posted on 5/7/2020 17:08Cheers - nomad
Sorry misunderstood, had completly forgotten about that, probably because it was pretty much a foregone conclusion at the time.
Personally think that it needs to be revisited, with a fairer explanation, no referendum, the last few years have been wearing, polarised and marginalised (arguably) parties that should have an input, greens etc.
Would be cool if Labour got behind it, no chance of tories doing so.
Personally think that it needs to be revisited, with a fairer explanation, no referendum, the last few years have been wearing, polarised and marginalised (arguably) parties that should have an input, greens etc.
Would be cool if Labour got behind it, no chance of tories doing so.
- Question for Gramsci - nomad 5/7 14:52 (read 12057 times, 11 posts in thread)
- Re: Question for Gramsci - RsFH 6/7 10:05 (read 12232 times)
- You're not keen on referendum results are you? - Gramsci. 6/7 12:17 (read 12321 times)
- I'd vote green. - blue_job 6/7 12:42 (read 12402 times)
- You're not keen on referendum results are you? - Gramsci. 6/7 12:17 (read 12321 times)
- It doesn't get discussed much - Gramsci. 5/7 16:16 (read 12299 times)
- Re: It doesn't get discussed much - nomad 5/7 16:48 (read 12265 times)
- Re: It doesn't get discussed much - Gramsci. 5/7 16:53 (read 12388 times)
- Referendum? - nomad 5/7 16:55 (read 12120 times)
- Re: Referendum? - Gramsci. 5/7 16:56 (read 12178 times)
- Cheers - nomad 5/7 17:08 (read 11604 times)
- Re: Referendum? - Gramsci. 5/7 16:56 (read 12178 times)
- Referendum? - nomad 5/7 16:55 (read 12120 times)
- Re: It doesn't get discussed much - Gramsci. 5/7 16:53 (read 12388 times)
- Re: It doesn't get discussed much - nomad 5/7 16:48 (read 12265 times)
- Re: Question for Gramsci - RsFH 6/7 10:05 (read 12232 times)
Post Your Reply
You must log in to reply to posts. Use the log in form at the top of the page or click here to create an account.

