"charles" wrote in message ...

In article , Grik-bustard„¢
wrote:
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 19:41:26 +0100, Jon The Todal, a notorious semite and
former shyster wrote:

On 25/09/2019 10:18, Norman Wells wrote:
On 25/09/2019 09:08, The Todal wrote:
On 24/09/2019 22:56, Norman Wells wrote:
On 24/09/2019 21:39, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 16:44, Steve Walker wrote:

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control
to the UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum.
Returning sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule
a democratic vote by the people.

but that's how our democracy works, mps do what's best for the
country. unlike boris,

Then why won't they vote for a general election? We have a
government in office but not in power. It's stymied at every turn.
It is being prevented from governing. The best for the country is
to have a general election. Why are they so reluctant to have one?

Please explain why an election would help to solve the Brexit crisis.

The Brexit crisis as you call it is a simple result of Parliament not
being representative of the people's views, and being determined to go
against the free choice of the people expressed in a single issue
referendum.

Well, that's not true. It's Boris's version of the truth.

The Brexit crisis is a simple result of a referendum result that
instructed the government to "leave" the EU but failed to give any
guidance about what deal if any should be negotiated. There are major
differences of opinion about what sort of deal should be made with the
EU. Maybe you somehow missed this, by not following the debates? Thus,
the ERG opposed Theresa's deal because they really want a no-deal
Brexit. A large number of people but not enough, support Theresa's deal.

Having a new bunch of MPs does not solve this difference of opinion. You
can get them to sign up to thirty nine articles when they are being
selected as candidates, but when they are in the Commons they still
might have their own opinions having heard all the arguments.


The way to resolve that, if it's possible, is to have a general
election where, hopefully, Parliament will become rather more
properly representative.

But more likely it will result in no clear majority in favour of any
exit deal and a majority against a no-deal.


Are you hoping that by shuffling the pack and dealing the cards again
you'll end up with a Royal Flush? A majority of MPs in favour of any
particular course of action?

Who knows? What is clear, though, is that we need a functioning
government, which we do not have at present. It needs to deal with
more than just a single issue.

I think you know, in your heart of hearts, that the demand for a general
election has only one purpose: to secure the future of the Tory party.

An election before 31st October would result in many people voting for
"Boris the man who is determined to get us out of the EU by 31st
October". An election after 31st October would result in many people
laughing at the man who failed to keep his promises, which turned out to
be all bluster and bluff.

The Tories are desperate for that early election and Cox was so furious
he was almost in tears.



Labour is acting purely out of self-interest in preventing an election
when the national interest is crying out for one. It is the first
opposition in history that seems unwilling to face the electorate to
get itself elected.

And what sort of opposition is that? It needs to be replaced too.

It will be replaced by the Tory opposition. Labour will form the next
government.

LOLOK! Too funny for words. And who is to *lead* this new Labour
government? The bearded uncharismatic pleb Corbyn???

the Thornberry

====

LOLOL