| Jacob Rees Mogg 20:09 - Sep 12 with 22558 views | CountyJim |
I really do not like the bloke or his Tory mates
But these protests out side his house are wrong sorry doesn't deserve that |  | | |  |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 13:54 - Sep 16 with 1537 views | Arizlan2 |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 10:24 - Sep 16 by Kilkennyjack |
Maybe JRM is the first posh establishment English Tory boy who really cares about the welsh working class people.
See - it even sounds totally bollox.
Refugees welcome. |
All makes sense why you want to stay in the EU so much, so you can continue to free load of us Brits that are lucky enough to have a job. When we leave and take back our own country, you can look out Kilkenny
#mrtinkertrain |  | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 13:58 - Sep 16 with 1531 views | Arizlan2 |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 11:20 - Sep 16 by Catullus |
Your last paragraph, I agree entirely. I have opinions and views that would be called left and right as in I'm all for better immigration controls and nationalised industry, I strongly support the welfare state but think welfare scroungers should be clamped down on, as should tax dodgers.
Now I'm not yet 60, I have another 9 years and I'm hardly "down with the youth" but I have a 10 year old son who helps keep my soul youngish. I suppose there's plenty who would call me childish for playing on his PS4 or a miserable old fart for not liking reality tv.
Thing is, the world has opened up but has it been a massively good thing? It's hardly the Star Trekkian idyll and it certainly causes plenty of arguments. I like to travel, I like to meet new people, see new places and there is a common theme in other countries, people are worried by how much their own little corner is changing, many people don't like change.
Myself, I'd love it to be more like Star Trek, living on the planet as one world, one community, one currency where equality is the norm and everybody is given all they need and a bit of what they want. That world is a long way off though, it's not just older people who are nationalistic, xenophobic, racist and closed minded.
For ll the progress that's claimed, is the world a better place? I take your point about culture preservation, the Welsh Government is stronly into preservation mode and to "save" our language and culture large amounts of money are spent while we have a failing NHS, failing schools and rising crime....is that really humane?
It seems that we agree on several things, apart from brexit of course but you know, the world has opened up in several ways (mostly business/financial) but in ways it has become more closed recently, right and left wing nationalism has increased. Politically Europe, the USA, China and Russia are further apart and global corporations have become too powerful and become more secretive. The internet is full of news but much of it fake, and I've fallen for a few fake stories myself. Trust has dimished.
For the world to truly open up we need to put an end to nationalism and that is a long, long way off. We are all guilty of being parochial/nationalsitic in one way or another, support a sports team local or national, be a "local jobs for local people" little Britisher or believe in stopping immigration (even if it's English people buying up Weslh property as second homes) and you are being parochial. It won't change in several generations but maybe one day.
The idealist in me wants that better world, the pragmatist has to live with the world the way it is. |
"Myself, I'd love it to be more like Star Trek, living on the planet as one world"
Lmfao
Your already living on one planet, your own on your own.. mind you if it meant I wasn't living on a planet with Tinkers such as Kilkenny, I'd join you | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 15:58 - Sep 16 with 1483 views | sherpajacob |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 13:58 - Sep 16 by Arizlan2 |
"Myself, I'd love it to be more like Star Trek, living on the planet as one world"
Lmfao
Your already living on one planet, your own on your own.. mind you if it meant I wasn't living on a planet with Tinkers such as Kilkenny, I'd join you |
You still here?. |  |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:01 - Sep 16 with 1476 views | sherpajacob |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 13:43 - Sep 16 by Highjack |
Why would JRM disciples call for abortions to be mandatory? |
The same reason Bojo supporters want to ban the burkha. | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:15 - Sep 16 with 1459 views | Kilkennyjack |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 13:54 - Sep 16 by Arizlan2 |
All makes sense why you want to stay in the EU so much, so you can continue to free load of us Brits that are lucky enough to have a job. When we leave and take back our own country, you can look out Kilkenny
#mrtinkertrain |
Is that a threat ?
Warra fecking fanny .... 😂
Feck your Tory Brexit. The People’s Vote is going to stop it. 👌 |  |
| Beware of the Risen People
|
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:17 - Sep 16 with 1452 views | Highjack |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:15 - Sep 16 by Kilkennyjack |
Is that a threat ?
Warra fecking fanny .... 😂
Feck your Tory Brexit. The People’s Vote is going to stop it. 👌 |
What happens when the people’s vote happens and leave wins again? Another people’s vote? |  |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:18 - Sep 16 with 1452 views | omarjack |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:15 - Sep 16 by Kilkennyjack |
Is that a threat ?
Warra fecking fanny .... 😂
Feck your Tory Brexit. The People’s Vote is going to stop it. 👌 |
Never mind him Kilkenny. The guy is a delusional psychopath that needs some serious help. I already blocked him. There is no reasoning with the likes of him. As for his constant death threats..just lol. |  |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:19 - Sep 16 with 1452 views | Loyal |
Took all the jobs lazy welfare institutionalised Brits were too lazy to do. |  |
| Nolan sympathiser, clout expert, personal friend of Leigh Dineen, advocate and enforcer of porridge swallows.
The official inventor of the tit w@nk. | | Poll: | Who should be Swansea number 1 |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:50 - Sep 16 with 1439 views | Jango |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:15 - Sep 16 by Kilkennyjack |
Is that a threat ?
Warra fecking fanny .... 😂
Feck your Tory Brexit. The People’s Vote is going to stop it. 👌 |
Losers vote. | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 18:17 - Sep 16 with 1401 views | Arizlan2 |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:15 - Sep 16 by Kilkennyjack |
Is that a threat ?
Warra fecking fanny .... 😂
Feck your Tory Brexit. The People’s Vote is going to stop it. 👌 |
The people's vote has already won it ðŸ‘ðŸ¼ðŸ¤£ðŸ˜ðŸ˜‰. Better start packing coz the clock be ticking | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 18:20 - Sep 16 with 1400 views | Arizlan2 |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:18 - Sep 16 by omarjack |
Never mind him Kilkenny. The guy is a delusional psychopath that needs some serious help. I already blocked him. There is no reasoning with the likes of him. As for his constant death threats..just lol. |
I' have no interest in you or your opinion, your value is less than that of a slug, which is only one step above Kilkenny | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 18:31 - Sep 16 with 1392 views | Arizlan2 |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:19 - Sep 16 by Loyal |
Took all the jobs lazy welfare institutionalised Brits were too lazy to do. |
propergander more like, greedy companies using a mercenary work force from Poland that they can get rid of at the drop of a hat... while your own people are left jobless and can't find work and we are left with a lost generation who don't know what it's like to be in full time employment employment with a full contract.
And there's you waving your EU flag with the rest of the lefty do gooders supporting your country's decline and selling your own people's and their future generations down the sh1tter. Really funny how people on here talk about Jenkins being a sell out, does come close to you vermin on here.
Take a bow sir, you really come close to being Pr1€k of the week | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 18:50 - Sep 16 with 1378 views | peenemunde |
History is isn’t a strong point of yours then.
Otherwise you’d have known that the British went to war with Germany, because Germany invaded Poland.
So the idea that the poles were fighting to defend the U.K., is a false narrative, because Poles were fighting to liberate Poland. |  | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 19:30 - Sep 16 with 1349 views | Catullus |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 16:15 - Sep 16 by Kilkennyjack |
Is that a threat ?
Warra fecking fanny .... 😂
Feck your Tory Brexit. The People’s Vote is going to stop it. 👌 |
We already had a people's vote and we chose leave.
What is this "people's vote" nonsense, was it only lemmings and suicidal penguins that voted the first time?
They say people's vote as if no people were involved in 2016, truth is the politicians have carried on trying to overturn the result and they'll use whatever means the can, even if it means deliberately voting a deal down that's good enough because no brexit will ever be good enough or right to a remainer.
Question, what if there was a "people's vote" and we chose to accept the deal and leave, or refused the deal and left anyway? What would you say then? | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 19:48 - Sep 16 with 1334 views | Jango |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 19:30 - Sep 16 by Catullus |
We already had a people's vote and we chose leave.
What is this "people's vote" nonsense, was it only lemmings and suicidal penguins that voted the first time?
They say people's vote as if no people were involved in 2016, truth is the politicians have carried on trying to overturn the result and they'll use whatever means the can, even if it means deliberately voting a deal down that's good enough because no brexit will ever be good enough or right to a remainer.
Question, what if there was a "people's vote" and we chose to accept the deal and leave, or refused the deal and left anyway? What would you say then? |
They want a people’s vote where one option is to remain in the EU. They have never had any interest in any sort of deal we may get just hell bent on stopping us leaving. The politicians who have tried derail brexit from the very beginning are an utter disgrace and anyone who disagrees with that is a joke. | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 20:01 - Sep 16 with 1322 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 19:30 - Sep 16 by Catullus |
We already had a people's vote and we chose leave.
What is this "people's vote" nonsense, was it only lemmings and suicidal penguins that voted the first time?
They say people's vote as if no people were involved in 2016, truth is the politicians have carried on trying to overturn the result and they'll use whatever means the can, even if it means deliberately voting a deal down that's good enough because no brexit will ever be good enough or right to a remainer.
Question, what if there was a "people's vote" and we chose to accept the deal and leave, or refused the deal and left anyway? What would you say then? |
A second referendum with the actual details of what leaving the EU will mean in practice available strikes me as a perfectly sensible proposition. If the British people vote to accept the terms and leave the EU on those terms then the issue is dead forever.
This whole “the people have spoken and their will must be obeyed” stuff is trite nonsense. The majority was small enough as to make the outcome indecisive and none of the details about what leaving the EU means in practice were available to either side. The campaign on both sites des was riven with guesswork, misinformation and scaremongering. The government still doesn’t know those details so how was the electorate was meant to make an informed decision two years ago? . Once they are known ask the nation again. “The people”are allowed to change their mind or not change their mind as the case may be. |  |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 20:17 - Sep 16 with 1310 views | Jango |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 20:01 - Sep 16 by exiledclaseboy |
A second referendum with the actual details of what leaving the EU will mean in practice available strikes me as a perfectly sensible proposition. If the British people vote to accept the terms and leave the EU on those terms then the issue is dead forever.
This whole “the people have spoken and their will must be obeyed” stuff is trite nonsense. The majority was small enough as to make the outcome indecisive and none of the details about what leaving the EU means in practice were available to either side. The campaign on both sites des was riven with guesswork, misinformation and scaremongering. The government still doesn’t know those details so how was the electorate was meant to make an informed decision two years ago? . Once they are known ask the nation again. “The people”are allowed to change their mind or not change their mind as the case may be. |
So what makes you think remains arguments on a people’s vote will be anything but negative guesswork this time around? The only people crying for a people’s vote are people who voted remain and have never had any intention of changing their opinion. It’s done, move and and try and make the best of it instead of trying to make it is as hard as possible.
We’ve had to wait 40 years to reverse the last decision. [Post edited 16 Sep 2018 20:19]
| | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 20:26 - Sep 16 with 1293 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 20:17 - Sep 16 by Jango |
So what makes you think remains arguments on a people’s vote will be anything but negative guesswork this time around? The only people crying for a people’s vote are people who voted remain and have never had any intention of changing their opinion. It’s done, move and and try and make the best of it instead of trying to make it is as hard as possible.
We’ve had to wait 40 years to reverse the last decision. [Post edited 16 Sep 2018 20:19]
|
Because by the time we’re ready to leave we’ll know exactly what the terms of the exit deal and future relationship deal will be so there’ll be no need for guesswork and scaremongering from either side. Just a proper debate based on the factual merits of leaving on those terms or staying in. Something that was impossible last time leading both sides to engage in the worst political campaign I’ve ever seen. | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 20:48 - Sep 16 with 1278 views | Jango |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 20:26 - Sep 16 by exiledclaseboy |
Because by the time we’re ready to leave we’ll know exactly what the terms of the exit deal and future relationship deal will be so there’ll be no need for guesswork and scaremongering from either side. Just a proper debate based on the factual merits of leaving on those terms or staying in. Something that was impossible last time leading both sides to engage in the worst political campaign I’ve ever seen. |
You honestly believe once the deals on the table the scaremongering from the remain side will stop? Anything they’ve said up until now has been pure speculation so I don’t see how that’s gonna stop. We’ll see though. | | | |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:05 - Sep 16 with 1266 views | sherpajacob |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 20:17 - Sep 16 by Jango |
So what makes you think remains arguments on a people’s vote will be anything but negative guesswork this time around? The only people crying for a people’s vote are people who voted remain and have never had any intention of changing their opinion. It’s done, move and and try and make the best of it instead of trying to make it is as hard as possible.
We’ve had to wait 40 years to reverse the last decision. [Post edited 16 Sep 2018 20:19]
|
"We’ve had to wait 40 years to reverse the last decision"
The people could have voted in a ukip government at any general election in the last 20 odd years, or labour in 83. They didn't. | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:10 - Sep 16 with 1260 views | Catullus |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 20:26 - Sep 16 by exiledclaseboy |
Because by the time we’re ready to leave we’ll know exactly what the terms of the exit deal and future relationship deal will be so there’ll be no need for guesswork and scaremongering from either side. Just a proper debate based on the factual merits of leaving on those terms or staying in. Something that was impossible last time leading both sides to engage in the worst political campaign I’ve ever seen. |
This I agree with, but ca;ll it a referendum on the deal not a people's vote. They came up with "people's vote" as part of the plan to try and somehow convince everyone that the people were somehow done over in the first vote, it's subterfuge.
I disagree with your previous comment though, about the result being close.......democracy means the majority vote wins, there wasn't a rule about winning margins or turnout or anything like that. The margin of victory is irrelevant in a straight in/out or yes/no vote. It's just another argument put forward to muddy the waters.
Your last sentence is spot on, the worst campaign by the worst bunch of politicians in many years. May or Corbyn, they have something in common, they're not fit to lead a sing song. | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:15 - Sep 16 with 1258 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:10 - Sep 16 by Catullus |
This I agree with, but ca;ll it a referendum on the deal not a people's vote. They came up with "people's vote" as part of the plan to try and somehow convince everyone that the people were somehow done over in the first vote, it's subterfuge.
I disagree with your previous comment though, about the result being close.......democracy means the majority vote wins, there wasn't a rule about winning margins or turnout or anything like that. The margin of victory is irrelevant in a straight in/out or yes/no vote. It's just another argument put forward to muddy the waters.
Your last sentence is spot on, the worst campaign by the worst bunch of politicians in many years. May or Corbyn, they have something in common, they're not fit to lead a sing song. |
The “people’s vote”thing is just marketing to plant the idea in people’s minds. It’s working too. Of course in reality it would be another referendum but marketing is marketing.
The result was close, that much is indisputable. What isn’t indisputable is that a majority voted to remain. But it wasn’t a popular mandate. Frankly there should have been provision for a minimum majority required to approve such a massive constitutional change not just a simple majority. The fact that there wasn’t is just another example of the casual way Cameron dealt with this whole nonsense. | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:45 - Sep 16 with 1239 views | Catullus |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:15 - Sep 16 by exiledclaseboy |
The “people’s vote”thing is just marketing to plant the idea in people’s minds. It’s working too. Of course in reality it would be another referendum but marketing is marketing.
The result was close, that much is indisputable. What isn’t indisputable is that a majority voted to remain. But it wasn’t a popular mandate. Frankly there should have been provision for a minimum majority required to approve such a massive constitutional change not just a simple majority. The fact that there wasn’t is just another example of the casual way Cameron dealt with this whole nonsense. |
How can you have a provision for a minimum majority? We'd still be having re-runs of the referendum now. That is a crazy idea, unless your saying that without a minimum majority for leave we should remain which totally destroys the idea of democracy. I mean, who chooses the size of majority, who can say if it's too big or small. We could never agree and any attempt to do such a thing would surely be condemned.
Lets go have a referendum but to pass there must be a 95% turnout with a 65% majority......we'd call that (or anything like it) an abuse of human rights.
How can you square making a vote practically impossible for either side to win with being a democratic country?
What if we'd had ten votes in such a condition and leave won every time but not by enough to trigger A50? Good grief, people have had enough of brexit now, imagine if we were still voting on it? | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 22:05 - Sep 16 with 1226 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:45 - Sep 16 by Catullus |
How can you have a provision for a minimum majority? We'd still be having re-runs of the referendum now. That is a crazy idea, unless your saying that without a minimum majority for leave we should remain which totally destroys the idea of democracy. I mean, who chooses the size of majority, who can say if it's too big or small. We could never agree and any attempt to do such a thing would surely be condemned.
Lets go have a referendum but to pass there must be a 95% turnout with a 65% majority......we'd call that (or anything like it) an abuse of human rights.
How can you square making a vote practically impossible for either side to win with being a democratic country?
What if we'd had ten votes in such a condition and leave won every time but not by enough to trigger A50? Good grief, people have had enough of brexit now, imagine if we were still voting on it? |
You could, for example, have made it a condition that 50% of eligible voters must have voted for one or otherof the options not just a simple majority of those who voted. That’s not unreasonable. | |
| |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 22:11 - Sep 16 with 1252 views | sherpajacob |
| Jacob Rees Mogg on 21:45 - Sep 16 by Catullus |
How can you have a provision for a minimum majority? We'd still be having re-runs of the referendum now. That is a crazy idea, unless your saying that without a minimum majority for leave we should remain which totally destroys the idea of democracy. I mean, who chooses the size of majority, who can say if it's too big or small. We could never agree and any attempt to do such a thing would surely be condemned.
Lets go have a referendum but to pass there must be a 95% turnout with a 65% majority......we'd call that (or anything like it) an abuse of human rights.
How can you square making a vote practically impossible for either side to win with being a democratic country?
What if we'd had ten votes in such a condition and leave won every time but not by enough to trigger A50? Good grief, people have had enough of brexit now, imagine if we were still voting on it? |
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_devolution_referendum,_1979
Not unusual for binary votes on constitutional change to require a,minimum threshold as per the 1979 votes which required 40% of the electorate.
If you can't muster 40% on a binary vote, you can't really argue it's the will of the people.
When this was debated in parliament the response was, it's not necessary because the referendum will be classed as advisory. [Post edited 16 Sep 2018 22:13]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
