It will bring down David Cameron

Perhaps his nerves couldn't stand it any longer!

He didn't have to bring the timing forward so much though, did he? He could have put it off for a year or two (I think it was originally going to be held in 2017).

We will just have to wait and see what he decides to do, if and when that happens. And what others in his government think about it. I do wonder whether he is really regretting ever thinking up this referendum thing though.

It will not 'bring down David Cameron' even if the majority of the UK vote to leave the EU ( they won't though) why would it? although he wants to stay in, he would carry on as PM whatever happens, until he chooses to leave before the next GE.

can't be bothered to look up all the references to the Tories promising the referendum to get more votes
Good answer dj
I'll remember that next time you ask me to substantiate a comment.

luckylegs I'm not sure if you mean me in your comment why do certain people feel the need to be do superior about grammar etc..
I don't make a habit of commenting on other posters' grammar, but on this occasion I thought it necessary to clarify (to dj) my own point.

People are fussy about meaning, Luckylegs, which comes over in a post according to how it is written, which is presumably how it was thought.

They "promised a referendum just to get in power" does indeed convey that the only reason for the referendum was for them to get into power. A cynical view, but one consistent with djs usual estimate of the motives of David Cameron and his ministers (and hence of anyone who doesn't vote them out of office)

Durhamgen, in my opinion Cameron is a man who cares about this country. He is a man of integrity, proud of our forces, works hard and he mixes with leaders on the world stage with ease, he has our countries interests at the heart of him.I do think however, his stance on Europe is wrong, I want out, we care capable of managing ourselves, we are in a very strong position to do so. . I do feel that we shall end up staying in when we all vote, we need to be told the true implications of being in charge of our own land again. However as a democracy it will be decided when we all vote. If we stay in I shall consider it a wasted opportunity, but will have to live with it. How wonderful to live in a country where we can say what we feel without fear of being victimised and can vote to express our will.

By the way, why do certain people feel the need to be do superior about grammar etc. It is not school.

Actually, jane, they even promised all UK nationals who lived overseas for any length of time the vote in the referendum. Then they changed their minds and went back to the fifteen year rule after the election.

I do not construct sentences on here. I write as I think, as if I am in normal conversation with other grans. If I'd meant the 'in my opinion' to qualify the referendum bit, I would have put it after the word referendum, not at the end.

Can't be bothered to look up all the references to the Tories promising the referendum to get more votes. You'll find it on their own website, unless they've got rid of it.

If they wanted us to stay in Europe they shouldn't have promised a referendum just to get in power at the last election, in my opinion.

dj in the above sentence, as it is constructed, your opinion is that if they want to stay in Europe, they shouldn't have promised a referendum.
The words 'just to get into power' qualify the referendum.
I'm not asking you to explain your opinion.
I'm asking you to explain your implication that the Tories' reason to hold a referendum was based on the calculation that it would get them back into power.
Will that do?

I don't demand. I ask. Assertions are different from opinions. I specifically said it was my opinion. People can have opinions without proof.
It's my opinion that Cameron is a calculating, patronising, objectionable snob. You can disagree with me and ask for proof if you like, but I am allowed to have that opinion.

What jingl said was not an opinion. It was an untrue statement which she could not verify.
I wasn't the only one who told her she was wrong and asked her to look at the proof. At least we could back up what we said.

One example, Elegran, is not always.

You always want evidence, statistics and links, dj for anyone else's assertions.

When I posted something general about Uk firms, you demanded to know whether I had a list of them, and that was only one example.

Now you are objecting to being asked to account for an arbitrary statement of your own, and I am sure that you will go on to claim (because more than one person agrees about your frequent requests for more and more conclusive evidence) that people are ganging up on you. They are not, they just have the same experience of your requests..

^How did Corbyn start it, jingle?
Corbyn was asking questions about the NHS.
Perhaps you ought to check out who said what on Hansard before making such a ridiculous statement.^

That's one example for starters, 'dj*. Your post from yesterday, 11.18.

It's not unreasonable to ask posters on what they base their opinions, but you seem to take exception when the principle is applied to you.

Thread after bloody thread. Sigh.

When have I said that, jane?

Well, you usually expect it from everyone else!

Do I need evidence to hold an opinion?

You seem to be criticising DC for being undemocratic in his choice of government ministers Dj, and then a few sentences later criticising him for democratically agreeing to hold a referendum.
Which is he - democratic or undemocratic?
What evidence do you have that people voted for the Tories just because they pledged to hold a referendum?

You are so much more interesting Elegran
(not that I was discussing you, as I don't like talking about people who are out of the room.)

If they wanted us to stay in Europe they shouldn't have promised a referendum
Well I will agree with that.
Be careful what you wish for.

An interesting statement in your op that seems to have been missed out, obie.

I've never thought of Cameron knowing what democracy is. If he had been more democratic he would not be in the mess he's in because the government would not consist of so many of his Oxford cronies all of whom he has to try to appease.

I think this is what will bring Cameron down.
Of course he will say otherwise, as he will say he meant to leave then, whenever it is. Not a PR man for nothing.

I found it extremely funny yesterday listening to Osborne talking about ensuring that we stayed in Europe when at a meeting in China.
If they wanted us to stay in Europe they shouldn't have promised a referendum just to get in power at the last election, in my opinion.

Sigh

Please all stop discussing me and get back to the subject of the thread. I wasn't getting at dj. and whether she thought I was doing so and retaliated or whether she didn't won't change the points under consideration.

Please feel free to attack me for something I didn't say or think. Gang up against me, as usual.
It's all in your heads.
Think what you like, Ana.

Jane10, why is what I said any nastier than what Elegran said?
I did read and understand what you said, and responded to it.
I then had to do other things, like Elegran.
I also did not wish to inflame the situation, unlike some of you.

Why on earth would Elegran be referring to herself as a politico? I still suspect you thought she meant people like you, and got your dig in right away, dj.

Now you realise. You didn't seem to then Dj. I only commented on what I read. It looked nasty to me.