrong on a forum like this quite a lot by writing constant lengthy posts, you couldn't hide it this time and you don't like being called on it.

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:14 am Impartial Beeb at it again

Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:35 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:14 am Impartial Beeb at it again

12 second clip out of context. Packaged to be spread and amplified by morons to suit an agenda.

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:03 am

Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:35 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:14 am Impartial Beeb at it again

12 second clip out of context. Packaged to be spread and amplified by morons to suit an agenda.

Care to enlighten us morons about the actual context of the glee?

C69 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:24 am
I hope the Tories burn

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:14 am Impartial Beeb at it again

Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:04 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:03 am

Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:35 am

12 second clip out of context. Packaged to be spread and amplified by morons to suit an agenda.

Care to enlighten us morons about the actual context of the glee?

The default reaction of a reasonable person on hearing Johnson has fucked off again?

Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:35 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:14 am Impartial Beeb at it again

12 second clip out of context. Packaged to be spread and amplified by morons to suit an agenda.

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:07 am

Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:04 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:03 am
Care to enlighten us morons about the actual context of the glee?

The default reaction of a reasonable person on hearing Johnson has fucked off again?

So, not so out of context then.

Be interesting to see if there are ramifications for the said presenter on impartiality grounds.

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:03 am

Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:35 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:14 am Impartial Beeb at it again

12 second clip out of context. Packaged to be spread and amplified by morons to suit an agenda.

Care to enlighten us morons about the actual context of the glee? Or are you going to double down and sling out phrases like fascist nazis as well.

Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:45 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:03 am

Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:35 am

12 second clip out of context. Packaged to be spread and amplified by morons to suit an agenda.

Care to enlighten us morons about the actual context of the glee? Or are you going to double down and sling out phrases like fascist nazis as well.

You're the one getting excited about the article. I thought you'd be able to tell us what she's gleeful about.

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:32 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:07 am

Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:04 am

The default reaction of a reasonable person on hearing Johnson has fucked off again?

So, not so out of context then.

Be interesting to see if there are ramifications for the said presenter on impartiality grounds.

You can’t seriously think that Guido is a reliable, unbiased news source?

Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:45 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:03 am

Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:35 am

12 second clip out of context. Packaged to be spread and amplified by morons to suit an agenda.

Care to enlighten us morons about the actual context of the glee? Or are you going to double down and sling out phrases like fascist nazis as well.

You're the one getting excited about the article. I thought you'd be able to tell us what she's gleeful about.

tabascoboy wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 10:18 am At least one good thing will come out of a Sunak Prime Ministership then - unless of course he does another backtrack

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 10:39 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:32 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:07 am

So, not so out of context then.

Be interesting to see if there are ramifications for the said presenter on impartiality grounds.

You can’t seriously think that Guido is a reliable, unbiased news source?

I have no idea who Guido is. But I’m pretty sure that was not a fabricated video.

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 10:39 am I have no idea who Guido is.

tabascoboy wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 10:18 am At least one good thing will come out of a Sunak Prime Ministership then - unless of course he does another backtrack

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:32 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:07 am

Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:04 am

The default reaction of a reasonable person on hearing Johnson has fucked off again?

So, not so out of context then.

Be interesting to see if there are ramifications for the said presenter on impartiality grounds.

You can’t seriously think that Guido is a reliable, unbiased news source?

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 10:39 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:32 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:07 am

So, not so out of context then.

Be interesting to see if there are ramifications for the said presenter on impartiality grounds.

You can’t seriously think that Guido is a reliable, unbiased news source?

I have no idea who Guido is. But I’m pretty sure that was not a fabricated video.

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Oct 22, 2022 12:35 pm

tabascoboy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 22, 2022 12:00 pm She thinks she can get her old job back?

Talking of which I see Sir (where the fuck did that come from) James Duddridge is trying to outdo Dorries for the Order of the Brown Nose medal with Boris. Without a doubt he will think he can make it to Foreign Secretary which is probably about right for this government as he is a talentless cock.

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 12:38 pm Yes, sure, he’s a biased git. But that doesn’t detract from what she said. It’s such a lazy argument.

And it is certainly not only this guy reporting it.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/bbc ... 314022.amp

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/1 ... eadership/

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 12:38 pm Yes, sure, he’s a biased git. But that doesn’t detract from what she said. It’s such a lazy argument.

And it is certainly not only this guy reporting it.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/bbc ... 314022.amp

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/1 ... eadership/

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 10:48 am

Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:45 am

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:03 am
Care to enlighten us morons about the actual context of the glee? Or are you going to double down and sling out phrases like fascist nazis as well.

You're the one getting excited about the article. I thought you'd be able to tell us what she's gleeful about.

Not sure, genius. But you seemed pretty sure a minute ago when you were calling it misleading and out of context, that you felt the need to shout moron.

Is this finger in ears moment, shouting wanker/moron … I’m not listening.