Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The country’s leading psephologists bring more bad news for Co

123457»

Comments

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,061
    Scott_P said:

    Another Remoaner fox shot.

    Shooting Argies.

    You guys really are crazy for war...
    Yes, its been so f*cking serious.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,468
    Scott_P said:

    Another Remoaner fox shot.

    Shooting Argies.

    You guys really are crazy for war...
    GOTCHA!
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,995

    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    We'd be free to do exactly what we want in every respect, and there's no doubt we would go for a low tax, ruthless, hugely capitalist model. It would be our best and only hope.

    *cough*

    Apart from the WTO terms we need to negotiate.

    That can be vetoed by other members.

    Like Argentina

    Oh, Fu...
    Remind us who won in 1982 :lol:
    Do you think Scotty wanted Mrs T to "negotiate" with Argentina in '82? ;)
    The more accurate parallel would be the negotiations over the Falklands before 1982. Mrs Thatchers govt in 1980 proposed a leaseback arrangement for example:

    http://www.britishempire.co.uk/forces/armycampaigns/southamerica/falklands/falklandswar.htm

    Indeed it was these negotiations over sovereignty that led the Argies to think that we didn't really want the Islands.
    I'm guessing Spain isn't getting the same message from us this time.. :p
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,995

    Scott_P said:

    Another Remoaner fox shot.

    Shooting Argies.

    You guys really are crazy for war...
    GOTCHA!
    Heh.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited April 2017
    SeanT said:

    This is casinoroyale's thesis. And I come to see its merits. The EU has a strong hand which they are about to overplay. They think we won't accept crashing out. Of course we will. We are Britain. We'll take it. We have a self image of stoicism and endurance, we positively welcome blood sweat and tears.

    It may be delusional and self harming but that is our national psychology. We don't bend the knee.

    And in the end it is very arguable as to whether crashing out would be any worse than some half arse bodge, in the long term. Who can say.

    By Crash Brexit we get absolute freedom. London would suffer, in the beginning. But the nation would regain self respect, via self reliance.

    As Andrew Rawnsley said in the Observer today, it's not a game of poker where you can bluff based on the strength of your hand, and one side wins all. Of course, he blamed it all on Theresa May, but in fact it's the EU that's treating this like a game of poker; she has been clear that she wants a win-win deal.

    But if a good deal is not available, then it's not available. It will be a lose-lose in that case.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,023
    Scott_P said:

    Another Remoaner fox shot.

    Shooting Argies.

    You guys really are crazy for war...
    Hmm. Given I have been one of those who has been pointing out that whole Gibraltar episode is a storm in a teacup I would politely suggest that your sabbatical has left you with a little sunstroke. At least it certainly does appear your senses are somewhat addled.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,995

    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    We'd be free to do exactly what we want in every respect, and there's no doubt we would go for a low tax, ruthless, hugely capitalist model. It would be our best and only hope.

    *cough*

    Apart from the WTO terms we need to negotiate.

    That can be vetoed by other members.

    Like Argentina

    Oh, Fu...
    Looks like they can't veto it:

    http://blogs.ft.com/david-allen-green/2017/02/28/brexit-and-the-issue-of-the-wto-schedules/

    What many who were concerned at the apparent threat of veto by other WTO members may have missed was the rather narrow basis on which one country can in practice object to the new WTO schedules of another.

    As Cambridge trade law academic Dr Lorand Bartels explains (in the fascinating comments under that post by Mr Braithwaite – some of the best “below the line” comments I have seen on any post):

    The other 163 WTO Members (actually, 27 of these are EU Member States, so there are fewer voices than that) do not have a veto over the UK’s scheduled commitments.

    They do have a veto over the certification of these schedules. But certification has merely evidentiary weight. It is like coronation. The UK’s scheduled commitments exist even if they are not certified, just as a monarch is a monarch prior to coronation. Indeed, the EU itself has not traded under certified schedules since 1974. The sky has not fallen.
    LOL. Another Remoaner fox shot.
    Be sure to bookmark it, just in case :p
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    SeanT said:

    This is casinoroyale's thesis. And I come to see its merits. The EU has a strong hand which they are about to overplay. They think we won't accept crashing out. Of course we will. We are Britain. We'll take it. We have a self image of stoicism and endurance, we positively welcome blood sweat and tears.

    It may be delusional and self harming but that is our national psychology. We don't bend the knee.

    And in the end it is very arguable as to whether crashing out would be any worse than some half arse bodge, in the long term. Who can say.

    By Crash Brexit we get absolute freedom. London would suffer, in the beginning. But the nation would regain self respect, via self reliance.

    As Andrew Rawnsley said in the Observer today, it's not a game of poker where you can bluff based on the strength of your hand, and one side wins all. Of course, he blamed it all on Theresa May, but in fact it's the EU that's treating this like a game of poker; she has been clear that she wants a win-win deal.

    But if a good deal is not available, then it's not available. It will be a lose-lose in that case.
    I have always said that hard Brexit is the default outcome. The only question is how (and whether) we are prepared for it.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,023

    FF43 said:

    And the EU aren't aiming for an amicable settlement. They are aiming for a settlement substantially on their terms. It's business.

    Will they get one? Providing EU Parliament or some other faction doesn't muck up, I think they will, based on the draft framework issued on Friday. It's a very clever negotiating strategy which concedes just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep them on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.

    It's not clever at all, it's extremely stupid, based on a series of political miscalculations, for multiple reasons:

    1. If this is going to work out to both sides' benefit, both sides need to get on with discussing the real issue, which is the post-Brexit deal. Time is of the essence, for both sides - not just for the UK, as they seem to think.

    2. The EU27 think that a chaotic crash-out would hurt the UK more than them. That is true, but that will be of little consolation to them if it happens, because they will still be badly hit. They seem to be in la-la land about this (much like the Brexiteers were when they were telling us we could leave without much damage).

    3. They are manoeuvring themselves into a position where it may be impossible for them to agree a reasonable deal, most notably with their completely bonkers exit payment demand.

    4. Bringing Gibraltar into the equation is highly provocative and completely unnecessary. What on earth were they thinking?
    I think SouthamObserver was absolutely right on this. They were actually making sure Gibraltar was completely off the table by insisting it was a matter to be decided at a future date after Brexit negotiations were completed rather than as part of them. If our ministers, papers and more than a few on here had shown a little bit of common sense they would have seen this and realised this was doing us (and the negotiations) a considerable service
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Hmm. Given I have been one of those who has been pointing out that whole Gibraltar episode is a storm in a teacup I would politely suggest that your sabbatical has left you with a little sunstroke. At least it certainly does appear your senses are somewhat addled.

    Calm down dear. I was not entirely serious
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,468
    Scott_P said:

    Hmm. Given I have been one of those who has been pointing out that whole Gibraltar episode is a storm in a teacup I would politely suggest that your sabbatical has left you with a little sunstroke. At least it certainly does appear your senses are somewhat addled.

    Calm down dear. I was not entirely serious
    Were you ever? :lol:
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    SeanT said:

    We need to start salivating weirdly and discussing the unexpected annihilation of European cities under the sign of Aries.

    Michael Howard, waaayyyy ahead of you
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,032





    Did the British riot during WW2? No, we knuckled down.

    The Queen will wave from Buck House, reminding us all to endure, and survive. The total proles can be manipulated via Rupert Murdoch and Lord Dacre, operating in their special underground bunkers directly linked to Number 10.

    Will they get one? Providing EU Parliament or some other faction doesn't muck up, I think they will, based on the draft framework issued on Friday. It's a very clever negotiating strategy which concedes just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep them on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.


    It's not clever at all, it's extremely stupid, based on a series of political miscalculations, for multiple reasons:


    This is casinoroyale's thesis. And I come to see its merits. The EU has a strong hand which they are about to overplay. They think we won't accept crashing out. Of course we will. We are Britain. We'll take it. We have a self image of stoicism and endurance, we positively welcome blood sweat and tears.

    It may be delusional and self harming but that is our national psychology. We don't bend the knee.

    And in the end it is very arguable as to whether crashing out would be any worse than some half arse bodge, in the long term. Who can say.

    By Crash Brexit we get absolute freedom. London would suffer, in the beginning. But the nation would regain self respect, via self reliance.

    Or riot. It is easy to take it on the chin when you earn more than the Prime Minister

    Did the British riot during WW2? No, we knuckled down.

    The Queen will wave from Buck House, reminding us all to endure, and survive. The total proles can be manipulated via Rupert Murdoch and Lord Dacre, operating in their special underground bunkers directly linked to Number 10.

    Knuckled down and elected a landslide Socialist government. I have no doubt we would knuckle down, but beware the whirlwind that would result! btw if you think you will have sex with lesbians, consider investing your £ in a Queer Studies course :)
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    I've just heard on R5 that the Croydon race attack is part of the post Brexit racial intolerance. Have the attackers been confirmed as Kippers yet?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,468
    Michael Portillo has a famous motto: "Who dares wins".

    WE dare! WE will WIN!
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,176
    edited April 2017
    SeanT said:

    FF43 said:


    Hmm, not sure that Tusk has been sensible on this point. It was a miscalculation of quite spectacular proportions to bring Gibraltar into the equation. They've probably just torpedoed the chance of an amicable settlement (not that that was very high, given the rest of their negotiating position).

    And the EU aren't aiming for an amicable settlement. They are aiming for a settlement substantially on their terms. It's business.

    Will they get one? Providing EU Parliament or some other faction doesn't muck up, I think they will, based on the draft framework issued on Friday. It's a very clever negotiating strategy which concedes just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep them on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.
    Or they utterly miscalculate, and under-estimate our willingness to say Fuck off, and walk away, with no deal at all. No money changes hands. Nowt.

    This sentiment grows daily on the British side. So we'd take a 5-10% cut in GDP? So fucking what. Life goes on. No one dies. We'd be free to do exactly what we want in every respect, and there's no doubt we would go for a low tax, ruthless, hugely capitalist model. It would be our best and only hope.
    I can't see May and Hammond going for a low tax, ruthless, hugely capitalist model, at most there would be a corporation tax cut. The likely outcome in my view is we agree a few bilateral agreements in a few areas with some continued budget contributions to the EU and the rest goes to WTO terms after both sides push each other to the brink over the 2 year period until we officially leave which lasts us for a decade or so and then Labour finally get in again and take us back into the single market which is where we will probably stay, still outside the EU and having got some control of EU immigration in the meantime
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,032
    SeanT said:

    RobD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    We'd be free to do exactly what we want in every respect, and there's no doubt we would go for a low tax, ruthless, hugely capitalist model. It would be our best and only hope.

    *cough*

    Apart from the WTO terms we need to negotiate.

    That can be vetoed by other members.

    Like Argentina

    Oh, Fu...
    Remind us who won in 1982 :lol:
    Do you think Scotty wanted Mrs T to "negotiate" with Argentina in '82? ;)
    The more accurate parallel would be the negotiations over the Falklands before 1982. Mrs Thatchers govt in 1980 proposed a leaseback arrangement for example:

    http://www.britishempire.co.uk/forces/armycampaigns/southamerica/falklands/falklandswar.htm

    Indeed it was these negotiations over sovereignty that led the Argies to think that we didn't really want the Islands.
    I'm guessing Spain isn't getting the same message from us this time.. :p
    I was once told that the best way to deal with a serious mugger, or street robber, is to come across as potentially way more violent and crazy than your assailant. e.g. if he asks for your watch, you start frothing and gibbering and singing and talking about your guns and how you just killed your wife and you need to dump the weapon can you tell me where the moon is????

    I have (seriously) used methods like these with street robbers, and they work.

    I think that's what we need to to do Europe. They are politely trying to mug us, using their proper legal rights under A50. We need to start salivating weirdly and discussing the unexpected annihilation of European cities under the sign of Aries.
    I can confirm that these tactics do work. However....
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,805
    @Richard_Nabavi

    Take your points in turn

    It's not clever at all, it's extremely stupid, based on a series of political miscalculations, for multiple reasons:

    1. If this is going to work out to both sides' benefit, both sides need to get on with discussing the real issue, which is the post-Brexit deal. Time is of the essence, for both sides - not just for the UK, as they seem to think.


    Their interest is getting the exit stuff dealt with. Even that's complicated. It's not just the money. By doing it first it gets a focus. But they will cover the trade deal in outline as well.

    2. The EU27 think that a chaotic crash-out would hurt the UK more than them. That is true, but that will be of little consolation to them if it happens, because they will still be badly hit. They seem to be in la-la land about this (much like the Brexiteers were when they were telling us we could leave without much damage).

    The important thing is that the UK DOESN'T crash out, but that's the UK choice not the EU one. It can't stop the UK being even more stupid than it already has been, but it has built in a discussion of the trade deal which is the UK interest. They don't specify what they will offer or agree to in heads of agreement, but I would imagine and hope it would be the "Canada Plus" arrangement that Britain wants.

    While both sides need the deal, the consequences of not achieving it are asymmetrical . It would damage us more than them. More importantly, I disagree with your assessment that time is of the essence for both sides. It is for us; it isn't for them. Long negotiations prolong uncertainty for us: businesses don't know whether they will be operating for a transition period, the new trade deal or cliff edge. Third countries won't want to sign trade deals with us until they know our EU settlement. On the other hand uncertainty for the rEU resolves itself over time. Businesses with supply chains involving the UK have the time to rejig them. That's the weakness of our negotiating position

    3. They are manoeuvring themselves into a position where it may be impossible for them to agree a reasonable deal, most notably with their completely bonkers exit payment demand.

    As I have just said, time is not on our side. It is in our firm interest to clear things like exit payments out of the way as quickly as possible. It's the cost of Brexit. We may not be sensible however.

    4. Bringing Gibraltar into the equation is highly provocative and completely unnecessary. What on earth were they thinking?

    You've got it the wrong way round. The draft framework takes Gibraltar OUT of the equation as far as the main Brexit deal is concerned.

  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    FF43 said:

    SeanT said:

    FF43 said:


    Hmm, not sure that Tusk has been sensible on this point. It was a miscalculation of quite spectacular proportions to bring Gibraltar into the equation. They've probably just torpedoed the chance of an amicable settlement (not that that was very high, given the rest of their negotiating position).

    And the EU aren't aiming for an amicable settlement. They are aiming for a settlement substantially on their terms. It's business.

    Will they get one? Providing EU Parliament or some other faction doesn't muck up, I think they will, based on the draft framework issued on Friday. It's a very clever negotiating strategy which concedes just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep th a bitem on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.
    Or they utterly miscalculate, and under-estimate our willingness to say Fuck off, and walk away, with no deal at all. No money changes hands. Nowt.

    This sentiment grows daily on the British side. So we'd take a 5-10% cut in GDP? So fucking what. Life goes on. No one dies. We'd be free to do exactly what we want in every respect, and there's no doubt we would go for a low tax, ruthless, hugely capitalist model. It would be our best and only hope.
    It's possible. The UK's only real interest is a comprehensive trade-only deal with the EU (Canada Plus). But if the EU side says (stage 2 of the negotiations after the payment stuff has been substantially dealt with) you can have your Canada Plus and we are working on it (slowly), how likely is it that the UK would choose to go over the cliff edge AND pass up the only thing it really wants?. And by the time you get to Year 10 (bearing in mind Canada-not-plus has taken fourteen years so far and counting) it will think we have waited so long, we might as well keep going a bit longer.

    Mind you, the thing you said last night about the transition deal being limited to three years would fuck everything up if it happened. The important thing is for the EU NOT to punish us. As the affable Mr Tusk pointed out, the EU doesn't need to.
    It's only took that long because of negotiating different standards and compliance. We are already 100% compliant as we are already in the single market. There are no tests to meet.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited April 2017
    SeanT said:

    dixiedean said:

    SeanT said:

    FF43 said:

    And the EU aren't aiming for an amicable settlement. They are aiming for a settlement substantially on their terms. It's business.

    Will they get one? Providing EU Parliament or some other faction doesn't muck up, I think they will, based on the draft framework issued on Friday. It's a very clever negotiating strategy which concedes just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep them on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.

    It's not clever at all, it's extremely stupid, based on a series of political miscalculations, for multiple reasons:

    1. If this is going to work out to both sides' benefit, both sides need to get on with discussing the real issue, which is the post-Brexit deal. Time is of the essence, for both sides - not just for the UK, as they seem to think.

    2. The EU27 think that a chaotic crash-out would hurt the UK more than them. That is true, but that will be of little consolation to them if it happens, because they will still be badly hit. They seem to be in la-la land about this (much like the Brexiteers were when they were telling us we could leave without much damage).

    3. They are manoeuvring themselves into a position where it may be impossible for them to agree a reasonable deal, most notably with their completely bonkers exit payment demand.

    4. Bringing Gibraltar into the equation is highly provocative and completely unnecessary. What on earth were they thinking?
    This is casinoroyale's thesis. And I come to see its merits. The EU has a strong hand which they are about to overplay. They think we won't accept crashing out. Of course we will. We are Britain. We'll take it. We have a self image of stoicism and endurance, we positively welcome blood sweat and tears.

    It may be delusional and self harming but that is our national psychology. We don't bend the knee.

    And in the end it is very arguable as to whether crashing out would be any worse than some half arse bodge, in the long term. Who can say.

    By Crash Brexit we get absolute freedom. London would suffer, in the beginning. But the nation would regain self respect, via self reliance.
    Or riot. It is easy to take it on the chin when you earn more than the Prime Minister
    Did the British riot during WW2? No, we knuckled down.

    The Queen will wave from Buck House, reminding us all to endure, and survive. The total proles can be manipulated via Rupert Murdoch and Lord Dacre, operating in their special underground bunkers directly linked to Number 10.
    After the knuckle down, we elected a Labour government with a landslide. A proper one.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    We'd be free to do exactly what we want in every respect, and there's no doubt we would go for a low tax, ruthless, hugely capitalist model. It would be our best and only hope.

    *cough*

    Apart from the WTO terms we need to negotiate.

    That can be vetoed by other members.

    Like Argentina

    Oh, Fu...
    Remind us who won in 1982 :lol:
    Do you think Scotty wanted Mrs T to "negotiate" with Argentina in '82? ;)
    The more accurate parallel would be the negotiations over the Falklands before 1982. Mrs Thatchers govt in 1980 proposed a leaseback arrangement for example:

    http://www.britishempire.co.uk/forces/armycampaigns/southamerica/falklands/falklandswar.htm

    Indeed it was these negotiations over sovereignty that led the Argies to think that we didn't really want the Islands.
    The Tories don't want to talk about that episode.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,925
    edited April 2017
    surbiton said:



    After the knuckle down, we elected a Labour government with a landslide. A proper one.

    Personally I wouldn't be at all surprised if, after brexit is done and dusted and it's all bedded in (2025?) Labour wins a landslide.

    The Tories will have had 15 years in power and you have to assume the pendulum will swing at some point.

    Labour will be the one's working out how to spend all those billions of extra money we save not being in the EU... Hope they don't waste it. ;)
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,805
    notme said:

    FF43 said:

    SeanT said:

    FF43 said:


    Hmm, not sure that Tusk has been sensible on this point. It was a miscalculation of quite spectacular proportions to bring Gibraltar into the equation. They've probably just torpedoed the chance of an amicable settlement (not that that was very high, given the rest of their negotiating position).

    And the EU aren't aiming for an amicable settlement. They are aiming for a settlement substantially on their terms. It's business.

    Will they get one? Providing EU Parliament or some other faction doesn't muck up, I think they will, based on the draft framework issued on Friday. It's a very clever negotiating strategy which concedes just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep th a bitem on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.
    Or they utterly miscalculate, and under-estimate our willingness to say Fuck off, and walk away, with no deal at all. No money changes hands. Nowt.

    This sentiment grows daily on the British side. So we'd take a 5-10% cut in GDP? So fucking what. Life goes on. No one dies. We'd be free to do exactly what we want in every respect, and there's no doubt we would go for a low tax, ruthless, hugely capitalist model. It would be our best and only hope.
    It's possible. The UK's only real interest is a comprehensive trade-only deal with the EU (Canada Plus). But if the EU side says (stage 2 of the negotiations after the payment stuff has been substantially dealt with) you can have your Canada Plus and we are working on it (slowly), how likely is it that the UK would choose to go over the cliff edge AND pass up the only thing it really wants?. And by the time you get to Year 10 (bearing in mind Canada-not-plus has taken fourteen years so far and counting) it will think we have waited so long, we might as well keep going a bit longer.

    Mind you, the thing you said last night about the transition deal being limited to three years would fuck everything up if it happened. The important thing is for the EU NOT to punish us. As the affable Mr Tusk pointed out, the EU doesn't need to.
    It's only took that long because of negotiating different standards and compliance. We are already 100% compliant as we are already in the single market. There are no tests to meet.
    True and that might speed things up. On the other hand the regulatory system in Canada doesn't change with CETA but requires complete bottom up development for us, which will slow things down.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,995
    GIN1138 said:

    surbiton said:



    After the knuckle down, we elected a Labour government with a landslide. A proper one.

    Personally I wouldn't be at all surprised if, after brexit is done and dusted and it's all bedded in (2025?) Labour wins a landslide.

    The Tories will have had 15 years in power and you have to assume the pendulum will swing at some point.

    Labour will be the one's working out how to spend all those billions of extra money we save not being in the EU... Hope they don't waste it. ;)
    Did someone say owls?

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/06/20/article-2662719-1EEE326200000578-499_634x359.jpg
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    dixiedean said:

    SeanT said:

    RobD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    We'd be free to do exactly what we want in every respect, and there's no doubt we would go for a low tax, ruthless, hugely capitalist model. It would be our best and only hope.

    *cough*

    Apart from the WTO terms we need to negotiate.

    That can be vetoed by other members.

    Like Argentina

    Oh, Fu...
    Remind us who won in 1982 :lol:
    Do you think Scotty wanted Mrs T to "negotiate" with Argentina in '82? ;)
    The more accurate parallel would be the negotiations over the Falklands before 1982. Mrs Thatchers govt in 1980 proposed a leaseback arrangement for example:

    http://www.britishempire.co.uk/forces/armycampaigns/southamerica/falklands/falklandswar.htm

    Indeed it was these negotiations over sovereignty that led the Argies to think that we didn't really want the Islands.
    I'm guessing Spain isn't getting the same message from us this time.. :p
    I was once told that the best way to deal with a serious mugger, or street robber, is to come across as potentially way more violent and crazy than your assailant. e.g. if he asks for your watch, you start frothing and gibbering and singing and talking about your guns and how you just killed your wife and you need to dump the weapon can you tell me where the moon is????

    I have (seriously) used methods like these with street robbers, and they work.

    I think that's what we need to to do Europe. They are politely trying to mug us, using their proper legal rights under A50. We need to start salivating weirdly and discussing the unexpected annihilation of European cities under the sign of Aries.
    I can confirm that these tactics do work. However....
    A friend of mine was kidnapped in Africa, and spent the next hours singing "Onward Christian Soldiers" end to end. After 4 hours of this they dumped the crazy Mzungu in a slum.

    It is a high risk strategy though. Could have had a bullet.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,370
    People are IMO misreading the negotiations, which haven't even started yet. It's absolutely normal to start off with irreconcilable conditions. Next comes a deadlock. Then a crisis. Then a walkout. Then last-minute further talks. And finally a fudge.

    It's how Europe has worked for years, and I suspect the UK will go along with it, because the alternatives are too unwelcome to May, who in the end is a pragmatist.

    On another subject, I'm off tomorrow to Mauritius, mostly for talks with MPs about the use of monkeys for experiments. But I'll probably have a day free. I'm not intereted in lying on beaches. Do PBers have any suggestions on things to see?
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    We need to start salivating weirdly and discussing the unexpected annihilation of European cities under the sign of Aries.

    Michael Howard, waaayyyy ahead of you
    Fair play to Mr Howard, indeed. Also Michael Heseltine, oddly using the same tactic
    We better get some aircrafts on those carriers. Better still, let's sack another 50000 from the Army, Navy and the Marines and finish building the carriers.............
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,805

    People are IMO misreading the negotiations, which haven't even started yet. It's absolutely normal to start off with irreconcilable conditions. Next comes a deadlock. Then a crisis. Then a walkout. Then last-minute further talks. And finally a fudge.

    It's how Europe has worked for years, and I suspect the UK will go along with it, because the alternatives are too unwelcome to May, who in the end is a pragmatist.

    On another subject, I'm off tomorrow to Mauritius, mostly for talks with MPs about the use of monkeys for experiments. But I'll probably have a day free. I'm not intereted in lying on beaches. Do PBers have any suggestions on things to see?

    Mostly agree. However fudges are for internal agreements, from what I have seen. Externally, which is what this negotiation will be, because we're out of the EU, the EU tends to be pretty hard-edged.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    People are IMO misreading the negotiations, which haven't even started yet. It's absolutely normal to start off with irreconcilable conditions. Next comes a deadlock. Then a crisis. Then a walkout. Then last-minute further talks. And finally a fudge.

    It's how Europe has worked for years, and I suspect the UK will go along with it, because the alternatives are too unwelcome to May, who in the end is a pragmatist.

    On another subject, I'm off tomorrow to Mauritius, mostly for talks with MPs about the use of monkeys for experiments. But I'll probably have a day free. I'm not intereted in lying on beaches. Do PBers have any suggestions on things to see?

    Look out for MH370 !
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    GIN1138 said:

    surbiton said:



    After the knuckle down, we elected a Labour government with a landslide. A proper one.

    Personally I wouldn't be at all surprised if, after brexit is done and dusted and it's all bedded in (2025?) Labour wins a landslide.

    The Tories will have had 15 years in power and you have to assume the pendulum will swing at some point.

    Labour will be the one's working out how to spend all those billions of extra money we save not being in the EU... Hope they don't waste it. ;)
    We will start with £350m a week extra on the NHS !
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,468
    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    dixiedean said:

    SeanT said:

    FF43 said:

    And the EU aren't aiming for an amicable settlement. They are aiming for a settlement substantially on their terms. It's business.

    Will they get one? Providing EU Parliament or so just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep them on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.

    It's not clever at all, it's extremely stupid, based on a series of political miscalculations, for multiple reasons:

    1. If this is going to work out to both sides' benefit, both sides need to get on with discussing the real issue, which is the post-Brexit deal. Time is of the essence, for both sides - not just for the UK, as they seem to think.

    2. The EU27 think that a chaotic crash-out would hurt the UK more than them. That is true, but that will be of little consolation to them if it happens, because they will still be badly hit. They seem to be in la-la land about this (much like the Brexiteers were when they were telling us we could leave without much damage).

    3. They are manoeuvring themselves into a position where it may be impossible for them to agree a reasonable deal, most notably with their completely bonkers exit payment demand.

    4. Bringing Gibraltar into the equation is highly provocative and completely unnecessary. What on earth were they thinking?
    This is casinoroyale's thesis. And I come to see its merits. The EU has a strong hand which they are about to overplay. They think we won't accept crashing out. Of course we will. We are Britain. We'll take it. We have a self image of stoicism and endurance, we positively welcome blood sweat and tears.

    It may be delusional and self harming but that is our national psychology. We don't bend the knee.

    And in the end it is very arguable as to whether crashing out would be any worse than some half arse bodge, in the long term. Who can say.

    By Crash Brexit we get absolute freedom. London would suffer, in the beginning. But the nation would regain self respect, via self reliance.
    Or riot. It is easy to take it on the chin when you earn more than the Prime Minister
    Did the British riot during WW2? No, we knuckled down.

    The Queen will wave from Buck House, reminding us all to endure, and survive. The total proles can be manipulated via Rupert Murdoch and Lord Dacre, operating in their special underground bunkers directly linked to Number 10.
    After the knuckle down, we elected a Labour government with a landslide. A proper one.
    And they lasted only full term :lol:
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    People are IMO misreading the negotiations, which haven't even started yet. It's absolutely normal to start off with irreconcilable conditions. Next comes a deadlock. Then a crisis. Then a walkout. Then last-minute further talks. And finally a fudge.

    It's how Europe has worked for years, and I suspect the UK will go along with it, because the alternatives are too unwelcome to May, who in the end is a pragmatist.

    On another subject, I'm off tomorrow to Mauritius, mostly for talks with MPs about the use of monkeys for experiments. But I'll probably have a day free. I'm not intereted in lying on beaches. Do PBers have any suggestions on things to see?

    This place was interesting:

    http://www.mauritian-wildlife.org/application/index.php?tpid=1&tcid=3

    I really liked Mauritius. Wonderfully multicultural.

    This book is good for the flight.

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B009NRBG3Q/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited April 2017
    Understanding 'them' is pivotal.

    The fearful talk as though they are one. It's an epic misjudgement.

    'Them' are the EU27 - each beholden to their own electorates. They act for their own electorate; the rest is a charade that they rely on having zero domestic cost.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,032
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    dixiedean said:

    SeanT said:

    FF43 said:

    And the EU aren't aiming for an amicable settlement. They are aiming for a settlement substantially on their terms. It's business.

    Will they get one? Providing EU Parliament or some other faction doesn't muck up, I think they will, based on the draft framework issued on Friday. It's a very clever negotiating strategy which concedes just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep them on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.

    It's ly with their completely bonkers exit payment demand.

    4. Bringing Gibraltar into the equation is highly provocative and completely unnecessary. What on earth were they thinking?
    This is casinoroyale's thesis. And I come to see its merits. The EU has a strong hand which they are about to overplay. They think we won't accept crashing out. Of course we will. We are Britain. We'll take it. We have a self image of stoicism and endurance, we positively welcome blood sweat and tears.

    It may be delusional and self harming but that is our national psychology. We don't bend the knee.

    And in the end it is very arguable as to whether crashing out would be any worse than some half arse bodge, in the long term. Who can say.

    By Crash Brexit we get absolute freedom. London would suffer, in the beginning. But the nation would regain self respect, via self reliance.
    Or riot. It is easy to take it on the chin when you earn more than the Prime Minister
    Did the British riot during WW2? No, we knuckled down.

    The Queen will wave from Buck House, reminding us all to endure, and survive. The total proles can be manipulated via Rupert Murdoch and Lord Dacre, operating in their special underground bunkers directly linked to Number 10.
    After the knuckle down, we elected a Labour government with a landslide. A proper one.
    And if that happens after Proper Hard Brexit, then I salute the British people, for making their sovereign choice as a nation.

    That's what Brexit MEANS. We get to choose, again, how we are governed, and under what laws. We can be North Korea or Singapore. WE CHOOSE. But the British people will decide, not a pseudoelite of unelected, unremovable, often criminal and always overpaid smug fat twats in Brussels.

    This is the one thing Tony Benn got right. Brussels means you can't throw out the people that govern you. It was fundamentally wrong. We were right to LEAVE.
    Hasta la revolucion siempre!
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    dixiedean said:

    SeanT said:

    FF43 said:

    And the EU aren't aiming for an amicable settlement. They are aiming for a settlement substantially on their terms. It's business.

    Providing EU Parliament or so just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep them on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.

    It's not clever at all, it's extremely stupid, based on a series of political miscalculations, for multiple reasons:

    1. If this is going to work out to both sides' benefit, both sides need to get on with discussing the real issue, which is the post-Brexit deal. Time is of the essence, for both sides - not just for the UK, as they seem to think.

    2. The EU27 think that a chaotic crash-out would hurt the UK more than them. That is true, but that will be of little consolation to them if it happens, because they will still be badly hit. They seem to be in la-la land about this (much like the Brexiteers were when they were telling us we could leave without much damage).

    3. They are manoeuvring themselves into a position where it may be impossible for them to agree a reasonable deal, most notably with their completely bonkers exit payment demand.

    4. Bringing Gibraltar into the equation is highly provocative and completely unnecessary. What on earth were they thinking?
    This is casinoroyale's thesis. And I come to see its merits. The EU has a strong hand which they are about to overplay. They think we won't accept crashing out. Of course we will. We are Britain. We'll take it. We have a self image of stoicism and endurance, we positively welcome blood sweat and tears.

    It may be delusional and self harming but that is our national psychology. We don't bend the knee.

    And in the end it is very arguable as to whether crashing out would be any worse than some half arse bodge, in the long term. Who can say.

    By Crash Brexit we get absolute freedom. London would suffer, in the beginning. But the nation would regain self respect, via self reliance.
    Or riot. It is easy to take it on the chin when you earn more than the Prime Minister
    Did the British riot during WW2? No, we knuckled down.

    The Queen will wave from Buck House, reminding us all to endure, and survive. The total proles can be manipulated via Rupert Murdoch and Lord Dacre, operating in their special underground bunkers directly linked to Number 10.
    After the knuckle down, we elected a Labour government with a landslide. A proper one.
    And they lasted only full term :lol:
    Actually they increased their votes. It was, as usual, the FPTP which did it for them.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,032

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    dixiedean said:

    SeanT said:

    FF43 said:

    And the EU aren't aiming for an amicable settlement. They are aiming for a settlement substantially on their terms. It's business.

    Will they get one? Providing EU Parliament or so just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep them on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.

    It's not clever at all, it's extremely stupid, based on a series of political miscalculations, for multiple reasons:

    1. If this is going to work out to both sides' benefit, both sides need to get on with discussing the real issue, which is the post-Brexit deal. Time is of the essence, for both sides - not just for the UK, as they seem to think.

    2. The EU27 think that a chaotic crash-out would hurt the UK more than them. That is true, but that will be of little consolation to them if it happens, because they will still be badly hit. They seem to be in la-la land about this (much like the Brexiteers were when they were telling us we could leave without much damage).

    3. They are manoeuvring themselves into a position where it may be impossible for them to agree a reasonable deal, most notably with their completely bonkers exit payment demand.

    4. Bringing Gibraltar into the equation is highly provocative and completely unnecessary. What on earth were they thinking?
    This is casinoroyale's thesis. And I come to see its merits. The EU has a strong hand which they are about to overplay. They think we won't accept crashing out. Of course we will. We are Britain. We'll take it. We have a self image of stoicism and endurance, we positively welcome blood sweat and tears.

    It may be delusional and self harming but that is our national psychology. We don't bend the knee.

    And in the end it is very arguable as to whether crashing out would be any worse than some half arse bodge, in the long term. Who can say.

    By Crash Brexit we get absolute freedom. London would suffer, in the beginning. But the nation would regain self respect, via self reliance.
    Or riot. It is easy to take it on the chin when you earn more than the Prime Minister
    Did the British riot during WW2? No, we knuckled down.

    The Queen will wave from Buck House, reminding us all to endure, and survive. The total proles can be manipulated via Rupert Murdoch and Lord Dacre, operating in their special underground bunkers directly linked to Number 10.
    After the knuckle down, we elected a Labour government with a landslide. A proper one.
    And they lasted only full term :lol:
    And re-shaped society for generations....
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,468
    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Scott_P said:

    SeanT said:

    We need to start salivating weirdly and discussing the unexpected annihilation of European cities under the sign of Aries.

    Michael Howard, waaayyyy ahead of you
    Fair play to Mr Howard, indeed. Also Michael Heseltine, oddly using the same tactic
    We better get some aircrafts
    Aircraft! No "s"!
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    dixiedean said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    dixiedean said:

    SeanT said:

    FF43 said:

    And the EU aren't aiming for an amicable settlement. They are aiming for a settlement substantially on their terms. It's business.

    Will they get one? Providing EU Parliament or some other faction doesn't muck up, I think they will, based on the draft framework issued on Friday. It's a very clever negotiating strategy which concedes just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep them on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.

    It's ly with their completely bonkers exit payment demand.

    4. Bringing Gibraltar into the equation is highly provocative and completely unnecessary. What on earth were they thinking?
    This is casinoroyale's thesis. And I come to see its merits. The EU has a strong hand which they are about to overplay. They think we won't accept crashing out. Of course we will. We are Britain. We'll take it. We have a self image of stoicism and endurance, we positively welcome blood sweat and tears.

    It may be delusional and self harming but that is our national psychology. We don't bend the knee.

    And in the end it is very arguable as to whether crashing out would be any worse than some half arse bodge, in the long term. Who can say.

    By Crash Brexit we get absolute freedom. London would suffer, in the beginning. But the nation would regain self respect, via self reliance.
    Or riot. It is easy to take it on the chin when you earn more than the Prime Minister
    Did the British riot during WW2? No, we knuckled down.

    The Queen will wave from Buck House, reminding us all to endure, and survive. The total proles can be manipulated via Rupert Murdoch and Lord Dacre, operating in their special underground bunkers directly linked to Number 10.
    After the knuckle down, we elected a Labour government with a landslide. A proper one.
    And if that happens after Proper Hard Brexit, then I salute the British people, for making their sovereign choice as a nation.

    That's what Brexit MEANS. We get to choose, again, how we are governed, and under what laws. We can be North Korea or Singapore. WE CHOOSE. But the British people will decide, not a pseudoelite of unelected, unremovable, often criminal and always overpaid smug fat twats in Brussels.

    This is the one thing Tony Benn got right. Brussels means you can't throw out the people that govern you. It was fundamentally wrong. We were right to LEAVE.
    Hasta la revolucion siempre!
    'siempre' or 'perpetuo'?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,176

    People are IMO misreading the negotiations, which haven't even started yet. It's absolutely normal to start off with irreconcilable conditions. Next comes a deadlock. Then a crisis. Then a walkout. Then last-minute further talks. And finally a fudge.

    It's how Europe has worked for years, and I suspect the UK will go along with it, because the alternatives are too unwelcome to May, who in the end is a pragmatist.

    On another subject, I'm off tomorrow to Mauritius, mostly for talks with MPs about the use of monkeys for experiments. But I'll probably have a day free. I'm not intereted in lying on beaches. Do PBers have any suggestions on things to see?

    Went to Mauritius for a wedding in 2015, go to the Botanical Gardens and the Natural History Museum in Port Louis and the multicoloured earth if you can and also do some snorkelling if you are able
  • Options
    Ally_BAlly_B Posts: 185
    notme said:

    FF43 said:



    It's possible. The UK's only real interest is a comprehensive trade-only deal with the EU (Canada Plus). But if the EU side says (stage 2 of the negotiations after the payment stuff has been substantially dealt with) you can have your Canada Plus and we are working on it (slowly), how likely is it that the UK would choose to go over the cliff edge AND pass up the only thing it really wants?. And by the time you get to Year 10 (bearing in mind Canada-not-plus has taken fourteen years so far and counting) it will think we have waited so long, we might as well keep going a bit longer.

    Mind you, the thing you said last night about the transition deal being limited to three years would fuck everything up if it happened. The important thing is for the EU NOT to punish us. As the affable Mr Tusk pointed out, the EU doesn't need to.

    It's only took that long because of negotiating different standards and compliance. We are already 100% compliant as we are already in the single market. There are no tests to meet.
    In our humble opinion there may not be BUT it is in the EU interest to let this run for many years whilst we struggle to reach some sort of an agreement. During that time our economy might suffer, the pound might suffer and the money available for Pensions/NHS/sacred cows might have to be cut. The EU is probably thinking that at some point the voters are going to say "who led (or is that lied to) us here" and vote them out because, as is often said, it is the economy that wins elections. Once that turns against the Conservatives then the voters will say "we have left the EU haven't we, so why aren't we better off" (even if negotiations are continuing). Now which party was it that has positioned themselves as the alternative to all this?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,468
    dixiedean said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    dixiedean said:

    SeanT said:

    FF43 said:

    And the EU aren't aiming for an amicable settlement. They are aiming for a settlement substantially on their terms. It's business.

    Will they get one? Providing EU Parliament or some other faction doesn't muck up, I think they will, based on the draft framework issued on Friday. It's a very clever negotiating strategy which concedes just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep them on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.

    It's ly with their completely bonkers exit payment demand.

    4. Bringing Gibraltar into the equation is highly provocative and completely unnecessary. What on earth were they thinking?
    This is casinoroyale's thesis. And I come to see its merits. The EU has a strong hand which they are about to overplay. They think we won't accept crashing out. Of course we will. We are Britain. We'll take it. We have a self image of stoicism and endurance, we positively welcome blood sweat and tears.

    It may be delusional and self harming but that is our national psychology. We don't bend the knee.

    And in the end it is very arguable as to whether crashing out would be any worse than some half arse bodge, in the long term. Who can say.

    By Crash Brexit we get absolute freedom. London would suffer, in the beginning. But the nation would regain self respect, via self reliance.
    Or riot. It is easy to take it on the chin when you earn more than the Prime Minister
    Did the British riot during WW2? No, we knuckled down.

    The Queen will wave from Buck House, reminding us all to endure, and survive. The total proles can be manipulated via Rupert Murdoch and Lord Dacre, operating in their special underground bunkers directly linked to Number 10.
    After the knuckle down, we elected a Labour government with a landslide. A proper one.
    And if that happens after Proper Hard Brexit, then I salute the British people, for making their sovereign choice as a nation.

    That's what Brexit MEANS. We get to choose, again, how we are governed, and under what laws. We can be North Korea or Singapore. WE CHOOSE. But the British people will decide, not a pseudoelite of unelected, unremovable, often criminal and always overpaid smug fat twats in Brussels.

    This is the one thing Tony Benn got right. Brussels means you can't throw out the people that govern you. It was fundamentally wrong. We were right to LEAVE.
    Hasta la revolucion siempre!
    Where's the Revolution?
    Come on people,
    You're letting me down!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsCR05oKROA
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    surbiton said:

    We better get some aircrafts on those carriers. Better still, let's sack another 50000 from the Army, Navy and the Marines and finish building the carriers.............

    It's OK, the Spanish are flying obsolete aircraft.

    Harriers I think they are called...
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited April 2017
    Mauritius is oddly like Kent.

    Agree that the blend of French, British, African and Indian can be quite endearing.

    A sundeck trip on a boat on a nice day is always a nice way to while away a day of rest.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,032

    It's ly with their completely bonkers exit payment demand.

    4. Bringing Gibraltar into the equation is highly provocative and completely unnecessary. What on earth were they thinking?

    This is casinoroyale's thesis. And I come to see its merits. The EU has a strong hand which they are about to overplay. They think we won't accept crashing out. Of course we will. We are Britain. We'll take it. We have a self image of stoicism and endurance, we positively welcome blood sweat and tears.

    It may be delusional and self harming but that is our national psychology. We don't bend the knee.

    And in the end it is very arguable as to whether crashing out would be any worse than some half arse bodge, in the long term. Who can say.

    By Crash Brexit we get absolute freedom. London would suffer, in the beginning. But the nation would regain self respect, via self reliance.

    Or riot. It is easy to take it on the chin when you earn more than the Prime Minister

    Did the British riot during WW2? No, we knuckled down.

    The Queen will wave from Buck House, reminding us all to endure, and survive. The total proles can be manipulated via Rupert Murdoch and Lord Dacre, operating in their special underground bunkers directly linked to Number 10.

    After the knuckle down, we elected a Labour government with a landslide. A proper one.

    And if that happens after Proper Hard Brexit, then I salute the British people, for making their sovereign choice as a nation.

    That's what Brexit MEANS. We get to choose, again, how we are governed, and under what laws. We can be North Korea or Singapore. WE CHOOSE. But the British people will decide, not a pseudoelite of unelected, unremovable, often criminal and always overpaid smug fat twats in Brussels.

    This is the one thing Tony Benn got right. Brussels means you can't throw out the people that govern you. It was fundamentally wrong. We were right to LEAVE.

    Hasta la revolucion siempre!

    Where's the Revolution?
    Come on people,
    You're letting me down!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsCR05oKROA

    Was a reply to SeanT, but if you are trying to associate me with Depeche Mode please don't :)
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,032
    MTimT said:

    dixiedean said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    dixiedean said:

    SeanT said:

    FF43 said:

    And the EU aren't aiming for an amicable settlement. They are aiming for a settlement substantially on their terms. It's business.

    Will they get one? Providing EU Parliament or some other faction doesn't muck up, I think they will, based on the draft framework issued on Friday. It's a very clever negotiating strategy which concedes just enough to the UK side at the right stages to keep them on board, while allowing the EU side to drive the direction and pace, which will be leisurely.

    It's ly with their completely bonkers exit payment demand.

    4. Bringing Gibraltar into the equation is highly provocative and completely unnecessary. What on earth were they thinking?
    This is casinoroyale's thesis. And I come to see its merits. The EU has a strong hand which they are about to overplay. They think we won't accept crashing out. Of course we will. We are Britain. We'll take it. We have a self image of stoicism and endurance, we positively welcome blood sweat and tears.

    It may be delusional and self harming but that is our national psychology. We don't bend the knee.

    And in the end it is very arguable as to whether crashing out would be any worse than some half arse bodge, in the long term. Who can say.

    By Crash Brexit we get absolute freedom. London would suffer, in the beginning. But the nation would regain self respect, via self reliance.
    Or riot. It is easy to take it on the chin when you earn more than the Prime Minister
    Did the British riot during WW2? No, we knuckled down.

    The Queen will wave from Buck House, reminding us all to endure, and survive. The total proles can be manipulated via Rupert Murdoch and Lord Dacre, operating in their special underground bunkers directly linked to Number 10.
    After the knuckle down, we elected a Labour government with a landslide. A proper one.
    And if that happens after Proper Hard Brexit, then I salute the British people, for making their sovereign choice as a nation.

    That's what Brexit MEANS. We get to choose, again, how we are governed, and under what laws. We can be North Korea or Singapore. WE CHOOSE. But the British people will decide, not a pseudoelite of unelected, unremovable, often criminal and always overpaid smug fat twats in Brussels.

    This is the one thing Tony Benn got right. Brussels means you can't throw out the people that govern you. It was fundamentally wrong. We were right to LEAVE.
    Hasta la revolucion siempre!
    'siempre' or 'perpetuo'?
    Ask SeanT
  • Options
    AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    edited April 2017
    chestnut said:


    'Them' are the EU27 - each beholden to their own electorates. They act for their own electorate; the rest is a charade that they rely on having zero domestic cost.

    That may be true of the EU council negotiators, to some degree. The EU Parliament though? They seem much more inclined towards punishment for leaving the club - and they have a veto.
This discussion has been closed.