Mr. Gallowgate, interesting to hear your thoughts (as a federalist).
I am definitely not one of those. At the moment, a bit on the fence about whether May was wise to say what she did. However, I do think there's a lack of critical thinking from some in the media, when the EU leaks a spun version of events, lets rumours fly of their Danegeld demand rising from 60 to 100bn, and comes out with things like "Brexit cannot be a success".
Hmm.
Certainly. Prior to the referendum and for many years prior, I wanted ultimately that we would fully integrate. That meant the Euro, Schengen and to take a lead role in the EU like Germany. That doesn't mean I didn't think the EU needed reform, but that ultimately that the federalism vision was a good one.
However, since the referendum, I've come to terms with the fact that this isn't Britain's destiny and that Europe (the continent) needs to make the best of it.
I don't like the scornful and spiteful rhetoric coming from certain people within the EU establishment. I also don't like the rhetoric coming from people from the 'liberal elite' that our nation is nothing and that we should just bend over and take our punishment. European countries should be our allies, and we should be theirs. We should reach a mutually beneficial deal and be done with it.
I'm a member of the Lib Dems, have been a Labour member in the past and have never ever voted Conservative, but May's pragmatism as someone who (allegedly) voted to remain to try and make the best of the situation is very endearing. I think it will win her a lot of votes. She isn't talking our nation down, unlike some people.
Yeah, right. let's see the headlines in the Mail , the Express, the Telegraph and the Sun tomorrow. She has made clear that anyone who opposes her is an enemy of the UK.
Yes, she's proving rather a formidable politician.
Yep - it's impossibly hard to get good headlines in the right wing anti-European press by labelling foreigners the enemy.
Calm down - she's using overblown language to spin a political point, right after she was called delusional by foreign opponents, this is not a big deal.
I think it'll probably work for May. There is at least some substance behind what she's saying, although I think she may well be overplaying it as it suits her.
It's not a zero-sum game, but it seems like there's an awfully big cost that the EU want us to pay - presumably in part because they're losing something beneficial, and in part we'll be gaining something beneficial by leaving. When they start demanding bigger and bigger sums it seems to me that they're slightly suggesting that the EU is a bigger and bigger handicap to its members.
I don't see much downside for her. After all, the other side are being unreasonable. If they back off, that's a win for her and for the country. If they don't, well, it helps ensure that the blame for failure is directed where it belongs, which is the headbangers in Brussels who want failure.
May is pitching to the head-bangers here who want failure. They are loving it. Her problems begin once this election is won. Fighting them on the beaches and never surrendering is all well and good in abstract. It gets a bit more serious when it happens. How long will people tolerate reductions in living standards for the sake of a few billion quid just so that wealthy Brexiteers can indulge their Churchill fantasies?
The spirit of the plucky ne'er do well Remainers in Richmond Park and Kensington will be too much for those wealthy Leave voters from Thurrock and Hartlepool in the end..
Eton Rifles, Eton Rifles!
Of course, Eton Rifles is all about the posh boys always winning. The good people of Richmond Park and Kensington will be fine. It's Leave voters in Thurrock and Hartlepool that have most to lose in the case of a rock hard Brexit - the one they were told would never, ever happen. Wealthy Brexiteers seem to expect that a bit of Cod Churchill and a few digs at Johnny Foreigner will see them through. I am not so sure. Hopefully, we won't get to find out.
The people who voted for Leave in poor areas don't have anything to lose, they feel their lives cant get any worse. They are dirt poor and their neighbourhoods don't feel like home anymore. They had the chance to say "up yours", they took it, and will probably be voting for Theresa May next month.
The only people revved up about it are metropolitan Smythers-Jones' in West London.
Eviening all. - The PM’s speech was a shot across the bow to those meddling on the other side of the channel, it will appeal to those that already dislike the EU, beyond that, I doubt it will change a single vote.
After all where exactly can any remain voting Tory supporter go?
I'm staying inside the tent, pissing in.
I'll have been a member of the Tory Party for twenty years this Saturday.
If things go well tonight, I'll be helping to try and elect a Leaver as Tory MP in Don Valley over the next few weeks.
May is pitching to the head-bangers here who want failure.
No she's not. She's pitching to those who want a deal but are worried that the EU are being unreasonable.
Yeah, right. let's see the headlines in the Mail , the Express, the Telegraph and the Sun tomorrow.
She's definitely pitching for the Mail type headline. I still hope 'crush the saboteurs' cost the Tories some votes, and perhaps seeing it encouraged some of the uptick for Labour we've seen, and I would not be surprised to see small bumps, only small, for Con and Lab based off her approach here.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
Yeah, right. let's see the headlines in the Mail , the Express, the Telegraph and the Sun tomorrow. She has made clear that anyone who opposes her is an enemy of the UK.
Yes, she's proving rather a formidable politician.
Yep - it's impossibly hard to get good headlines in the right wing anti-European press by labelling foreigners the enemy.
A good pm does not go onto the steps of no10 to complain about the press. Bonkers.
Just catching up on the news after yet another crazy busy afternoon at work. The increasingly weird Theresa May has done what I never thought possible – she has made Corbyn look like a sensible moderate. He isn't of course. He is also a whack job. What in the world has this country done to deserve these two clowns as heads of the main parties?
It's not a zero-sum game, but it seems like there's an awfully big cost that the EU want us to pay - presumably in part because they're losing something beneficial, and in part we'll be gaining something beneficial by leaving. When they start demanding bigger and bigger sums it seems to me that they're slightly suggesting that the EU is a bigger and bigger handicap to its members.
The bigger the amount the EU can squeeze out of the UK the further the EU can kick budget problems down the road. Nobody should simply assume EU demands are fair, they have other motives for getting as much out of us as they can.
Of course, if our EU friends want to improve the atmosphere, they have a very simple means to do so. They just need to let it be known that they too don't recognise the figures of €50bn to €100bn which have appeared in the press, and that they expect the final figure to be sensible when compared with the UK's annual membership cost.
Sensible to you = Zero ?
What if the UK have indeed signed commitments of whatever billions ? Are you saying UK should renege ?
Given our annual net contribution is around £13 billion - why would £26 billion become £50 or £100?
Carlotta, the annual NET contribution is indeed net as it says. But the EU gross budget runs into hundreds of billions. In 2014 [ I think ], the EU finalised their budget, partly at Britain's insistence, that it should run until 2020. All 28 countries signed the budget.
We would be in a strong position not to pay on any spend after 2020. But legally I am not sure how we can not pay until 2020 unless we want to sour relations with the EU countries.
Remember one thing: if the UK does not pay [ we do not know the actual figure, at the moment it is all hot air ], the other 27 will have to pick up the tab. No one will be happy.
If our strategy is divide and rule, then the chances of Latvia siding with us, after they have been told they would have to pick up €3bn, say, of the spend, is most unlikely.
I hope I have made it as clear as possible.
Legally I suspect we don't have to pay beyond March 29 2019, morally we should pay until the end of the 2020 budget...
That doesn't however mean we can't get (try to get) something for it....
Fair enough. That could have negotiated with goodwill. But now it has really soured the atmosphere. It is also just not what she says, it is also her manner of saying. Too abrasive. Yes, she will add a few points and win an even bigger majority. Then what ?
I don't see much downside for her. After all, the other side are being unreasonable. If they back off, that's a win for her and for the country. If they don't, well, it helps ensure that the blame for failure is directed where it belongs, which is the headbangers in Brussels who want failure.
May is pitching to the head-bangers here who want failure. They are loving it. Her problems begin once this election is won. Fighting them on the beaches and never surrendering is all well and good in abstract. It gets a bit more serious when it happens. How long will people tolerate reductions in living standards for the sake of a few billion quid just so that wealthy Brexiteers can indulge their Churchill fantasies?
The spirit of the plucky ne'er do well Remainers in Richmond Park and Kensington will be too much for those wealthy Leave voters from Thurrock and Hartlepool in the end..
Eton Rifles, Eton Rifles!
Of course, Eton Rifles is all about the posh boys always winning. The good people of Richmond Park and Kensington will be fine. It's Leave voters in Thurrock and Hartlepool that have most to lose in the case of a rock hard Brexit - the one they were told would never, ever happen. Wealthy Brexiteers seem to expect that a bit of Cod Churchill and a few digs at Johnny Foreigner will see them through. I am not so sure. Hopefully, we won't get to find out.
The people who voted for Leave in poor areas don't have anything to lose, they feel their lives cant get any worse. They are dirt poor and their neighbourhoods don't feel like home anymore. They had the chance to say "up yours", they took it, and will probably be voting for Theresa May next month.
The only people revved up about it are metropolitan Smythers-Jones' in West London.
People who feel they have nothing to lose may not react that well when it turns out that they do. As I said, this will do May no harm at all in the election. But then it will be time for her to deliver the fairer, more united, more prosperous country that she has promised.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
Mr. Jonathan, she was complaining about the leaks, no? Comments on Gibraltar, Northern Ireland, and £100bn won't exactly have gone down well either.
I'm still not convinced she was wise to do it. But the idea there hasn't been mendacious bullshit from Brussels is ludicrous, yet some are unwilling to condemn that (indeed, gloating about how the UK was being put in its place).
Mr. Nabavi, if the Commission and other parts of the EU were splintering, overt criticism may force them back together again.
But we were told by Leavers [ you were NOT one of them; remember you were a Cameroon ] that the EU desperately needed our markets.
Both statements cannot be correct.
They don't desperately need our markets, but that doesn't meant they won't be seriously damaged by hard Brexit, as we will. So the question is whether Eurocrat politics will trump economic self-interest. I don't know the answer to that question, but I do know that Theresa May wants to do a reasonable deal, as does DD.
What if the UK have indeed signed commitments of whatever billions ? Are you saying UK should renege ?
Of course we shouldn't renege. We have legal obligations to pay our dues until we leave. There might be some small further obligations, but clearly it is impossible to imagine that these could be anything more than a year or maybe at a push two years' worth of our annual bill. And there is a strong case, as the Lords report concluded, for thinking that it might well be zero. If there's no trade deal, zero should be our position; it would be bonkers to pay up megabucks for nothing. If relations have broken down to the extent that we are regarded as no more partners of the EU than Vietnam or Columbia are, why would we want to pay anything more than Vietnam or Columbia pay?
That's the worst case for both side. A 'sensible' amount, which the EU should be seeking, would be an agreement by us to pay a proportion of our existing net costs for a transitional period. Amount and timing to be negotiated, but off the top of my head something like 50% in the first year after Brexit, dropping over three years to zero, might be reasonable. In addition we would of course contribute to any specific programmes we sign back into, such as Europol. In return for this, we'd expect a comprehensive trade deal.
That is the basis of a possible deal, although obviously there's room to haggle over the percentages and duration. The EU need to decide what they want, that or €0bn and massive trade disruption. I don't know which they'll go for, but, realistically, that's what they can have.
Perhaps the most sensible post I've ever seen on here regarding Brexit.
I don't see much downside for her. After all, the other side are being unreasonable. If they back off, that's a win for her and for the country. If they don't, well, it helps ensure that the blame for failure is directed where it belongs, which is the headbangers in Brussels who want failure.
May is pitching to the head-bangers here who want failure. They are loving it. Her problems begin once this election is won. Fighting them on the beaches and never surrendering is all well and good in abstract. It gets a bit more serious when it happens. How long will people tolerate reductions in living standards for the sake of a few billion quid just so that wealthy Brexiteers can indulge their Churchill fantasies?
The spirit of the plucky ne'er do well Remainers in Richmond Park and Kensington will be too much for those wealthy Leave voters from Thurrock and Hartlepool in the end..
Eton Rifles, Eton Rifles!
Though some of the lads said they'll be back next week
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
That is a reasonable point - you see it suggested often that the slightest remark here and there will doom things in all sorts of ways, but if we are dealing with reasonable people and organisations, then they will respond reasonably and not base their processes and decisions on someone going into an election posturing for a domestic audience. I don't doubt they will dislike it, but can it really be the case that the EU machinery and 27 Heads of Government are going to base what they do off TMay using inflammatory language?
I don't like what she said, or the intent behind it, so I hope she is not particularly boosted by it, but that it would sink our chances of a deal (assuming for the moment either of us are still interested in that)? A deal may or may not come (I'm betting not) but stupid comments from the PM won't be the cause.
It's not a zero-sum game, but it seems like there's an awfully big cost that the EU want us to pay - presumably in part because they're losing something beneficial, and in part we'll be gaining something beneficial by leaving. When they start demanding bigger and bigger sums it seems to me that they're slightly suggesting that the EU is a bigger and bigger handicap to its members.
The bigger the amount the EU can squeeze out of the UK the further the EU can kick budget problems down the road. Nobody should simply assume EU demands are fair, they have other motives for getting as much out of us as they can.
Of course. They can probably get their pound of flesh too - they can't have the whole arm though.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
The downside is that it makes it politically harder for EU leaders to offer up the concessions they will need to make in order for there to be a Brexit deal that works for the UK.
I don't see much downside for her. After all, the other side are being unreasonable. If they back off, that's a win for her and for the country. If they don't, well, it helps ensure that the blame for failure is directed where it belongs, which is the headbangers in Brussels who want failure.
May is pitching to the head-bangers here who want failure. They are loving it. Her problems begin once this election is won. Fighting them on the beaches and never surrendering is all well and good in abstract. It gets a bit more serious when it happens. How long will people tolerate reductions in living standards for the sake of a few billion quid just so that wealthy Brexiteers can indulge their Churchill fantasies?
The spirit of the plucky ne'er do well Remainers in Richmond Park and Kensington will be too much for those wealthy Leave voters from Thurrock and Hartlepool in the end..
Eton Rifles, Eton Rifles!
Of course, Eton Rifles is all about the posh boys always winning. The good people of Richmond Park and Kensington will be fine. It's Leave voters in Thurrock and Hartlepool that have most to lose in the case of a rock hard Brexit - the one they were told would never, ever happen. Wealthy Brexiteers seem to expect that a bit of Cod Churchill and a few digs at Johnny Foreigner will see them through. I am not so sure. Hopefully, we won't get to find out.
The people who voted for Leave in poor areas don't have anything to lose, they feel their lives cant get any worse. They are dirt poor and their neighbourhoods don't feel like home anymore. They had the chance to say "up yours", they took it, and will probably be voting for Theresa May next month.
The only people revved up about it are metropolitan Smythers-Jones' in West London.
People who feel they have nothing to lose may not react that well when it turns out that they do. As I said, this will do May no harm at all in the election. But then it will be time for her to deliver the fairer, more united, more prosperous country that she has promised.
Let's hope so eh?
We can only judge what people think by the way they voted, and the poorer areas voted UKIP and to Leave the EU. The people who seem to be riled by the vote are those in very posh areas, the people who voted Remain by and large.
What if the UK have indeed signed commitments of whatever billions ? Are you saying UK should renege ?
Of course we shouldn't renege. We have legal obligations to pay our dues until we leave. There might be some small further obligations, but clearly it is impossible to imagine that these could be anything more than a year or maybe at a push two years' worth of our annual bill. And there is a strong case, as the Lords report concluded, for thinking that it might well be zero. If there's no trade deal, zero should be our position; it would be bonkers to pay up megabucks for nothing. If relations have broken down to the extent that we are regarded as no more partners of the EU than Vietnam or Columbia are, why would we want to pay anything more than Vietnam or Columbia pay?
That's the worst case for both side. A 'sensible' amount, which the EU should be seeking, would be an agreement by us to pay a proportion of our existing net costs for a transitional period. Amount and timing to be negotiated, but off the top of my head something like 50% in the first year after Brexit, dropping over three years to zero, might be reasonable. In addition we would of course contribute to any specific programmes we sign back into, such as Europol. In return for this, we'd expect a comprehensive trade deal.
That is the basis of a possible deal, although obviously there's room to haggle over the percentages and duration. The EU need to decide what they want, that or €0bn and massive trade disruption. I don't know which they'll go for, but, realistically, that's what they can have.
Perhaps the most sensible post I've ever seen on here regarding Brexit.
Out of curiosity, I took a look at several German papers to see how they how they reported Theresa May's speech. Completely factually so far. My eye was caught by the BTL comments. Not a single one was impressed by May. The consensus is that she is looking for foreign scapegoats to blame for the inevitable bad consequences of her Brexit project.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
It's not remotely statesmanlike.
Yes and no. It's not what I want statesmen to do, but I've certainly seen plenty of foreign ones do it. In terms of ideal behaviour definitely not. Though I applaud any PM that is able to remain statesmanlike even during the grubbiness of an election campaign.
I don't see much downside for her. After all, the other side are being unreasonable. If they back off, that's a win for her and for the country. If they don't, well, it helps ensure that the blame for failure is directed where it belongs, which is the headbangers in Brussels who want failure.
May is pitching to the head-bangers here who want failure. They are loving it. Her problems begin once this election is won. Fighting them on the beaches and never surrendering is all well and good in abstract. It gets a bit more serious when it happens. How long will people tolerate reductions in living standards for the sake of a few billion quid just so that wealthy Brexiteers can indulge their Churchill fantasies?
The spirit of the plucky ne'er do well Remainers in Richmond Park and Kensington will be too much for those wealthy Leave voters from Thurrock and Hartlepool in the end..
Eton Rifles, Eton Rifles!
Of course, Eton Rifles is all about the posh boys always winning. The good people of Richmond Park and Kensington will be fine. It's Leave voters in Thurrock and Hartlepool that have most to lose in the case of a rock hard Brexit - the one they were told would never, ever happen. Wealthy Brexiteers seem to expect that a bit of Cod Churchill and a few digs at Johnny Foreigner will see them through. I am not so sure. Hopefully, we won't get to find out.
The people who voted for Leave in poor areas don't have anything to lose, they feel their lives cant get any worse. They are dirt poor and their neighbourhoods don't feel like home anymore. They had the chance to say "up yours", they took it, and will probably be voting for Theresa May next month.
The only people revved up about it are metropolitan Smythers-Jones' in West London.
People who feel they have nothing to lose may not react that well when it turns out that they do. As I said, this will do May no harm at all in the election. But then it will be time for her to deliver the fairer, more united, more prosperous country that she has promised.
Let's hope so eh?
We can only judge what people think by the way they voted, and the poorer areas voted UKIP and to Leave the EU. The people who seem to be riled by the vote are those in very posh areas, the people who voted Remain by and large.
This is not about the Brexit vote. That's been and gone. It's about what happens next. We will indeed have to see how voters react to the realities of a rock hard Brexit, having been told repeatedly that it will all turn out OK.
It's not a zero-sum game, but it seems like there's an awfully big cost that the EU want us to pay - presumably in part because they're losing something beneficial, and in part we'll be gaining something beneficial by leaving. When they start demanding bigger and bigger sums it seems to me that they're slightly suggesting that the EU is a bigger and bigger handicap to its members.
Nobody should simply assume EU demands are fair, they have other motives for getting as much out of us as they can.
Well said. They are not, automatically, unfair either, but not everything that comes from Brussells is fair, and governments and organisations are wrong all the time. Remember our government thought it had the power to trigger A50, and they were wrong.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
A little bit of Jingoism never did anyone any harm, or did it?
I expect PB Leavers to be just as sympathetic to bellicose posturing during the French assembly elections, the German elections and the Spring '18 Italian elections.
I don't see much downside for her. After all, the other side are being unreasonable. If they back off, that's a win for her and for the country. If they don't, well, it helps ensure that the blame for failure is directed where it belongs, which is the headbangers in Brussels who want failure.
begin once this election is won. Fighting them on the beaches and never surrendering is all well and good in abstract. It gets a bit more serious when it happens. How long will people tolerate reductions in living standards for the sake of a few billion quid just so that wealthy Brexiteers can indulge their Churchill fantasies?
The spirit of the plucky ne'er do well Remainers in Richmond Park and Kensington will be too much for those wealthy Leave voters from Thurrock and Hartlepool in the end..
Eton Rifles, Eton Rifles!
Of course, Eton Rifles is all about the posh boys always winning. The good people of Richmond Park and Kensington will be fine. It's Leave voters in Thurrock and Hartlepool that have most to lose in the case of a rock hard Brexit - the one they were told would never, ever happen. Wealthy Brexiteers seem to expect that a bit of Cod Churchill and a few digs at Johnny Foreigner will see them through. I am not so sure. Hopefully, we won't get to find out.
The only people revved up about it are metropolitan Smythers-Jones' in West London.
People who feel they have nothing to lose may not react that well when it turns out that they do. As I said, this will do May no harm at all in the election. But then it will be time for her to deliver the fairer, more united, more prosperous country that she has promised.
Let's hope so eh?
We can only judge what people think by the way they voted, and the poorer areas voted UKIP and to Leave the EU. The people who seem to be riled by the vote are those in very posh areas, the people who voted Remain by and large.
This is not about the Brexit vote. That's been and gone. It's about what happens next. We will indeed have to see how voters react to the realities of a rock hard Brexit, having been told repeatedly that it will all turn out OK.
I reckon the people that voted to leave will make the best of the consequences. There have been studies that show that the way people vote informs their reaction to it's consequences, I will try to find the link.
In the meantime, there is plenty of evidence on here every day!
I don't see much downside for her. After all, the other side are being unreasonable. If they back off, that's a win for her and for the country. If they don't, well, it helps ensure that the blame for failure is directed where it belongs, which is the headbangers in Brussels who want failure.
May is pitching to the head-bangers here who want failure. They are loving it. Her problems begin once this election is won. Fighting them on the beaches and never surrendering is all well and good in abstract. It gets a bit more serious when it happens. How long will people tolerate reductions in living standards for the sake of a few billion quid just so that wealthy Brexiteers can indulge their Churchill fantasies?
The spirit of the plucky ne'er do well Remainers in Richmond Park and Kensington will be too much for those wealthy Leave voters from Thurrock and Hartlepool in the end..
Eton Rifles, Eton Rifles!
Ot.
The people who voted for Leave in poor areas don't have anything to lose, they feel their lives cant get any worse. They are dirt poor and their neighbourhoods don't feel like home anymore. They had the chance to say "up yours", they took it, and will probably be voting for Theresa May next month.
The only people revved up about it are metropolitan Smythers-Jones' in West London.
People who feel they have nothing to lose may not react that well when it turns out that they do. As I said, this will do May no harm at all in the election. But then it will be time for her to deliver the fairer, more united, more prosperous country that she has promised.
Let's hope so eh?
We can only judge what people think by the way they voted, and the poorer areas voted UKIP and to Leave the EU. The people who seem to be riled by the vote are those in very posh areas, the people who voted Remain by and large.
We will indeed have to see how voters react to the realities of a rock hard Brexit, having been told repeatedly that it will all turn out OK.
I would imagine that the reality of a harsher deal than expected (even from those like myself who expected it to involve some pain) coupled with the fact that the Tories will have been in power a long time by then, will mean Labour will find recovery a bit easier than some of its more pessimistic supporters think, even if it will still be a challenge, depending on how things go on 8 June.
The downside is that it makes it politically harder for EU leaders to offer up the concessions they will need to make in order for there to be a Brexit deal that works for the UK.
No it doesn't. No-one will remember, and if they do, our EU friends can just pass it off as TM electioneering.
The thing which is making it difficult for the EU27 to offer up the concessions they will need to make is their ratcheting up of unreasonable demands.
Just catching up on the news after yet another crazy busy afternoon at work. The increasingly weird Theresa May has done what I never thought possible – she has made Corbyn look like a sensible moderate. He isn't of course. He is also a whack job. What in the world has this country done to deserve these two clowns as heads of the main parties?
I have to tell you that apart from Abbott's plane crash, Labour has not made too many gaffes. Corbyn has not. In fact, his calm persona maybe to some people's liking.
Labour will lose badly, of course. But the numbers, we were being told on the first Saturday night, I don't think will come about.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
It's not remotely statesmanlike.
It reminds people of Thatcher and not in a good way. The downside from her point of view is that it'll galvanise a progressive alliance against her. I don't think wrapping yourself in the flag is in keeping with to days zeitgeist. Certainly not with Remainers or young people.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
I expect PB Leavers to be just as sympathetic to bellicose posturing during the French assembly elections, the German elections and the Spring '18 Italian elections.
We should all be understanding of such, can they not do the same? Do you seriously believe bellicose posturing will have a genuine impact on the way the negotiations have been going and will go? If they were going badly they still will, if it was really just a lot of tough talk from everyone, that will still be the case.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
It's not remotely statesmanlike.
It reminds people of Thatcher and not in a good way. The downside from her point of view is that it'll galvanise a progressive alliance against her. I don't think wrapping yourself in the flag is in keeping with to days zeitgeist. Certainly not with Remainers or young people.
Young people aren't voting Tory anyway. Most don't even know there's a GE in 5 weeks.
I think the chances of a comprehensive trade deal have disappeared. I cannot read May very well. But hard brexiters can now look forward to their beloved Empire II.
If they've disappeared, it's entirely because the EU don't want to do a deal.
But we were told by Leavers [ you were NOT one of them; remember you were a Cameroon ] that the EU desperately needed our markets.
Both statements cannot be correct.
They can if one understands that the EU and the countries that make up the EU are not the same. This is the same error as trying to paint the EU as Europe.
The EU is a political construct, an artificial creation that has gained sentience and is trying to protect itself against what it perceives as an existential threat. It has no interest in the fates of individual countries or the hardships they may suffer as a loss of trade with the UK. All it is interested in is that it survives and that anyone leaving is punished and removed as a threat either 'de facto' or 'in exemplum'.
However, there is the other Europe, the individual countries and they (at least the big players) are not going to let the EU damage their economies through its bloody mindedness and insistence on punishment without a fight.
I am not sure who will win that particular fight but the idea that there is or will be a single 'will' in Europe that will work to our detriment is plainly false.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
It's not remotely statesmanlike.
You want her to be a doormat in the entrance to 10 Downing Street?
Your nervousness is showing through - that our Prime Minister might have nicely judged the national mood to political advantage....
No-one will remember, and if they do, our EU friends can just pass it off as TM electioneering.
She accused them of espionage
I don't think she did, but if she did, so what? The USA actually carried out espionage on Merkel's private communication lines. It was a bit of a kerfuffle when it came out, but German-US relations weren't seriously damaged.
Just catching up on the news after yet another crazy busy afternoon at work. The increasingly weird Theresa May has done what I never thought possible – she has made Corbyn look like a sensible moderate. He isn't of course. He is also a whack job. What in the world has this country done to deserve these two clowns as heads of the main parties?
I have to tell you that apart from Abbott's plane crash, Labour has not made too many gaffes. Corbyn has not. In fact, his calm persona maybe to some people's liking.
Labour will lose badly, of course. But the numbers, we were being told on the first Saturday night, I don't think will come about.
Nope. I think it surprised many Tories, which is an indication it is likely too good to be true. And it is the case Labour have not done terribly so far. I've long since lost patience with Corbyn's genial old man persona (I'm sure he is genial, but he gets bitchy at times too), but others will like it, even though they still don't trust him.
@OwenJones84: Labour's offer has to be this. We'll always put our country first, not our party. Unlike Theresa May.
He is right, but, luckily for Tezza, Jezza does not put this country first.
Labour have just offered to unilaterally disarm and give EU citizens full rights while the EU are playing silly buggers with our people based in the EU.
I think the chances of a comprehensive trade deal have disappeared. I cannot read May very well. But hard brexiters can now look forward to their beloved Empire II.
If they've disappeared, it's entirely because the EU don't want to do a deal.
But we were told by Leavers [ you were NOT one of them; remember you were a Cameroon ] that the EU desperately needed our markets.
Both statements cannot be correct.
They can if one understands that the EU and the countries that make up the EU are not the same. This is the same error as trying to paint the EU as Europe.
The EU is a political construct, an artificial creation that has gained sentience and is trying to protect itself against what it perceives as an existential threat. It has no interest in the fates of individual countries or the hardships they may suffer as a loss of trade with the UK. All it is interested in is that it survives and that anyone leaving is punished and removed as a threat either 'de facto' or 'in exemplum'.
However, there is the other Europe, the individual countries and they (at least the big players) are not going to let the EU damage their economies through its bloody mindedness and insistence on punishment without a fight.
I am not sure who will win that particular fight but the idea that there is or will be a single 'will' in Europe that will work to our detriment is plainly false.
I think the chances of a comprehensive trade deal have disappeared. I cannot read May very well. But hard brexiters can now look forward to their beloved Empire II.
If they've disappeared, it's entirely because the EU don't want to do a deal.
But we were told by Leavers [ you were NOT one of them; remember you were a Cameroon ] that the EU desperately needed our markets.
Both statements cannot be correct.
They can if one understands that the EU and the countries that make up the EU are not the same. This is the same error as trying to paint the EU as Europe.
The EU is a political construct, an artificial creation that has gained sentience and is trying to protect itself against what it perceives as an existential threat. It has no interest in the fates of individual countries or the hardships they may suffer as a loss of trade with the UK. All it is interested in is that it survives and that anyone leaving is punished and removed as a threat either 'de facto' or 'in exemplum'.
However, there is the other Europe, the individual countries and they (at least the big players) are not going to let the EU damage their economies through its bloody mindedness and insistence on punishment without a fight.
I am not sure who will win that particular fight but the idea that there is or will be a single 'will' in Europe that will work to our detriment is plainly false.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
The downside is that it makes it politically harder for EU leaders to offer up the concessions they will need to make in order for there to be a Brexit deal that works for the UK.
That downside became fact with the leak from Juncker yesterday....
@OwenJones84: Labour's offer has to be this. We'll always put our country first, not our party. Unlike Theresa May.
He is right, but, luckily for Tezza, Jezza does not put this country first.
It's a problem. It's a fine message to make, a generic partisan attack which you see all sides make from time to time, but particularly from the big two it's hard to make credible, since they always prioritise attacking their opponents.
Just catching up on the news after yet another crazy busy afternoon at work. The increasingly weird Theresa May has done what I never thought possible – she has made Corbyn look like a sensible moderate. He isn't of course. He is also a whack job. What in the world has this country done to deserve these two clowns as heads of the main parties?
I have to tell you that apart from Abbott's plane crash, Labour has not made too many gaffes. Corbyn has not. In fact, his calm persona maybe to some people's liking.
Labour will lose badly, of course. But the numbers, we were being told on the first Saturday night, I don't think will come about.
What I am looking forward to is the Labour big red bus touring Leaverstan with "Lets spend £350 million extra per week on the NHS instead" . Its only a matter of time!
This election is about Brexit. In Brexit we face one of the more complicated and difficult challenges that we have faced since the war, the outcome of which will have a material effect on peoples' standard of living for a long time to come. The question people have to ask themselves is who is best placed to negotiate us the best result?
And there is only one answer. By electing a thick, incompetent buffoon as leader and then even more incredibly re-electing him Labour have failed to give this country a choice. It is disgraceful self-indulgence, really shameful. Even if you have reservations about May, even if you have serious concerns about the competence of those about her, there is no choice. None.
Of course if the EU are stupid enough to act unreasonably or make ridiculous statements May is going to use the opportunity to ram that message home. It is going to win the election for her so why wouldn't she?
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
It's not remotely statesmanlike.
You want her to be a doormat in the entrance to 10 Downing Street?
Your nervousness is showing through - that our Prime Minister might have nicely judged the national mood to political advantage....
Why are people so shocked that TMay can do politics. Have they forgotten she was the person who told the Tories they are the nasty party and then took on the vested interests I'm the police.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
It's not remotely statesmanlike.
It reminds people of Thatcher and not in a good way. The downside from her point of view is that it'll galvanise a progressive alliance against her. I don't think wrapping yourself in the flag is in keeping with to days zeitgeist. Certainly not with Remainers or young people.
The French will be looking enviously at our formidable female leader and considering their imminent decision.
May's speech has certainly left some of the Remain/Labour frothers in a tizzy, that's for sure. You can always tell when a politicans words have been effective by the attacking vitriol from their opponents. People saying May is 'unhinged' is a good example of this, and then flattering Corbyn for his 'statesman like' response.
Her speech was nothing more than naked electioneering - but guess what - we're in the middle of two election campaigns. Go figure. And anyone who thinks the EU bureaucrats are going to deliberately damage their economies because of May's speech are utterly deluded.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
It's not remotely statesmanlike.
It reminds people of Thatcher and not in a good way. The downside from her point of view is that it'll galvanise a progressive alliance against her. I don't think wrapping yourself in the flag is in keeping with to days zeitgeist. Certainly not with Remainers or young people.
The French will be looking enviously at our formidable female leader and considering their imminent decision.
And there is only one answer. By electing a thick, incompetent buffoon as leader and then even more incredibly re-electing him Labour have failed to give this country a choice. It is disgraceful self-indulgence, really shameful. Even if you have reservations about May, even if you have serious concerns about the competence of those about her, there is no choice. None.
At least we have George Osborne to keep TMay on her toes moving forward.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
A little bit of Jingoism never did anyone any harm, or did it?
I expect PB Leavers to be just as sympathetic to bellicose posturing during the French assembly elections, the German elections and the Spring '18 Italian elections.
Brexit by timetable...
Such as Macron threatening to tear up the Calais agreement, or Merkel claiming the UK has 'illusions', you mean?
@hugorifkind: May's speech is a new low. Tories got so used to casting the EU as our enemy when it didn't matter that they now can't stop when it does.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
It's not remotely statesmanlike.
You want her to be a doormat in the entrance to 10 Downing Street?
Your nervousness is showing through - that our Prime Minister might have nicely judged the national mood to political advantage....
Why are people so shocked that TMay can do politics. Have they forgotten she was the person who told the Tories they are the nasty party and then took on the vested interests I'm the police.
She did bellicosity against both her own party, and against the Police, but what real change in either did she achieve? not much that I can see in either.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
It's not remotely statesmanlike.
You want her to be a doormat in the entrance to 10 Downing Street?
Your nervousness is showing through - that our Prime Minister might have nicely judged the national mood to political advantage....
Why are people so shocked that TMay can do politics. Have they forgotten she was the person who told the Tories they are the nasty party and then took on the vested interests I'm the police.
She also doesn't react well to being bullied by men. Ask Obama, or Osborne.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
It's not remotely statesmanlike.
It reminds people of Thatcher and not in a good way. The downside from her point of view is that it'll galvanise a progressive alliance against her. I don't think wrapping yourself in the flag is in keeping with to days zeitgeist. Certainly not with Remainers or young people.
The French will be looking enviously at our formidable female leader and considering their imminent decision.
It's not a zero-sum game, but it seems like there's an awfully big cost that the EU want us to pay - presumably in part because they're losing something beneficial, and in part we'll be gaining something beneficial by leaving. When they start demanding bigger and bigger sums it seems to me that they're slightly suggesting that the EU is a bigger and bigger handicap to its members.
The bigger the amount the EU can squeeze out of the UK the further the EU can kick budget problems down the road. Nobody should simply assume EU demands are fair, they have other motives for getting as much out of us as they can.
Of course it's unfair, but EU are not being irrational. Brexit harms both parties and the EU wants to ensure as much damage as possible falls on the UK side and not theirs.
For a classical take on fairness and the exercise of power, read the Melian dialogues by Thucydides, where Athens explained why it would crush Melos, even though Melos thought it was unfair.
It's quite apparent from posts on here that there are plenty of Leavers entirely willing to believe that the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung is the obvious newspaper of choice for Eurocrats to try to swing the British election. So Theresa May is probably going to be just fine suggesting that.
The more chilling (and more likely) thought is that the Eurocrats are indifferent to the impact on the UK's general election. If that's a second or third order consideration, it implies that the Eurocrats have more important considerations. None of those more possible important considerations support the idea that a good deal is going to be done.
@OwenJones84: Labour's offer has to be this. We'll always put our country first, not our party. Unlike Theresa May.
He is right, but, luckily for Tezza, Jezza does not put this country first.
It's a problem. It's a fine message to make, a generic partisan attack which you see all sides make from time to time, but particularly from the big two it's hard to make credible, since they always prioritise attacking their opponents.
Jezza's problem is that his country is Chavez's Venezuela....
@hugorifkind: May's speech is a new low. Tories got so used to casting the EU as our enemy when it didn't matter that they now can't stop when it does.
Why does it matter? They were already being hostile, and surely reasonable people don't base their judgements off a politician's electioneering statements.
Stuff like that makes the argument the EU and the EU27 are fools who respond to the last thing they heard and nothing else matters. And that's Donald Trump's thing.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
It's not remotely statesmanlike.
It reminds people of Thatcher and not in a good way. The downside from her point of view is that it'll galvanise a progressive alliance against her. I don't think wrapping yourself in the flag is in keeping with to days zeitgeist. Certainly not with Remainers or young people.
Problems:
1. The Remainer vote is split several ways, there is still little or no sign of the Conservative portion of it defecting, and the "Progressive Alliance" is a paper tiger. Some politically savvy middle class Guardianista types might swap back and forth, but the Liberal Democrats are weak in the vast majority of constituencies, the Green vote is marginal and Labour high command has explicitly rejected electoral pacts. Its effect is likely to be minimal; that of Ukip voters defecting to the Tories in large numbers, perhaps more significant. 2. Most young people don't vote, and the bulk of those who do weren't in the Tory column before this happened in any case.
The more chilling (and more likely) thought is that the Eurocrats are indifferent to the impact on the UK's general election. If that's a second or third order consideration, it implies that the Eurocrats have more important considerations. None of those more possible important considerations support the idea that a good deal is going to be done.
And if that is the case TMay's bellicose remarks are irrelevant, neither a grand victory nor a grand disaster, as the stage will already have been set.
Try as I might, I'm struggling to see what the downside* of Theresa May's rather vigorous rhetoric is supposed to be. Are people seriously suggesting that the EU27 are such snowflakes that a rebuttal of their own 'Brexit must be a failure' and 'on another galaxy' lines will trigger a reaction which means they slink off and don't do a deal?
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
It's not remotely statesmanlike.
You want her to be a doormat in the entrance to 10 Downing Street?
Your nervousness is showing through - that our Prime Minister might have nicely judged the national mood to political advantage....
Why are people so shocked that TMay can do politics. Have they forgotten she was the person who told the Tories they are the nasty party and then took on the vested interests I'm the police.
She also doesn't react well to being bullied by men. Ask Obama, or Osborne.
I know - my brother is doing some work for her which she still takes a special interest in even though she is no longer Home Sec.
And there is only one answer. By electing a thick, incompetent buffoon as leader and then even more incredibly re-electing him Labour have failed to give this country a choice. It is disgraceful self-indulgence, really shameful. Even if you have reservations about May, even if you have serious concerns about the competence of those about her, there is no choice. None.
At least we have George Osborne to keep TMay on her toes moving forward.
Yeah! in a free newspaper that's only read by London commuters and only taken seriously by deluded remaindermen.
Comments
It's not a zero-sum game, but it seems like there's an awfully big cost that the EU want us to pay - presumably in part because they're losing something beneficial, and in part we'll be gaining something beneficial by leaving. When they start demanding bigger and bigger sums it seems to me that they're slightly suggesting that the EU is a bigger and bigger handicap to its members.
The only people revved up about it are metropolitan Smythers-Jones' in West London.
* Of course, I can see the downside for the opposition parties.
http://bruegel.org/2017/03/the-uks-brexit-bill-what-are-the-possible-liabilities/
Essentially the EU's planned commitments and significant legal commitments are budgeted back to zero at the end of 2020.
Loans, pensions, contingent liabilities may never materialise or are miniscule annual sums.
That leaves Reste e Liquider at €247bn in 2020. 13% of that is €32bn (c.£27bn).
It all points to a transition/implementation ended on 31 December 2020.
I'm still not convinced she was wise to do it. But the idea there hasn't been mendacious bullshit from Brussels is ludicrous, yet some are unwilling to condemn that (indeed, gloating about how the UK was being put in its place).
Mr. Nabavi, if the Commission and other parts of the EU were splintering, overt criticism may force them back together again.
I don't like what she said, or the intent behind it, so I hope she is not particularly boosted by it, but that it would sink our chances of a deal (assuming for the moment either of us are still interested in that)? A deal may or may not come (I'm betting not) but stupid comments from the PM won't be the cause.
We can only judge what people think by the way they voted, and the poorer areas voted UKIP and to Leave the EU. The people who seem to be riled by the vote are those in very posh areas, the people who voted Remain by and large.
https://twitter.com/montie/status/859818279849922560
Jesus, what an idiot we have as PM!
Major wouldn't have done it.
Blair wouldn't have done it.
Brown wouldn't have done it.
Cameron wouldn't have done it.
Corbyn would have thought about it and even he would not have done it.
May either thinks she is in a movie or is seriously out of her depth. Possibly both.
I expect PB Leavers to be just as sympathetic to bellicose posturing during the French assembly elections, the German elections and the Spring '18 Italian elections.
Brexit by timetable...
In the meantime, there is plenty of evidence on here every day!
The thing which is making it difficult for the EU27 to offer up the concessions they will need to make is their ratcheting up of unreasonable demands.
Labour will lose badly, of course. But the numbers, we were being told on the first Saturday night, I don't think will come about.
He is right, but, luckily for Tezza, Jezza does not put this country first.
Oh wait...
The EU is a political construct, an artificial creation that has gained sentience and is trying to protect itself against what it perceives as an existential threat. It has no interest in the fates of individual countries or the hardships they may suffer as a loss of trade with the UK. All it is interested in is that it survives and that anyone leaving is punished and removed as a threat either 'de facto' or 'in exemplum'.
However, there is the other Europe, the individual countries and they (at least the big players) are not going to let the EU damage their economies through its bloody mindedness and insistence on punishment without a fight.
I am not sure who will win that particular fight but the idea that there is or will be a single 'will' in Europe that will work to our detriment is plainly false.
Your nervousness is showing through - that our Prime Minister might have nicely judged the national mood to political advantage....
A flaw in his cunning plan?
Honestly, as not a fan of TMay, when she does slip up people get a bit too excited and overdo it.
You can't half tell its election season.
Oh, wait...
.
Its only a matter of time!
And there is only one answer. By electing a thick, incompetent buffoon as leader and then even more incredibly re-electing him Labour have failed to give this country a choice. It is disgraceful self-indulgence, really shameful. Even if you have reservations about May, even if you have serious concerns about the competence of those about her, there is no choice. None.
Of course if the EU are stupid enough to act unreasonably or make ridiculous statements May is going to use the opportunity to ram that message home. It is going to win the election for her so why wouldn't she?
Her speech was nothing more than naked electioneering - but guess what - we're in the middle of two election campaigns. Go figure. And anyone who thinks the EU bureaucrats are going to deliberately damage their economies because of May's speech are utterly deluded.
You know what, good for Theresa May. Juncker and the EU leaders have crossed the road to pick a fight with her. Totally right to hit back.
Juncker slams May Remainers gloat "that's shown her!". May hits back Remainers scream "how dare she!?!". And people wonder why Remain lost.
For a classical take on fairness and the exercise of power, read the Melian dialogues by Thucydides, where Athens explained why it would crush Melos, even though Melos thought it was unfair.
The more chilling (and more likely) thought is that the Eurocrats are indifferent to the impact on the UK's general election. If that's a second or third order consideration, it implies that the Eurocrats have more important considerations. None of those more possible important considerations support the idea that a good deal is going to be done.
Stuff like that makes the argument the EU and the EU27 are fools who respond to the last thing they heard and nothing else matters. And that's Donald Trump's thing.
1. The Remainer vote is split several ways, there is still little or no sign of the Conservative portion of it defecting, and the "Progressive Alliance" is a paper tiger. Some politically savvy middle class Guardianista types might swap back and forth, but the Liberal Democrats are weak in the vast majority of constituencies, the Green vote is marginal and Labour high command has explicitly rejected electoral pacts. Its effect is likely to be minimal; that of Ukip voters defecting to the Tories in large numbers, perhaps more significant.
2. Most young people don't vote, and the bulk of those who do weren't in the Tory column before this happened in any case.