@mattholehouse: Jaw-dropping. Corbyn's Labour party refused to share its voter registration data with Stronger In. https://t.co/OOGqId2c88

So. The left fucked it then.

I still don't think Labour shoulders more blame than the Conservatives.

This is interesting.

Map showing where people signing the petition are located

http://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.co ... 15&area=uk

It’s a town with almost no immigrants that voted to get the immigrants out. A town that has been showered with EU cash that no longer wants to be part of the EU.

From the guardians comments section:

If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.

Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.

How?

Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.

The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.

If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.

The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.

When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.

I read just now that maybe DC has done in BoJo,Gove et al by saying Art 50 would fire the day after. He didn't and resigned, leaving that huge responsibility hanging over the next leader. If they do, they are toast, if they don't, they are toast

I've been thinking this for a few days. The Tory leadership is a poisoned chalice for sure. Who would want it, now?

I've been thinking this for a few days. The Tory leadership is a poisoned chalice for sure. Who would want it, now?

As a whole. No. It was the givernment that set the stage.

As part of Remain: They didn't pull tbeur weight as they were preoccupied with infighting. They didn't help as much as they could. I think it's fair to say Cameron would have pushed everything to win this. So, as far as the remain campaign went, they fucked it. Had Labour stuck behind it and formed a pax romana for this period of time, Remain would have won.

Which probably is why is said this as that is when the pendulum swung i think.

Also, first part of my tryptch is in place

It's interesting, though it would be better to see those areas as a % of elegible voters as population density differences would probably show far higher numbers in some parts of Scotland and other areas.

Who wants to be a minister?

Who wants to be a minister?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... yn-must-go

Tristram Hunt on the woes of the party. I broadly agree.

I predict that, in the long run (say 5 years), this will end up having made very little difference to anything at all, and everyone who got so ridiculously het up about this (on both sides) will, if they have any humility, feel a little bit silly.

Dear all,

Please sign NOW. Thanks

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

I read just now that maybe DC has done in BoJo,Gove et al by saying Art 50 would fire the day after. He didn't and resigned, leaving that huge responsibility hanging over the next leader. If they do, they are toast, if they don't, they are toast.

The typo really annoys me! Also, I really can't see it being passed, can you imagine the backlash?

:insincere:

:insincere:

The fact that more than one and a half million people have signed a petition calling for a second EU referendum has attracted a lot of attention - but it has zero chance of being enacted.

The main reason is that it is asking for retrospective legislation. It suggests another referendum is required because the winning side got less than 60% of the vote, and there was less than a 75% turnout.

You can have thresholds in referendums.

Dear all,

Please sign NOW. Thanks

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

Instruct their MPs on mass to vote no confidence in the government

But that would rely on Conservative MPs voting against their own government to trigger a GE that could see them out.

No. We shouldn't. Those with misgivings about the way they voted have to deal with it. It's absurdly arrogant if anyone to demand a second referendum if you don't like the result of the first. It'd better serve their cause to petition to disenfranchise the elderly and the poor going forwards.

"We must have a referendum on this thing that no-one can possibly underatand! Democracy!"
/wrong side wins
"Fuck that result we should do it again because people didn't understand!"