Seizing back control: The ILX lol brexit is how we're all gonna die thread.

wait till he needs a pee and then don't let him back in

I'm very calm. Just posting as I always do.

i dont see whether anything is going on in parliament rn or not is anything to do with why someone wouldnt want to see one of the few busy with content threads left on the site fucked up with persistent catty adhom rubbish tbh

Several convos are going on the thread as always. Plenty for you to get busy with. If something is dominating it passes after a while calm down Darragh.

Eh, as long as you're part of the EU you're bound to the Four Freedoms, of which the Freedom of Shitposting is surely the most important.

im very calm. just posting as i always do.

Good to know man. Appreciate the feedback on my posting.

no deal now

this is fine

xyzzz = id
imago = superego
Fred = some kind of catatonia idk

I mean it has to be said that imago tear where he wrote something furious about xyzzzzz’s books or whatever was hilarious? I would have printed that off and stuck it on my wall if I were xyzzzzz, which of course I am, as well as being SV.

careful gyac youll have twu in here in a mo

I enjoyed that post gyac. There is definitely a cuckoo clock in there..

It's five o'clock and you're still a prick!

pax pax j/k everyone chill

ffs get a room you two

I’m very calm? Just posting as I always do...

vote ON tomorrow

time to get 1x big bag of cans and post as you always do

What the fuck? I mean I’ve read the previous raft of stuff posted on the guardian liveblog and still, what the fuck?

**BERCOW STATEMENT KLAXON**
The govt motion for tomorrow's debate does comply so it can happen - as it only covers the Withdrawal Agreement not the Political Declaration

— Rob Powell (@robpowellnews) March 28, 2019

Keir Starmer is tweeting about how this is all bullshit rn

There are four key reasons why you cannot separate the Withdrawal Agreement from the Political Declaration. 1/

— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) March 28, 2019

What the Government is doing is not in the national interest and that’s why we will not support it tomorrow. 6/

— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) March 28, 2019

she’s shown a staunch unwillingness til now to ignore everything except that which is statutorily mandated... afaik the EU withdrawal act explicitly links the WA and PD so she’s moved onto the ignoring statute part of her increasingly authoritarian premiership

Lol the bold young Bercow takes any excuse to cave

Otoh good, the sooner MV3 gets tanked the better, really

lol DUP voting against (obvs)

*tents fingers in a pleased manner*

The UK could well have three elections in 2019 - with a fighting chance of a fourth, too | @stephenkb https://t.co/DrSdRNS2Kj

— i views (@ipaperviews) March 28, 2019

Oh so you're the guy

there's a faint possibility that Australia's unelected PM decides to hold the Senate and House Of Reps votes separately this year so that he can stay in power longer, I am totally in favour of voting three times this year (home state had its election four days ago. not that my ballot has arrived yet, but still)

lines from MPs to the things they voted for in the IVs

https://alexandreafonso.files.wordpress.com/2019/03/untitled90-1.png?w=1024&h=1024

any wags voting in favor of everything

The wives and girlfriends are sick of it all

I guess the deal making that didn't happen yesterday between the SNP and Labour can happen in subsequent votes.

So Jezza kicks the off the delicate negotiations by tweeting that the SNP caused Thatcher.

sounds productive

In my replies today, a number of people have expressed their delight at Bercow saying the name "Bambos Charalambous", which of course prompts me to do the following, which probably won't last on here longer than 2 minutes but it's worth a crack. pic.twitter.com/Ew0cDY4yQ0

— Rhodri Marsden (@rhodri) March 28, 2019

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/28/withdrawal-agreement-separation-brexit-theresa-may-election

This is truth bomb after truth bomb.

I guess the deal making that didn't happen yesterday between the SNP and Labour can happen in subsequent votes.
So Jezza kicks the off the delicate negotiations by tweeting that the SNP caused Thatcher.

― Non, je ned raggette rien (onimo), Thursday, March 28, 2019 12:41 PM (six minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

sassanach twat

Bambos is usually short for Charalambos so I think his name might actually be Charalambos Charalambos.

It is

yes, tom kibasi's a very perceptive commentator. mentioned it upthread but this is worth a listen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9NFrzSkioA

xp

yeah, that JC post was not helpful, however questionable the SNP's voting was last night.

The SNP have not once missed a chance to attack Labour in this Parliament so I’m not really going to slag JC off on that? Just totally cynical operation.

JC is a bit clueless on scotland but he likely knows that labour had lost their majority in 1976 and promised a devolution referendum to the snp to prop up their government, they then put in amendment to the act that 40% of the total electorate had to vote for it, rather than a simple majority. it failed due to that amendment. it was a betrayal. the people who ended up really helping thatcher in power were the english electorate.

the SNP, as useless a big-tent managerial centrist party as it is, is meant to represent voters in scotland. voters in scotland didn't vote for brexit. it's their mandate to oppose it.

people in scotland know it’s ahistorical nonsense though. it echoes foulkes-esque nonsense and riles up ppl he should be looking to attract

they need better lines on the SNP but fear UK LAB are getting direction from the (borderline-inept) SLAB on that

there was a non-zero amount of people in scotland (and the SNP membership) who voted leave. they should at least have supported some of the compromise motions. instead they chose “stop brexit or, if it is to happen, it should be as disruptive as possible”

strikes me that their support for a second referendum could set them quite a dangerous precedent

yeah but for some reason people itt are completely wedded to the idea that for political reasons labour can't oppose brexit and that labour are playing a blinder, but conversely can't believe that seeking to represent a country in which every region voted remain, where you have lots of marginal seats, backing brexit would be politically harmful for the snp

chances of a scottish independence referendum happening in the next 10 years or so must be perishingly slim, sturgeon seems to have accepted that

I’m not suggesting the SNP should back Brexit? If a GE happens & the SNP take back the labour gains and therefore the Tories stay in, that’s no good for the second referendum either. But if you want to remain, part of bringing people with you should be ruling out various options as you go - and if you can’t get to where you want to, get the least damaging outcome? Labour and the SNP are in very different places on Brexit in part because the political costs to them are very different.

labour's results in scotland will never be what determines the general election. they did poorly last time round, gaining half the seats of the tories.

i don't believe snp should back a soft brexit, it goes against what they've been saying the whole time and would be politically costly.