I doubt the EU would even let us remain without us having a massive pro-remain referendum win: why should they, when they know they'll just have this problem again in a few years when the Brexiteers start slobbering again?
There's no sign from any of the EU bigwigs or national leaders who have spoken about this, which is lots of them, that the rest of the EU is going to put up special hurdles like a *massive* referendum result before letting the British stay. They want Britain to stay in the EU because it's in the interests of their citizens and businesses who can work, study and trade in a wider area without lots of stupid bureaucracy. There's also a net budgetary contribution and an international influence contribution.
They also know that voters vote for stupid shit from time to time. They're not going to get gamed for negotiating advantage if Brexit is still on, but if it's off, they're not going to let the possibility that Brexit might get resurrected in 5 or 10 or 20 years deter them from ending it now.
Quite. The best outcome for the UK is to stay in the EU, nobody wants a No Deal exit, everybody (including prominent Leavers) say that Chequers is worse than staying. But it's difficult politically because of the leadership of the Tory and Labour parties. A 'People's Vote' is a way out so come on parliament - take control.
Only if the 'people's vote' is conclusive. As we saw with the 2016 referendum, it's easy to get a result that is not conclusive, which is why we're in this mess.
Most likely result would be 52-48 for remain.
Well that's you guess. Yougov suggests that most people want a new referendum and I would suggest that 54 - 46 as the outcome of that referendum is more likely. People now know that Leavers cheated and lied.
- Britain backs this deal over no deal by 60% to 40% - Britain prefers a 2nd in/out ref to this deal by 56% to 44% - Britain prefers a 2nd in/out ref to no deal by 54% to 46%
The symmetry appeals to me. And it has been confirmed over the last couple of days that truth and reason are less of a consideration for many MPs (and by extension voters) than they once were.
Can’t help feeling the tide turned a bit for May today. Yesterday was very rough but her enemies overshot and she proved dogged. Today her Cabinet rallied around somewhat and the 48 didn’t materialise. .The options other than her deal looked less likely and less palatable. A long way to go yet but she just might be past the worst.
The dross is sticking to her, but she is still toast, bringing back the liar Elmer Fud , promoting unknown pygmies etc. She will never get that crap deal through, it makes Cameron's vapourware look good. If only Scotland had had the bollox 4 years ago to get out of the corrupt useless union.
I wish they had the numbers to do it now. If there was a serious threat of voting for independence this Brexit crap would be thrown into touch and this crap government would have something worthwhile to occupy their striped trouser brigade
OT. I've just heard someone on radio saying that it's 'an absolute disgrace no one on the high st is catering for size 18's. It is a fact that obeisity is on the rise but none of the well known brands are catering for us'
You couldn't make it up.
fast food restaurants are as well as the pop fizz industry
I doubt the EU would even let us remain without us having a massive pro-remain referendum win: why should they, when they know they'll just have this problem again in a few years when the Brexiteers start slobbering again?
There's no sign from any of the EU bigwigs or national leaders who have spoken about this, which is lots of them, that the rest of the EU is going to put up special hurdles like a *massive* referendum result before letting the British stay. They want Britain to stay in the EU because it's in the interests of their citizens and businesses who can work, study and trade in a wider area without lots of stupid bureaucracy. There's also a net budgetary contribution and an international influence contribution.
They also know that voters vote for stupid shit from time to time. They're not going to get gamed for negotiating advantage if Brexit is still on, but if it's off, they're not going to let the possibility that Brexit might get resurrected in 5 or 10 or 20 years deter them from ending it now.
Quite. The best outcome for the UK is to stay in the EU, nobody wants a No Deal exit, everybody (including prominent Leavers) say that Chequers is worse than staying. But it's difficult politically because of the leadership of the Tory and Labour parties. A 'People's Vote' is a way out so come on parliament - take control.
Only if the 'people's vote' is conclusive. As we saw with the 2016 referendum, it's easy to get a result that is not conclusive, which is why we're in this mess.
Most likely result would be 52-48 for remain.
Well that's you guess. Yougov suggests that most people want a new referendum and I would suggest that 54 - 46 as the outcome of that referendum is more likely. People now know that Leavers cheated and lied.
- Britain backs this deal over no deal by 60% to 40% - Britain prefers a 2nd in/out ref to this deal by 56% to 44% - Britain prefers a 2nd in/out ref to no deal by 54% to 46%
Given that Merkel and Macron back an EU army, which was dismissed as a leaver fantasy two years ago, isn't it also true that Remain told a few porkies? The biggest lie of all was that remain represented the status quo. It did t. It was a vote for ever closer union. And that's why it will lose a second time around.
Even if it doesn't, what possible reason would leavers have to accept the result of a second referendum if remainers refused to accept the first? The war would continue. Forever. 54/46 is not a conclusive result.
Can’t help feeling the tide turned a bit for May today. Yesterday was very rough but her enemies overshot and she proved dogged. Today her Cabinet rallied around somewhat and the 48 didn’t materialise. .The options other than her deal looked less likely and less palatable. A long way to go yet but she just might be past the worst.
The dross is sticking to her, but she is still toast, bringing back the liar Elmer Fud , promoting unknown pygmies etc. She will never get that crap deal through, it makes Cameron's vapourware look good. If only Scotland had had the bollox 4 years ago to get out of the corrupt useless union.
I wish they had the numbers to do it now. If there was a serious threat of voting for independance this Brexit crap would be thrown into touch and this crap government would have something worthwhile to occupy their striped trouser brigade
An interesting scenario and I think you are right. It was clear that after the vote the SNP expected an anti-UK backlash in remainer Scotland (hence some tough talk from Sturgeon, to begin with) but this hasn't materialised. Quite possibly a chaotic exit could re-light the flame?
The "we demand a change of course" faction in the Cabinet is puzzling. They quite clearly won't get it from May, and if they did they wouldn't get it from the EU - the EU might consider having a discussion with a much friendlier new Government, but not with another version of the Tories.
So what's their game?
1. They have decided for various reasons to stay loyal to the end but need a narrative to explain to Leave supporters why they're doing it. But "we are staying in order to seek the impossible" is not really going to impress anyone, surely?
2. They plan to do their best to change course and otherwise will resign as a bloc. That would probably sink May, but it's not obvious that it would do anything for them. They still won't get toi reopen talks.
So what are they up to?
A couple of possibilities:
1. There is no room to achieve any substantive changes to the Withdrawal Agreement, but maybe there is still a smidgen of room for a cosmetic change to the Irish backstop, sufficient to sell as progress. Therefore, it could be that Gove & al are trying to save the deal, using their strong Leave credentials to do so.
2. They are focused not on the Withdrawal Agreement, but on shaping the direction of the future relationship. Since the draft political agreement on this is very broad-brush, it makes very good sense to want to influence it before it becomes more specific. Smarter Leavers such as Gove no doubt realise that this is far more important than the details of what happens over the next two years or so.
I doubt the EU would even let us remain without us having a massive pro-remain referendum win: why should they, when they know they'll just have this problem again in a few years when the Brexiteers start slobbering again?
There's no sign from any of the EU bigwigs or national leaders who have spoken about this, which is lots of them, that the rest of the EU is going to put up special hurdles like a *massive* referendum result before letting the British stay. They want Britain to stay in the EU because it's in the interests of their citizens and businesses who can work, study and trade in a wider area without lots of stupid bureaucracy. There's also a net budgetary contribution and an international influence contribution.
They also know that voters vote for stupid shit from time to time. They're not going to get gamed for negotiating advantage if Brexit is still on, but if it's off, they're not going to let the possibility that Brexit might get resurrected in 5 or 10 or 20 years deter them from ending it now.
Quite. The best outcome for the UK is to stay in the EU, nobody wants a No Deal exit, everybody (including prominent Leavers) say that Chequers is worse than staying. But it's difficult politically because of the leadership of the Tory and Labour parties. A 'People's Vote' is a way out so come on parliament - take control.
Only if the 'people's vote' is conclusive. As we saw with the 2016 referendum, it's easy to get a result that is not conclusive, which is why we're in this mess.
Most likely result would be 52-48 for remain.
There were two main issues with the 2016 referendum result:
*) It was a narrow win. *) It was not clear what winning meant, and the winners made contradictory and incompatible promises to the electorate.
The problem with a new referendum is that, to cover all bases, a simple two-way choice will not be acceptable to many: there are many options such as no deal, deal, or remain. Leaving one of these out will automatically make the referendum seem undemocratic to many.
And yet a three- or four- way referendum is unlikely to get a clear majority over the other options, leading people to say it was not a clear win.
It's an absolute fucking mess, and it's totally the fault of hate-filled Europhobic winnets.
As I've said passim, the Europhiles would be better off trying to sell the EU to the public than aiming for another referendum. They didn't do it in 2016 (in fact, I was one of the few people on here who tried), and they're not trying to now.
I don’t see what the question on a ballot paper could be. Remain would be one option, but what’s the other (or others)?
Because the official “leaver, but anti May’s deal” position is “a better deal” (with no agreed definition of “better”). And that is not just the official position of Tory Leavers, but the official position of the Labour Party!. The only difference being that Tory leavers argue their better deal can be achieved by threatening to walk into no deal, Labour simply because they are not the Tories.
How do you put that on the ballot paper? You can’t.
I doubt the EU would even let us remain without us having a massive pro-remain referendum win: why should they, when they know they'll just have this problem again in a few years when the Brexiteers start slobbering again?
There's no sign from any of the EU bigwigs or national leaders who have spoken about this, which is lots of them, that the rest of the EU is going to put up special hurdles like a *massive* referendum result before letting the British stay. They want Britain to stay in the EU because it's in the interests of their citizens and businesses who can work, study and trade in a wider area without lots of stupid bureaucracy. There's also a net budgetary contribution and an international influence contribution.
They also know that voters vote for stupid shit from time to time. They're not going to get gamed for negotiating advantage if Brexit is still on, but if it's off, they're not going to let the possibility that Brexit might get resurrected in 5 or 10 or 20 years deter them from ending it now.
Quite. The best outcome for the UK is to stay in the EU, nobody wants a No Deal exit, everybody (including prominent Leavers) say that Chequers is worse than staying. But it's difficult politically because of the leadership of the Tory and Labour parties. A 'People's Vote' is a way out so come on parliament - take control.
The “best outcome for the UK” is to overturn the result of the largest vote in its history?
You don’t foresee any downsides?
They never do.... A broken domestic political arrangement is obviously a price worth paying for going back to their usual default position - grasping the ankles, taking whatever the EU wants to shove our way, no lube.
That weak weak weak position is what got us to this point. And they think more of the same will fix it? Utterly delusional.
I doubt the EU would even let us remain without us having a massive pro-remain referendum win: why should they, when they know they'll just have this problem again in a few years when the Brexiteers start slobbering again?
There's no sign from any of the EU bigwigs or national leaders who have spoken about this, which is lots of them, that the rest of the EU is going to put up special hurdles like a *massive* referendum result before letting the British stay. They want Britain to stay in the EU because it's in the interests of their citizens and businesses who can work, study and trade in a wider area without lots of stupid bureaucracy. There's also a net budgetary contribution and an international influence contribution.
They also know that voters vote for stupid shit from time to time. They're not going to get gamed for negotiating advantage if Brexit is still on, but if it's off, they're not going to let the possibility that Brexit might get resurrected in 5 or 10 or 20 years deter them from ending it now.
Quite. The best outcome for the UK is to stay in the EU, nobody wants a No Deal exit, everybody (including prominent Leavers) say that Chequers is worse than staying. .
I think you are wrong. Many, many powerful people crave a no deal exit, because it's chaos brings opportunities for them.
No one wants to admit wanting a No Deal exit. Very different proposition.
I think this is right.
I also think that the basic tradeoff in May's deal is pretty popular - immigration control in return for pretty much anything that doesn't wreck the economy. May's opponents have done a very good hatchet job on a deal that's been almost undefended.
The immigration controls are probably enough to buy off enough leavers so they lose a 2nd vote.
There'd be no turkish bogeyman to frighten people with, but there's also a potential for a massive "screw you" vote from the rural and coastal towns.
Peoples vote sounds great but would anyone really want to cross the rubicon into a 6 week deal / remain campaign lead by T May ? Could go great, but equally it could go very badly wrong. It'd have half the cabinet and probably the bulk of her party against her.
I doubt the EU would even let us remain without us having a massive pro-remain referendum win: why should they, when they know they'll just have this problem again in a few years when the Brexiteers start slobbering again?
There's no sign from any of the EU bigwigs or national leaders who have spoken about this, which is lots of them, that the rest of the EU is going to put up special hurdles like a *massive* referendum result before letting the British stay. They want Britain to stay in the EU because it's in the interests of their citizens and businesses who can work, study and trade in a wider area without lots of stupid bureaucracy. There's also a net budgetary contribution and an international influence contribution.
They also know that voters vote for stupid shit from time to time. They're not going to get gamed for negotiating advantage if Brexit is still on, but if it's off, they're not going to let the possibility that Brexit might get resurrected in 5 or 10 or 20 years deter them from ending it now.
Quite. The best outcome for the UK is to stay in the EU, nobody wants a No Deal exit, everybody (including prominent Leavers) say that Chequers is worse than staying. .
I think you are wrong. Many, many powerful people crave a no deal exit, because it's chaos brings opportunities for them.
No one wants to admit wanting a No Deal exit. Very different proposition.
I think this is right.
I also think that the basic tradeoff in May's deal is pretty popular - immigration control in return for pretty much anything that doesn't wreck the economy. May's opponents have done a very good hatchet job on a deal that's been almost undefended.
But if this govt collapses in abject disarray such that an election eventuates, be prepared for a large Labour overall majority. Forget about what the polls say now.
I think at the moment things are in such a state of flux we cannot even take that for granted. May botched things last time, but between their own splits, Corbyn's ongoing weakness and a mood of hubris among his outriders, they are in serious danger of overplaying their hand and failing yet again. Look at the proposals put forward on housing and land reform. They are sheer madness. Nobody with half a brain would take them seriously, yet Labour do.
All true, but how would the Tories even begin to campaign with an iota of credibility when perhaps dozens of their own MPs (some of whom would still be candidates) had caused the fall of their own government and precipitated the third election in almost as many years? Labour would generally present a united front: I would predict a majority of at least 60 seats. And welcome Venezuela.
Nah, but most seats is quite likely. A majority of 60 would require nearly a ton of gains.
Clearly we're just being hypothetical at present, but why on earth shouldn't an opposition secure a ton of gains if their opponents implode so spectacularly. 1906? 1931? 1983? 1997?
Lab would need 385 seats, so 115 gains from present, not sure where that 115th gain would be, perhaps N Somerset?
But that would be a majority of 120!
Ok, 355 seats, still a lot of gains though.
Indeed - though they may well pick up 20 in Scotland from SNP.
Anecdotal - more real life leavers seem reconciled to this deal that I thought would be and far, far fewer remainers are on board. I really thought it would be the opposite. I'd estimate that around 40% of remainers back the deal and about 80% of leavers back it, from the people I know. I really thought it would be the other way around.
I don't think the polls are currently reflecting public opinion.
I came on here to post something similar. Just had an evening with friends, some of whom voted to leave and some to remain. Still some disagreements, but the common threads were (a) Admiration for Mrs May's resilience and patience, (b) A feeling that grandstanding MPs in the debate yesterday were being childish and that Theresa May is at least a grown-up, (c) A feeling that we need to move on and the deal is a basis for that.
Perhaps most of all: (d) No thanks to another referendum or an election!
OK, this is deepest true-blue Sussex, but I suspect similar sentiments are widespread.
Also in deepest Sussex. I hear there is now a pro-EU group in town actively planning for the next referendum. I think that a year ago leavers would have breathed a sigh of relief that May's deal wasn't as bad as it might have been. Now I think the mood is that stopping Brexit altogether is a real possibility. I still can't see the route to that outcome myself, but I'm old and tired.
Peoples vote sounds great but would anyone really want to cross the rubicon into a 6 week deal / remain campaign lead by T May ? Could go great, but equally it could go very badly wrong. It'd have half the cabinet and probably the bulk of her party against her.
We're kind of hoping for Leave With Deal vs Remain, with TMay leading the Leave With Deal side...
OT. I've just heard someone on radio saying that it's 'an absolute disgrace no one on the high st is catering for size 18's. It is a fact that obeisity is on the rise but none of the well known brands are catering for us'
You couldn't make it up.
fast food restaurants are as well as the pop fizz industry
Pity the interviewer didn't have the wit and courage to say that!
I think a good betting strategy will be to lay TM out in 2018 just after the VONC is announced next week (assuming it is). The price will get way too short in all the excitement.
Regarding a figure emerging to take over. Can't believe I'm saying this but I have a growing hunch about Michael Gove. He has terrible teeth though, which could be what ultimately costs him.
I doubt the EU would even let us remain without us having a massive pro-remain referendum win: why should they, when they know they'll just have this problem again in a few years when the Brexiteers start slobbering again?
There's no sign from any of the EU bigwigs or national leaders who have spoken about this, which is lots of them, that the rest of the EU is going to put up special hurdles like a *massive* referendum result before letting the British stay. They want Britain to stay in the EU because it's in the interests of their citizens and businesses who can work, study and trade in a wider area without lots of stupid bureaucracy. There's also a net budgetary contribution and an international influence contribution.
They also know that voters vote for stupid shit from time to time. They're not going to get gamed for negotiating advantage if Brexit is still on, but if it's off, they're not going to let the possibility that Brexit might get resurrected in 5 or 10 or 20 years deter them from ending it now.
Quite. The best outcome for the UK is to stay in the EU, nobody wants a No Deal exit, everybody (including prominent Leavers) say that Chequers is worse than staying. But it's difficult politically because of the leadership of the Tory and Labour parties. A 'People's Vote' is a way out so come on parliament - take control.
The “best outcome for the UK” is to overturn the result of the largest vote in its history?
You don’t foresee any downsides?
They never do.... A broken domestic political arrangement is obviously a price worth paying for going back to their usual default position - grasping the ankles, taking whatever the EU wants to shove our way, no lube.
That weak weak weak position is what got us to this point. And they think more of the same will fix it? Utterly delusional.
OT. I've just heard someone on radio saying that it's 'an absolute disgrace no one on the high st is catering for size 18's. It is a fact that obeisity is on the rise but none of the well known brands are catering for us'
You couldn't make it up.
Among the curious requests that MPs get was one that Alan Simpson had from a constiuent complaining that M&S no longer stocked her bra size, and could he have a word with them?
Peoples vote sounds great but would anyone really want to cross the rubicon into a 6 week deal / remain campaign lead by T May ? Could go great, but equally it could go very badly wrong. It'd have half the cabinet and probably the bulk of her party against her.
We're kind of hoping for Leave With Deal vs Remain, with TMay leading the Leave With Deal side...
Why would TMay want to lead a side? In a Deal vs Remain referendum she can legitimately say that both options are deliverable and she’s fine with whatever people choose.
I doubt the EU would even let us remain without us having a massive pro-remain referendum win: why should they, when they know they'll just have this problem again in a few years when the Brexiteers start slobbering again?
There's no sign from any of the EU bigwigs or national leaders who have spoken about this, which is lots of them, that the rest of the EU is going to put up special hurdles like a *massive* referendum result before letting the British stay. They want Britain to stay in the EU because it's in the interests of their citizens and businesses who can work, study and trade in a wider area without lots of stupid bureaucracy. There's also a net budgetary contribution and an international influence contribution.
They also know that voters vote for stupid shit from time to time. They're not going to get gamed for negotiating advantage if Brexit is still on, but if it's off, they're not going to let the possibility that Brexit might get resurrected in 5 or 10 or 20 years deter them from ending it now.
Quite. The best outcome for the UK is to stay in the EU, nobody wants a No Deal exit, everybody (including prominent Leavers) say that Chequers is worse than staying. But it's difficult politically because of the leadership of the Tory and Labour parties. A 'People's Vote' is a way out so come on parliament - take control.
The “best outcome for the UK” is to overturn the result of the largest vote in its history?
You don’t foresee any downsides?
They never do.... A broken domestic political arrangement is obviously a price worth paying for going back to their usual default position - grasping the ankles, taking whatever the EU wants to shove our way, no lube.
That weak weak weak position is what got us to this point. And they think more of the same will fix it? Utterly delusional.
Lol. Good luck with trying to cast others as delusional!
I doubt the EU would even let us remain without us having a massive pro-remain referendum win: why should they, when they know they'll just have this problem again in a few years when the Brexiteers start slobbering again?
There's no sign from any of the EU bigwigs or national leaders who have spoken about this, which is lots of them, that the rest of the EU is going to put up special hurdles like a *massive* referendum result before letting the British stay. They want Britain to stay in the EU because it's in the interests of their citizens and businesses who can work, study and trade in a wider area without lots of stupid bureaucracy. There's also a net budgetary contribution and an international influence contribution.
They also know that voters vote for stupid shit from time to time. They're not going to get gamed for negotiating advantage if Brexit is still on, but if it's off, they're not going to let the possibility that Brexit might get resurrected in 5 or 10 or 20 years deter them from ending it now.
Quite. The best outcome for the UK is to stay in the EU, nobody wants a No Deal exit, everybody (including prominent Leavers) say that Chequers is worse than staying. But it's difficult politically because of the leadership of the Tory and Labour parties. A 'People's Vote' is a way out so come on parliament - take control.
Only if the 'people's vote' is conclusive. As we saw with the 2016 referendum, it's easy to get a result that is not conclusive, which is why we're in this mess.
Most likely result would be 52-48 for remain.
There were two main issues with the 2016 referendum result:
*) It was a narrow win. *) It was not clear what winning meant, and the winners made contradictory and incompatible promises to the electorate.
The problem with a new referendum is that, to cover all bases, a simple two-way choice will not be acceptable to many: there are many options such as no deal, deal, or remain. Leaving one of these out will automatically make the referendum seem undemocratic to many.
And yet a three- or four- way referendum is unlikely to get a clear majority over the other options, leading people to say it was not a clear win.
It's an absolute fucking mess, and it's totally the fault of hate-filled Europhobic winnets.
As I've said passim, the Europhiles would be better off trying to sell the EU to the public than aiming for another referendum. They didn't do it in 2016 (in fact, I was one of the few people on here who tried), and they're not trying to now.
In the absence of TSE, I should just say that some kind of alternative vote might be the answer.
Can’t help feeling the tide turned a bit for May today. Yesterday was very rough but her enemies overshot and she proved dogged. Today her Cabinet rallied around somewhat and the 48 didn’t materialise. .The options other than her deal looked less likely and less palatable. A long way to go yet but she just might be past the worst.
The dross is sticking to her, but she is still toast, bringing back the liar Elmer Fud , promoting unknown pygmies etc. She will never get that crap deal through, it makes Cameron's vapourware look good. If only Scotland had had the bollox 4 years ago to get out of the corrupt useless union.
I wish they had the numbers to do it now. If there was a serious threat of voting for independence this Brexit crap would be thrown into touch and this crap government would have something worthwhile to occupy their striped trouser brigade
Because a narrow vote for independence followed by the RU.K.approaching the divorce talks from a position of magnanimity and seeking a mutually beneficial agreement (without any thoughts of playing hardball to tempt the voters into a change of mind) would have been the (second) easiest deal in history?
OT. I've just heard someone on radio saying that it's 'an absolute disgrace no one on the high st is catering for size 18's. It is a fact that obeisity is on the rise but none of the well known brands are catering for us'
You couldn't make it up.
Among the curious requests that MPs get was one that Alan Simpson had from a constiuent complaining that M&S no longer stocked her bra size, and could he have a word with them?
I think a good betting strategy will be to lay TM out in 2018 just after the VONC is announced next week (assuming it is). The price will get way too short in all the excitement.
Regarding a figure emerging to take over. Can't believe I'm saying this but I have a growing hunch about Michael Gove. He has terrible teeth though, which could be what ultimately costs him.
Really don't think they've got the numbers for a VONC. And if they don't, it also suggests that the deal is more likely to pass through HoC than many have suggested.
Anyone who thinks the ERG have the 48 letters are kidding themselves. If they had the numbers they would have been on the BBC am hour ago calling on Brady to fire the gun.
I think they have the numbers, but Brady may well want to check that each is still valid.
I expect that we will hear on Monday.
Squeaking over the line is worse than talk.
Whether it is 48 or 148 matters little in terms of triggering a vote.
Then we enter uncharted waters. Voting for TM keeps her in post for a year wounded, I dont think it has been ever tried, so how it pans out has no precedent. I think it will happen, but she will win, and the Tories may need to fight GE2019 with her in post.
You should lay May exit before 31st Dec this year at 2.8 on Betfair, then.
I'd say, at present, there's a 75% chance of a no confidence vote next week and, if there is, about a 75% chance that May wins it. If she win then this bet is safe. If there's no vote, then it moves to December after the Parliamentary vote where there's another chance of a no confidence vote after losing it.
However, given the first would have petered out, that 1st/2nd week of December is leaving it very tight before Christmas I think it's more likely rebels would use it to try and RON or force concessions, and the battle would move to the deadline set out in the EU Withdrawal Act for a decision by 21st January 2019. May would only consider resigning if the defeat was very big, and even then I doubt she would out of a sense of duty.
I'd say, overall, it's an 85% chance May is in position on 1st Jan 2019, rather than 65%, so that makes this bet value.
Can’t help feeling the tide turned a bit for May today. Yesterday was very rough but her enemies overshot and she proved dogged. Today her Cabinet rallied around somewhat and the 48 didn’t materialise. .The options other than her deal looked less likely and less palatable. A long way to go yet but she just might be past the worst.
The dross is sticking to her, but she is still toast, bringing back the liar Elmer Fud , promoting unknown pygmies etc. She will never get that crap deal through, it makes Cameron's vapourware look good. If only Scotland had had the bollox 4 years ago to get out of the corrupt useless union.
I wish they had the numbers to do it now. If there was a serious threat of voting for independance this Brexit crap would be thrown into touch and this crap government would have something worthwhile to occupy their striped trouser brigade
An interesting scenario and I think you are right. It was clear that after the vote the SNP expected an anti-UK backlash in remainer Scotland (hence some tough talk from Sturgeon, to begin with) but this hasn't materialised. Quite possibly a chaotic exit could re-light the flame?
still around 45/46% for independence so it will not take much to achieve. The absolute shambles and fact that Tories have ignored Scottish Government will harden that as well. There will be a referendum next year for sure or they will tip it over the edge for sure.
I think a good betting strategy will be to lay TM out in 2018 just after the VONC is announced next week (assuming it is). The price will get way too short in all the excitement.
Regarding a figure emerging to take over. Can't believe I'm saying this but I have a growing hunch about Michael Gove. He has terrible teeth though, which could be what ultimately costs him.
Really don't think they've got the numbers for a VONC. And if they don't, it also suggests that the deal is more likely to pass through HoC than many have suggested.
May is probably still 30 votes short. She will need to swing 15+ Tories or get a phalanx of Labour MPs to abstain/back it.
Can’t help feeling the tide turned a bit for May today. Yesterday was very rough but her enemies overshot and she proved dogged. Today her Cabinet rallied around somewhat and the 48 didn’t materialise. .The options other than her deal looked less likely and less palatable. A long way to go yet but she just might be past the worst.
The dross is sticking to her, but she is still toast, bringing back the liar Elmer Fud , promoting unknown pygmies etc. She will never get that crap deal through, it makes Cameron's vapourware look good. If only Scotland had had the bollox 4 years ago to get out of the corrupt useless union.
I wish they had the numbers to do it now. If there was a serious threat of voting for independence this Brexit crap would be thrown into touch and this crap government would have something worthwhile to occupy their striped trouser brigade
Because a narrow vote for independence followed by the RU.K.approaching the divorce talks from a position of magnanimity and seeking a mutually beneficial agreement (without any thoughts of playing hardball to tempt the voters into a change of mind) would have been the (second) easiest deal in history?
A long sentence! No but because the government and country wouldn't want to fight a war on two fronts. The striped trouser brigade would know they were wrecking their precious Union which trumps leaving the UK. Witness this nonsense over Ireland
I expect the deal to go ahead on the basis that it is easier to agree it than not agree it and have to work out what to do instead.
The only other easy option is to pause Brexit, set up a committee to decide what to do next and withdraw Article 50 in the meantime. A better approach for those that hate the current direction than a second referendum I think. No-one is proposing this however.
I expect the deal to go ahead on the basis that it is easier to agree it than not agree it and have to work out what to do instead.
The only other easy option is to pause Brexit, set up a committee to decide what to do next and withdraw Article 50 in the meantime. A better approach for those that hate the current direction than a second referendum I think. No-one is proposing this however.
I expect the deal to go ahead on the basis that it is easier to agree it than not agree it and have to work out what to do instead.
The only other easy option is to pause Brexit, set up a committee to decide what to do next and withdraw Article 50 in the meantime. A better approach for those that hate the current direction than a second referendum I think. No-one is proposing this however.
Gets my vote.
It's a ridiculous proposal. We can't withdraw Article 50 unilaterally, and do you honestly think the EU would allow us to withdraw it for twelve months and then trigger it starting the whole expensive and distracting process afresh?
They might - almost certainly would - allow us to withdraw it, but I would be very surprised if there isn't a caveat that we do not invoke it again for a minimum of 10 years.
Which would leave this deal, or no deal. I am very much hoping at some point that gets into the thick heads of the Labour leadership.
I expect the deal to go ahead on the basis that it is easier to agree it than not agree it and have to work out what to do instead.
The only other easy option is to pause Brexit, set up a committee to decide what to do next and withdraw Article 50 in the meantime. A better approach for those that hate the current direction than a second referendum I think. No-one is proposing this however.
Gets my vote.
It's a ridiculous proposal. We can't withdraw Article 50 unilaterally, and do you honestly think the EU would allow us to withdraw it for twelve months and then trigger it starting the whole expensive and distracting process afresh?
They might - almost certainly would - allow us to withdraw it, but I would be very surprised if there isn't a caveat that we do not invoke it again for a minimum of 10 years.
Which would leave this deal, or no deal. I am very much hoping at some point that gets into the thick heads of the Labour leadership.
It's a ridiculous proposal because you assume the EU would not like it?
re-Nabarro 'On the night of 21 May 1971, Nabarro's car NAB 1 was seen to swerve at speed the wrong way round a roundabout at Totton, Hampshire. It was occupied by Nabarro and his company secretary, Margaret Mason. The police charged him as the driver, but Nabarro insisted it was his secretary, who agreed with his story. He was found guilty by a jury at Winchester Crown Court; the judge pronounced his behaviour "outrageous" and fined him £250. He announced his appeal on the court steps immediately afterwards, accompanied by his private secretary Christine Holman. He suffered two strokes in the following year and was cleared in the second trial. Many commentators of the time believed that the jury had brought in their verdict to spare Nabarro the horrors of a perjury trial.
A few months later, having recently announced a decision to retire from the Commons on grounds of health, he died at his home, Orchard House, in Broadway, Worcestershire on 18 November 1973.']
As we are talking about him, there is a lot of good things to say. The Clean Air Act in particular was both a good bit of legislation in itself and also a model for similar ones both here and around the world. It might not have happened without his advocacy. It's not many MPs who can claim such a legacy. He held a lot of views that were not exactly fashionable even at the time and which nowadays are quite repugnant - which was no doubt why he never got into government. But it is good to have people like him in public life.
I doubt the EU would even let us remain without us having a massive pro-remain referendum win: why should they, when they know they'll just have this problem again in a few years when the Brexiteers start slobbering again?
There's no sign from any of the EU bigwigs or national leaders who have spoken about this, which is lots of them, that the rest of the EU is going to put up special hurdles like a *massive* referendum result before letting the British stay. They want Britain to stay in the EU because it's in the interests of their citizens and businesses who can work, study and trade in a wider area without lots of stupid bureaucracy. There's also a net budgetary contribution and an international influence contribution.
They also know that voters vote for stupid shit from time to time. They're not going to get gamed for negotiating advantage if Brexit is still on, but if it's off, they're not going to let the possibility that Brexit might get resurrected in 5 or 10 or 20 years deter them from ending it now.
Quite. The best outcome for the UK is to stay in the EU, nobody wants a No Deal exit, everybody (including prominent Leavers) say that Chequers is worse than staying. But it's difficult politically because of the leadership of the Tory and Labour parties. A 'People's Vote' is a way out so come on parliament - take control.
Only if the 'people's vote' is conclusive. As we saw with the 2016 referendum, it's easy to get a result that is not conclusive, which is why we're in this mess.
Most likely result would be 52-48 for remain.
Well that's you guess. Yougov suggests that most people want a new referendum and I would suggest that 54 - 46 as the outcome of that referendum is more likely. People now know that Leavers cheated and lied.
- Britain backs this deal over no deal by 60% to 40% - Britain prefers a 2nd in/out ref to this deal by 56% to 44% - Britain prefers a 2nd in/out ref to no deal by 54% to 46%
Given that Merkel and Macron back an EU army, which was dismissed as a leaver fantasy two years ago, isn't it also true that Remain told a few porkies? The biggest lie of all was that remain represented the status quo. It did t. It was a vote for ever closer union. And that's why it will lose a second time around.
Even if it doesn't, what possible reason would leavers have to accept the result of a second referendum if remainers refused to accept the first? The war would continue. Forever. 54/46 is not a conclusive result.
I doubt the EU would even let us remain without us having a massive pro-remain referendum win: why should they, when they know they'll just have this problem again in a few years when the Brexiteers start slobbering again?
There's no sign from any of the EU bigwigs or national leaders who have spoken about this, which is lots of them, that the rest of the EU is going to put up special hurdles like a *massive* referendum result before letting the British stay. They want Britain to stay in the EU because it's in the interests of their citizens and businesses who can work, study and trade in a wider area without lots of stupid bureaucracy. There's also a net budgetary contribution and an international influence contribution.
They also know that voters vote for stupid shit from time to time. They're not going to get gamed for negotiating advantage if Brexit is still on, but if it's off, they're not going to let the possibility that Brexit might get resurrected in 5 or 10 or 20 years deter them from ending it now.
Quite. The best outcome for the UK is to stay in the EU, nobody wants a No Deal exit, everybody (including prominent Leavers) say that Chequers is worse than staying. But it's difficult politically because of the leadership of the Tory and Labour parties. A 'People's Vote' is a way out so come on parliament - take control.
Only if the 'people's vote' is conclusive. As we saw with the 2016 referendum, it's easy to get a result that is not conclusive, which is why we're in this mess.
- Britain backs this deal over no deal by 60% to 40% - Britain prefers a 2nd in/out ref to this deal by 56% to 44% - Britain prefers a 2nd in/out ref to no deal by 54% to 46%
Given that Merkel and Macron back an EU army, which was dismissed as a leaver fantasy two years ago, isn't it also true that Remain told a few porkies? The biggest lie of all was that remain represented the status quo. It did t. It was a vote for ever closer union. And that's why it will lose a second time around.
Even if it doesn't, what possible reason would leavers have to accept the result of a second referendum if remainers refused to accept the first? The war would continue. Forever. 54/46 is not a conclusive result.
Comments
Even if it doesn't, what possible reason would leavers have to accept the result of a second referendum if remainers refused to accept the first? The war would continue. Forever. 54/46 is not a conclusive result.
Long game.
*) It was a narrow win.
*) It was not clear what winning meant, and the winners made contradictory and incompatible promises to the electorate.
The problem with a new referendum is that, to cover all bases, a simple two-way choice will not be acceptable to many: there are many options such as no deal, deal, or remain. Leaving one of these out will automatically make the referendum seem undemocratic to many.
And yet a three- or four- way referendum is unlikely to get a clear majority over the other options, leading people to say it was not a clear win.
It's an absolute fucking mess, and it's totally the fault of hate-filled Europhobic winnets.
As I've said passim, the Europhiles would be better off trying to sell the EU to the public than aiming for another referendum. They didn't do it in 2016 (in fact, I was one of the few people on here who tried), and they're not trying to now.
Because the official “leaver, but anti May’s deal” position is “a better deal” (with no agreed definition of “better”). And that is not just the official position of Tory Leavers, but the official position of the Labour Party!. The only difference being that Tory leavers argue their better deal can be achieved by threatening to walk into no deal, Labour simply because they are not the Tories.
How do you put that on the ballot paper? You can’t.
That weak weak weak position is what got us to this point. And they think more of the same will fix it? Utterly delusional.
There'd be no turkish bogeyman to frighten people with, but there's also a potential for a massive "screw you" vote from the rural and coastal towns.
Peoples vote sounds great but would anyone really want to cross the rubicon into a 6 week deal / remain campaign lead by T May ? Could go great, but equally it could go very badly wrong. It'd have half the cabinet and probably the bulk of her party against her.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37896976
Regarding a figure emerging to take over. Can't believe I'm saying this but I have a growing hunch about Michael Gove. He has terrible teeth though, which could be what ultimately costs him.
Rather gloomy day.
I'd say, at present, there's a 75% chance of a no confidence vote next week and, if there is, about a 75% chance that May wins it. If she win then this bet is safe. If there's no vote, then it moves to December after the Parliamentary vote where there's another chance of a no confidence vote after losing it.
However, given the first would have petered out, that 1st/2nd week of December is leaving it very tight before Christmas I think it's more likely rebels would use it to try and RON or force concessions, and the battle would move to the deadline set out in the EU Withdrawal Act for a decision by 21st January 2019. May would only consider resigning if the defeat was very big, and even then I doubt she would out of a sense of duty.
I'd say, overall, it's an 85% chance May is in position on 1st Jan 2019, rather than 65%, so that makes this bet value.
But I doubt that would be conclusive enough either: it'd just be seen as a stitch-up by the noisy children.
My own preferences are (currently):
Deal
Remain
No Deal.
Although that has changed over time.
The only other easy option is to pause Brexit, set up a committee to decide what to do next and withdraw Article 50 in the meantime. A better approach for those that hate the current direction than a second referendum I think. No-one is proposing this however.
They might - almost certainly would - allow us to withdraw it, but I would be very surprised if there isn't a caveat that we do not invoke it again for a minimum of 10 years.
Which would leave this deal, or no deal. I am very much hoping at some point that gets into the thick heads of the Labour leadership.
I was referring to the weather.
NEW THREAD
I point out we are a sovereign country.
Leave 52%
Remain 48%