Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » “TMay exit” level-pegging with “UK leaving the EU” on the whic

1246

Comments

  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,337

    IanB2 said:

    Those of us who wish the U.K. to leave the EU and voted accordingly look likely to be disappointed. Too many MPs are content to be paid for simply doing as Brussels tells them and are currently seeking to seize hold of parliamentary business, for which they have no electoral mandate, to stick two fingers up to the electorate. The second is that Brexit has shown the entire British political class and civil service to be unfit for the task of governing Britain. For Leave, it means they have virtually no MPs in parliament capable of articulating what Brexit should look like. Remain supporting MPs don’t have that problem; Brussels simply tells them what to do.

    May is not going to resign so it’s hard to see her leaving until she is forced out by a vote of no confidence. The Tories will support her against Corbyn so she’s safe for about another year - another year in which absolutely nothing gets done but vast quantities of hot air get expended.

    You seem to have missed the Elephant In The Room - inaction leads to No Deal and you get your precious Brexit.
    Not really, if you read and understood my comment. If MPs are successful in grabbing control of the parliamentary agenda, which I referred to up front, there won’t be a Brexit.
    I took the implication of your post to be that nothing will happen. As you say, MPs are deadlocked and the Maybot's programming does not allow her to make decisions and the Tories have made her invulnerable from deselection until the end of 2019.

    No Deal looks nailed on (as they say around this parish)
    I'm betting on No Deal as much as personal insurance as for a political bet.

    At 6/1 on Betfair it's obvious value.
    Worth reading the small print to that bet, which only pays off for a departure with no deal at end March. If there is any delay or extension then the bet fails, even if we eventually leave with no deal. Given that proviso I think the 6/1 is fair, not value

    Edit/ and a lot less valuable as insurance against being shafted by no deal.
    Thanks. Useful warning.
    Still interested in the definition of “a deal” too. Because I suspect there’s a much slimmer “open in case of emergency” envelope in Barnier’s desk which basically says “OK, OK, we get it. How about we sort the planes and meds and stuff for 6 months?”. Is *that* a deal?

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    edited January 2019

    IanB2 said:

    Those of us who wish the U.K. to leave the EU and voted accordingly look likely to be disappointed. Too many MPs are content to be paid for simply doing as Brussels tells them and are currently seeking to seize hold of parliamentary business, for which they have no electoral mandate, to stick two fingers up to the electorate. The second is that Brexit has shown the entire British political class and civil service to be unfit for the task of governing Britain. For Leave, it means they have virtually no MPs in parliament capable of articulating what Brexit should look like. Remain supporting MPs don’t have that problem; Brussels simply tells them what to do.

    May is not going to resign so it’s hard to see her leaving until she is forced out by a vote of no confidence. The Tories will support her against Corbyn so she’s safe for about another year - another year in which absolutely nothing gets done but vast quantities of hot air get expended.

    You seem to have missed the Elephant In The Room - inaction leads to No Deal and you get your precious Brexit.
    Not really, if you read and understood my comment. If MPs are successful in grabbing control of the parliamentary agenda, which I referred to up front, there won’t be a Brexit.
    I took the implication of your post to be that nothing will happen. As you say, MPs are deadlocked and the Maybot's programming does not allow her to make decisions and the Tories have made her invulnerable from deselection until the end of 2019.

    No Deal looks nailed on (as they say around this parish)
    I'm betting on No Deal as much as personal insurance as for a political bet.

    At 6/1 on Betfair it's obvious value.
    Worth reading the small print to that bet, which only pays off for a departure with no deal at end March. If there is any delay or extension then the bet fails, even if we eventually leave with no deal. Given that proviso I think the 6/1 is fair, not value

    Edit/ and a lot less valuable as insurance against being shafted by no deal.
    Thanks. Useful warning.
    Betfair is being very naughty in calling the bet "No deal exit - yes or no", given that the actual leaving date is a critical qualifier. It's fine for the minutiae to be in the small print, but that bet should really be titled "No deal exit in March"
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,626
    TGOHF said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:
    So all the stuff about the DUP having agreed to support the deal and the speculation that they would bring 100 Tory MPs across with them was predicated on sheer fantasy.
    That much was obvious a week ago.

    Has anyone actually identified a single MP who has changed his or her position since the meaningful vote?
    Well not since the vote..

    https://twitter.com/oflynnmep/status/1089923239558762497
    Wouldn't surprise me if that wasn't a standard CCHQ-organised leaflet. There's probably a similar one to embarrass all the Remainiacs. It's a really shit design, so looks about right. I mean, what is that double ripped effect supposed to be, top and bottom? Urgh.

    Some of them were so awful, a conscious decision was taken not to deliver them.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    edited January 2019


    Worth reading the small print to that bet, which only pays off for a departure with no deal at end March. If there is any delay or extension then the bet fails, even if we eventually leave with no deal. Given that proviso I think the 6/1 is fair, not value

    Edit/ and a lot less valuable as insurance against being shafted by no deal.

    Thanks. Useful warning.
    That's a bit cheeky, since there's really four options, not two, but they're burying the lede to make you miscount the odds.

    1) Leave 29th March with an agreed WA and PD
    2) Leave 29th March with no agreed WA and PD
    3) Leave sometime in the future with an agreed WA and PD
    4) Don't leave


    RESPONSE (who messed up the BQ?):

    And a further scenario where we get an extension - for example for a GE or referendum - but end up leaving later with no deal isn't a zero percentage probability.

  • Still interested in the definition of “a deal” too. Because I suspect there’s a much slimmer “open in case of emergency” envelope in Barnier’s desk which basically says “OK, OK, we get it. How about we sort the planes and meds and stuff for 6 months?”. Is *that* a deal?

    A withdrawal agreement and political declaration negotiated under Article 50 process. If the clock runs out and the WA+PD hasn't been approved, there will be other deals. But they will not be THE deal. At the moment the clock runs out, the UK becomes a third country, and the EU has no legal competence to conclude a Withdrawal Agreement with a third country.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    I hope that the food supply experts of this morning were looking at the BBC early evening news. Unlikely though given physical location.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,362

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Did Brand not see Barnier's recent statement that the EU was [at last] looking at technical solutions to the Irish border issue.

    Also there are rumours in Ireland that the EUs solution in the event of No Deal is to have no checks on the Ireland/NI border but instead have them on the Ireland/EU border eg at Calais Rotterdam etc.
    With all due respect, David, the second option will not happen.
    In the event of No Deal the Eu has been made aware that neither Ireland nor the UK are prepared to instal infrastructure on the Ireland/NI border.

    Consequently their fallback position is to check goods coming into the EU from the UK and Ireland in the same way - both for tariffs and compliance with standards.

    The EU are not keen to publicise their position because it undermines their negotiating position of course, which is to weaponise the Irish border issue.
    Given that will mean the goods are delayed big time it will mean someone will end up needing to stick a border in or stop trading.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Sean_F said:
    Less fresh food demand - matches reduced supply from Q2...
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,138
    Some of you may recall that I have in the past indicated that Mr Lilico is a bear of very little brain. Sometimes you look at what he writes and wonder how such can exist in the world... :(
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I wonder which of the various possible outcomes is worse for the Tories? Which one will mean that they lose the next election and lose it badly?

    Because if it is very obviously one particular outcome, rather than any of the others, one would assume that everything the Labour leadership do from here will be geared with a lazer like focus to steering events towards that outcome.

    I mean, this is what politics is about, right? - Power.

    And especially for the Corbyn project at this time. They have the chance, if they play their cards right, to effect a massive and irreversible transfer of wealth and power in this country in favour of working people.

    The chance will probably not come again, not in a lifetime, so surely they will at least do their damnedest to grab it.

    If most Tory MPs were concerned about the next election they'd have come behind a single view by now, whatever it was. As frustrating as the lack of decision has been, and while May's indecision has been because she is too afraid of splitting her own party, that they are so ungovernable on this issue even to the idiotic point of derailing the entire project and possibly losing Brexit entirely, or alternately causing a no deal the remain faction claim not to want, it shows that they are, at least, truly focusing on this issue to the exclusion of other concerns. Because they cannot be so stupid as to think all out party war will be good for them.
    Dunno. It worked for Labour.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    viewcode said:

    Some of you may recall that I have in the past indicated that Mr Lilico is a bear of very little brain. Sometimes you look at what he writes and wonder how such can exist in the world... :(
    He truly is an idiot. How someone like that survives in a job as some sort of thinktank type is beyond me.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,362

    Mr. Divvie, Piers Morgan is a moron. However, Greer may be 'courteous' but he's also the author of this, as you may've seen:
    https://twitter.com/Ross_Greer/status/1088871720382091264

    He is a plonker of the first order, a halfwitted moronic nutter.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,138
    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    If the ERG does not vote for the Brady amendment, they will have truly sabotaged Brexit.

    Do you think they care?
    It seems your position is closer to Gina Miller's than to Jacob Rees-Mogg's.

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1089819354290704385
    That deal is no longer available.
    Indeed. More fictions, more fantasies, more procrastination...:(
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    edited January 2019
    Yes, that seems the simplest explanation. Which, frankly, makes them a perfect fit for the party they lead. Not a one of them shows any quality right now. The sooner they are out of office the better.

    Surely this chaos around the Brady amendment will secure some more votes for Cooper's plan? The 'pass an amended deal' plan was the only plan the government had to get something through it seems, and with that blown up surely enough Tories and Labour will fall back on the 'kick the can' plan?
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    TGOHF said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:
    So all the stuff about the DUP having agreed to support the deal and the speculation that they would bring 100 Tory MPs across with them was predicated on sheer fantasy.
    That much was obvious a week ago.

    Has anyone actually identified a single MP who has changed his or her position since the meaningful vote?
    Well not since the vote..

    https://twitter.com/oflynnmep/status/1089923239558762497
    Unlike the hard as nails and dumb as rocks Brextards, she has looked over the cliff and doesn’t like the ending.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    edited January 2019
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I wonder which of the various possible outcomes is worse for the Tories? Which one will mean that they lose the next election and lose it badly?

    Because if it is very obviously one particular outcome, rather than any of the others, one would assume that everything the Labour leadership do from here will be geared with a lazer like focus to steering events towards that outcome.

    I mean, this is what politics is about, right? - Power.

    And especially for the Corbyn project at this time. They have the chance, if they play their cards right, to effect a massive and irreversible transfer of wealth and power in this country in favour of working people.

    The chance will probably not come again, not in a lifetime, so surely they will at least do their damnedest to grab it.

    If most Tory MPs were concerned about the next election they'd have come behind a single view by now, whatever it was. As frustrating as the lack of decision has been, and while May's indecision has been because she is too afraid of splitting her own party, that they are so ungovernable on this issue even to the idiotic point of derailing the entire project and possibly losing Brexit entirely, or alternately causing a no deal the remain faction claim not to want, it shows that they are, at least, truly focusing on this issue to the exclusion of other concerns. Because they cannot be so stupid as to think all out party war will be good for them.
    Dunno. It worked for Labour.
    And while lightning can in fact strike in the same way twice, the Tories should not expect that.

    In the last 12 months they have proven that Corbyn would indeed be a better Prime Minister, something Corbyn himself is far too incompetent to prove.
  • Churchill may have been a white supremacist and mass murderer, but he was OUR white supremacist and mass murderer.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    edited January 2019
    kle4 said:

    Yes, that seems the simplest explanation. Which, frankly, makes them a perfect fit for the party they lead. Not a one of them shows any quality right now. The sooner they are out of office the better.

    Surely this chaos around the Brady amendment will secure some more votes for Cooper's plan? The 'pass an amended deal' plan was the only plan the government had to get something through it seems, and with that blown up surely enough Tories and Labour will fall back on the 'kick the can' plan?
    We have arrived at a situation where most sensible people would agree that this appalling government needs to be kicked out of office yet with an opposition most people see is utterly unfit to govern. And with a third party that has been almost obliterated as punishment for what, against current sins, were relatively small mistakes. Woe betide the UK.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,257
    IanB2 said:

    Voters are concerned about real world consequences, not political game playing. And the government always takes the blame. Hence the worst option for the Tories is the one with the worst real world outcome. Which is probably an early no deal exit.

    The only exception to this is if the political manoevering actually leads to a formal split in the party.

    It's interesting, because as I see it:

    A No Deal exit is the worst for the country - and like you say this Tory Govt should reap the blame.

    But a No Deal probably keeps the Tory Party together whereas a No Brexit might stress it to break point.

    So which is better for JC, a disaster for the country or a disaster for the Tory Party?

    For me, in his position, it would be the latter. But does he agree, that is what we need to know.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,199
    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I wonder which of the various possible outcomes is worse for the Tories? Which one will mean that they lose the next election and lose it badly?

    Because if it is very obviously one particular outcome, rather than any of the others, one would assume that everything the Labour leadership do from here will be geared with a lazer like focus to steering events towards that outcome.

    I mean, this is what politics is about, right? - Power.

    And especially for the Corbyn project at this time. They have the chance, if they play their cards right, to effect a massive and irreversible transfer of wealth and power in this country in favour of working people.

    The chance will probably not come again, not in a lifetime, so surely they will at least do their damnedest to grab it.

    If most Tory MPs were concerned about the next election they'd have come behind a single view by now, whatever it was. As frustrating as the lack of decision has been, and while May's indecision has been because she is too afraid of splitting her own party, that they are so ungovernable on this issue even to the idiotic point of derailing the entire project and possibly losing Brexit entirely, or alternately causing a no deal the remain faction claim not to want, it shows that they are, at least, truly focusing on this issue to the exclusion of other concerns. Because they cannot be so stupid as to think all out party war will be good for them.
    Dunno. It worked for Labour.
    And while lightning can in fact strike in the same way twice, the Tories should not expect that.

    In the last 12 months they have proven that Corbyn would indeed be a better Prime Minister, something Corbyn himself is far too incompetent to prove.
    Er, no. They have not proven that. Just as Maduro being a third rate neo-Fascist drunken failure doesn't prove that the only reason Venezuela imploded is the relatively early death of Chavez.
  • Lillico is an idiot, but as it happens, he's stopped-clock right about this. Remain is not a bad outcome for the ERG and the DUP at all.

    If May cancels Brexit, the DUP will have a lucky escape and the ERG will have a party grassroots seething with rage from a very public betrayal, and a freshly energized bully pulpit from which to denounce traitors and generally render the Tories ungovernable for perhaps decades to come.

    Really they'd be delighted with that.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    edited January 2019
    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Voters are concerned about real world consequences, not political game playing. And the government always takes the blame. Hence the worst option for the Tories is the one with the worst real world outcome. Which is probably an early no deal exit.

    The only exception to this is if the political manoevering actually leads to a formal split in the party.

    It's interesting, because as I see it:

    A No Deal exit is the worst for the country - and like you say this Tory Govt should reap the blame.

    But a No Deal probably keeps the Tory Party together whereas a No Brexit might stress it to break point.

    So which is better for JC, a disaster for the country or a disaster for the Tory Party?

    For me, in his position, it would be the latter. But does he agree, that is what we need to know.
    Which goes to the nub of the matter. Probably, if Brexit failed, the Tories would split and reap most of the electoral punishment. And the country would be better off as a result. Yet Corbyn is hanging his hat on the more straightforward course of pushing the Tories toward exit with no deal.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,257
    kle4 said:

    If most Tory MPs were concerned about the next election they'd have come behind a single view by now, whatever it was. As frustrating as the lack of decision has been, and while May's indecision has been because she is too afraid of splitting her own party, that they are so ungovernable on this issue even to the idiotic point of derailing the entire project and possibly losing Brexit entirely, or alternately causing a no deal the remain faction claim not to want, it shows that they are, at least, truly focusing on this issue to the exclusion of other concerns. Because they cannot be so stupid as to think all out party war will be good for them.

    You could be right. In which case Jeremy Corbyn is on his way to Downing St.

    That will be quite something.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I wonder which of the various possible outcomes is worse for the Tories? Which one will mean that they lose the next election and lose it badly?

    Because if it is very obviously one particular outcome, rather than any of the others, one would assume that everything the Labour leadership do from here will be geared with a lazer like focus to steering events towards that outcome.

    I mean, this is what politics is about, right? - Power.

    And especially for the Corbyn project at this time. They have the chance, if they play their cards right, to effect a massive and irreversible transfer of wealth and power in this country in favour of working people.

    The chance will probably not come again, not in a lifetime, so surely they will at least do their damnedest to grab it.

    If most Tory MPs were concerned about the next election they'd have come behind a single view by now, whatever it was. As frustrating as the lack of decision has been, and while May's indecision has been because she is too afraid of splitting her own party, that they are so ungovernable on this issue even to the idiotic point of derailing the entire project and possibly losing Brexit entirely, or alternately causing a no deal the remain faction claim not to want, it shows that they are, at least, truly focusing on this issue to the exclusion of other concerns. Because they cannot be so stupid as to think all out party war will be good for them.
    Dunno. It worked for Labour.
    And while lightning can in fact strike in the same way twice, the Tories should not expect that.

    In the last 12 months they have proven that Corbyn would indeed be a better Prime Minister, something Corbyn himself is far too incompetent to prove.
    Er, no. They have not proven that. .
    Yes, they have. Corbyn could not be more incompetent than the Tories right now. They certainly haven't proven he would be any good, he'd be very crap I have no doubt, but this government and its farcical MPs deserve to see him become PM, and as bad as that will be for us, it'd be better than this shower.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    H
    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    If most Tory MPs were concerned about the next election they'd have come behind a single view by now, whatever it was. As frustrating as the lack of decision has been, and while May's indecision has been because she is too afraid of splitting her own party, that they are so ungovernable on this issue even to the idiotic point of derailing the entire project and possibly losing Brexit entirely, or alternately causing a no deal the remain faction claim not to want, it shows that they are, at least, truly focusing on this issue to the exclusion of other concerns. Because they cannot be so stupid as to think all out party war will be good for them.

    You could be right. In which case Jeremy Corbyn is on his way to Downing St.

    That will be quite something.
    Saying the same thing repeatedly, albeit with subtle tonal variations, doesn’t equal insight.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Just.Remain.Already. Why insult us with the extension nonsense? He can talk about the legislation needed for brexit all he wants, but that's a distraction if the brexit direction is not decided, we can request extensions if needed after we decide to deal or not deal.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,138
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Seems like a bit of a non-issue, unless you think there is going to be no extradition treaty between the EU and UK in the future?
    We can't even agree on a withdrawal agreement (which we asked for and extends the status quo for several months) without Mark Francois busting a blood vessel and Tim Weatherspoon gobbing off. What do you think is the probability of this Parliament approving legislation that moves English people to European courts involuntarily?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I wonder which of the various possible outcomes is worse for the Tories? Which one will mean that they lose the next election and lose it badly?

    Because if it is very obviously one particular outcome, rather than any of the others, one would assume that everything the Labour leadership do from here will be geared with a lazer like focus to steering events towards that outcome.

    I mean, this is what politics is about, right? - Power.

    And especially for the Corbyn project at this time. They have the chance, if they play their cards right, to effect a massive and irreversible transfer of wealth and power in this country in favour of working people.

    The chance will probably not come again, not in a lifetime, so surely they will at least do their damnedest to grab it.

    If most Tory MPs were concerned about the next election they'd have come behind a single view by now, whatever it was. As frustrating as the lack of decision has been, and while May's indecision has been because she is too afraid of splitting her own party, that they are so ungovernable on this issue even to the idiotic point of derailing the entire project and possibly losing Brexit entirely, or alternately causing a no deal the remain faction claim not to want, it shows that they are, at least, truly focusing on this issue to the exclusion of other concerns. Because they cannot be so stupid as to think all out party war will be good for them.
    Dunno. It worked for Labour.
    And while lightning can in fact strike in the same way twice, the Tories should not expect that.

    In the last 12 months they have proven that Corbyn would indeed be a better Prime Minister, something Corbyn himself is far too incompetent to prove.
    Er, no. They have not proven that. .
    Yes, they have. Corbyn could not be more incompetent than the Tories right now. They certainly haven't proven he would be any good, he'd be very crap I have no doubt, but this government and its farcical MPs deserve to see him become PM, and as bad as that will be for us, it'd be better than this shower.
    Yes he could, and he would. Let's keep a sense of perspective here. May has Major (pun intended) faults but she hasn't launched a Chavez or Yeltsin style catastrophe on us.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    matt said:

    H

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    If most Tory MPs were concerned about the next election they'd have come behind a single view by now, whatever it was. As frustrating as the lack of decision has been, and while May's indecision has been because she is too afraid of splitting her own party, that they are so ungovernable on this issue even to the idiotic point of derailing the entire project and possibly losing Brexit entirely, or alternately causing a no deal the remain faction claim not to want, it shows that they are, at least, truly focusing on this issue to the exclusion of other concerns. Because they cannot be so stupid as to think all out party war will be good for them.

    You could be right. In which case Jeremy Corbyn is on his way to Downing St.

    That will be quite something.
    Saying the same thing repeatedly, albeit with subtle tonal variations, doesn’t equal insight.
    But that's my whole thing!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Ben Gummer was never the Cabinet Secretary.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I wonder which of the various possible outcomes is worse for the Tories? Which one will mean that they lose the next election and lose it badly?

    Because if it is very obviously one particular outcome, rather than any of the others, one would assume that everything the Labour leadership do from here will be geared with a lazer like focus to steering events towards that outcome.

    I mean, this is what politics is about, right? - Power.

    And especially for the Corbyn project at this time. They have the chance, if they play their cards right, to effect a massive and irreversible transfer of wealth and power in this country in favour of working people.

    The chance will probably not come again, not in a lifetime, so surely they will at least do their damnedest to grab it.

    If most Tory MPs were concerned about the next election they'd have come behind a single view by now, whatever it was. As frustrating as the lack of decision has been, and while May's indecision has been because she is too afraid of splitting her own party, that they are so ungovernable on this issue even to the idiotic point of derailing the entire project and possibly losing Brexit entirely, or alternately causing a no deal the remain faction claim not to want, it shows that they are, at least, truly focusing on this issue to the exclusion of other concerns. Because they cannot be so stupid as to think all out party war will be good for them.
    Dunno. It worked for Labour.
    And while lightning can in fact strike in the same way twice, the Tories should not expect that.

    In the last 12 months they have proven that Corbyn would indeed be a better Prime Minister, something Corbyn himself is far too incompetent to prove.
    Er, no. They have not proven that. .
    Yes, they have. Corbyn could not be more incompetent than the Tories right now. They certainly haven't proven he would be any good, he'd be very crap I have no doubt, but this government and its farcical MPs deserve to see him become PM, and as bad as that will be for us, it'd be better than this shower.
    Yes he could, and he would. Let's keep a sense of perspective here. May has Major (pun intended) faults but she hasn't launched a Chavez or Yeltsin style catastrophe on us.
    That oversight might be corrected in two months and a day.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871

    IanB2 said:

    Those of us who wish the U.K. to leave the EU and voted accordingly look likely to be disappointed. Too many MPs are content to be paid for simply doing as Brussels tells them and are currently seeking to seize hold of look like. Remain supporting MPs don’t have that problem; Brussels simply tells them what to do.

    May is not going to resign so it’s hard to see her leaving until she is forced out by a vote of no confidence. The Tories will support her against Corbyn so she’s safe for about another year - another year in which absolutely nothing gets done but vast quantities of hot air get expended.

    You seem to have missed the Elephant In The Room - inaction leads to No Deal and you get your precious Brexit.
    Not really, if you read and understood my comment. If MPs are successful in grabbing control of the parliamentary agenda, which I referred to up front, there won’t be a Brexit.
    I took the implication of your post to be that nothing will happen. As you say, MPs are deadlocked and the Maybot's programming does not allow her to make decisions and the Tories have made her invulnerable from deselection until the end of 2019.

    No Deal looks nailed on (as they say around this parish)
    I'm betting on No Deal as much as personal insurance as for a political bet.

    At 6/1 on Betfair it's obvious value.
    Worth reading the small print to that bet, which only pays off for a departure with no deal at end March. If there is any delay or extension then the bet fails, even if we eventually leave with no deal. Given that proviso I think the 6/1 is fair, not value

    Edit/ and a lot less valuable as insurance against being shafted by no deal.
    Thanks. Useful warning.
    Still interested in the definition of “a deal” too. Because I suspect there’s a much slimmer “open in case of emergency” envelope in Barnier’s desk which basically says “OK, OK, we get it. How about we sort the planes and meds and stuff for 6 months?”. Is *that* a deal?

    Betfair's blurb says leaving "without a withdrawal agreement being ratified". Which I would take to mean an embracing agreement, rather than some hurried sectoral deals to keep the planes flying, etc. The BF small print reserves the right to interpret the actual outcome against the background of how it is being generally reported.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I wonder which of the various possible outcomes is worse for the Tories? Which one will mean that they lose the next election and lose it badly?

    Because if it is very obviously one particular outcome, rather than any of the others, one would assume that everything the Labour leadership do from here will be geared with a lazer like focus to steering events towards that outcome.

    I mean, this is what politics is about, right? - Power.

    And especially for the Corbyn project at this time. They have the chance, if they play their cards right, to effect a massive and irreversible transfer of wealth and power in this country in favour of working people.

    The chance will probably not come again, not in a lifetime, so surely they will at least do their damnedest to grab it.

    If most Tory MPs were concerned about the next election they'd have come behind a single view by now, whatever it was. As frustrating as the lack of decision has been, and while May's indecision has been because she is too afraid of splitting her own party, that they are so ungovernable on this issue even to the idiotic point of derailing the entire project and possibly losing Brexit entirely, or alternately causing a no deal the remain faction claim not to want, it shows that they are, at least, truly focusing on this issue to the exclusion of other concerns. Because they cannot be so stupid as to think all out party war will be good for them.
    Dunno. It worked for Labour.
    And while lightning can in fact strike in the same way twice, the Tories should not expect that.

    In the last 12 months they have proven that Corbyn would indeed be a better Prime Minister, something Corbyn himself is far too incompetent to prove.
    Er, no. They have not proven that. .
    Yes, they have. Corbyn could not be more incompetent than the Tories right now. They certainly haven't proven he would be any good, he'd be very crap I have no doubt, but this government and its farcical MPs deserve to see him become PM, and as bad as that will be for us, it'd be better than this shower.
    Yes he could, and he would. Let's keep a sense of perspective here. May has Major (pun intended) faults but she hasn't launched a Chavez or Yeltsin style catastrophe on us.
    That oversight might be corrected in two months and a day.
    It is most unlikely Brexit will cause 1,000,000% inflation.

    Increasing the money supply by 50% in the first year, on the other hand...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,626
    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Stop saying "extend" to some endless point, Gummer, and have the balls to say you want to cancel Brexit. Yes, you will be deselected, but at least you can hold your head up high.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,199
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Just.Remain.Already. Why insult us with the extension nonsense? He can talk about the legislation needed for brexit all he wants, but that's a distraction if the brexit direction is not decided, we can request extensions if needed after we decide to deal or not deal.
    The extension of course would be to enable moves towards Norway Plus or Customs Union BINO or Remain v Deal EUref2.

    That is why if the Cooper amendment extending Article 50 and the Grieve amendment enabling Parliament to put forward its own Brexit proposals every Tuesday both pass Parliament will have taken control of the Brexit process
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,626

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Stop saying "extend" to some endless point, Gummer, and have the balls to say you want to cancel Brexit. Yes, you will be deselected, but at least you can hold your head up high.
    EDIT: He doesn't seem to have bothered even trying for another seat after losing Ipswich. No great loss then.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,199
    edited January 2019

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Stop saying "extend" to some endless point, Gummer, and have the balls to say you want to cancel Brexit. Yes, you will be deselected, but at least you can hold your head up high.
    Gummer was deselected by the voters of Ipswich last year but his views match those of Tory Remainers. (He was also 2 years above me at school and a Europhile even then)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,199
    edited January 2019
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Ben Gummer was never the Cabinet Secretary.
    Cabinet Office Minister then
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,138
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Just.Remain.Already. Why insult us with the extension nonsense? He can talk about the legislation needed for brexit all he wants, but that's a distraction if the brexit direction is not decided, we can request extensions if needed after we decide to deal or not deal.
    The extension of course would be to enable moves towards Norway Plus or Customs Union BINO or Remain v Deal EUref2.

    That is why if the Cooper amendment extending Article 50 and the Grieve amendment enabling Parliament to put forward its own Brexit proposals every Tuesday both pass Parliament will have taken control of the Brexit process
    Unfortunately, every outcome other than the existing deal and no-deal requires the consent of the EU.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Stop saying "extend" to some endless point, Gummer, and have the balls to say you want to cancel Brexit. Yes, you will be deselected, but at least you can hold your head up high.
    Watching the Tories push away their traditional core support amongst educated middle class businesspeople is a sight to behold. Historians will watch and wonder.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,257
    matt said:

    Saying the same thing repeatedly, albeit with subtle tonal variations, doesn’t equal insight.

    It depends what that thing is, surely.

    A certain Theresa May has said "Brexit means Brexit" about a hundred times but has the repetition lessened its power and relevance?

    I think not.
  • StreeterStreeter Posts: 684
    edited January 2019
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I wonder which of the various possible outcomes is worse for the Tories? Which one will mean that they lose the next election and lose it badly?

    Because if it is very obviously one particular outcome, rather than any of the others, one would assume that everything the Labour leadership do from here will be geared with a lazer like focus to steering events towards that outcome.

    I mean, this is what politics is about, right? - Power.

    And especially for the Corbyn project at this time. They have the chance, if they play their cards right, to effect a massive and irreversible transfer of wealth and power in this country in favour of working people.

    The chance will probably not come again, not in a lifetime, so surely they will at least do their damnedest to grab it.

    If most Tory MPs were concerned about the next election they'd have come behind a single view by now, whatever it was. As frustrating as the lack of decision has been, and while May's indecision has been because she is too afraid of splitting her own party, that they are so ungovernable on this issue even to the idiotic point of derailing the entire project and possibly losing Brexit entirely, or alternately causing a no deal the remain faction claim not to want, it shows that they are, at least, truly focusing on this issue to the exclusion of other concerns. Because they cannot be so stupid as to think all out party war will be good for them.
    Dunno. It worked for Labour.
    And while lightning can in fact strike in the same way twice, the Tories should not expect that.

    In the last 12 months they have proven that Corbyn would indeed be a better Prime Minister, something Corbyn himself is far too incompetent to prove.
    Er, no. They have not proven that. .
    Yes, they have. Corbyn could not be more incompetent than the Tories right now. They certainly haven't proven he would be any good, he'd be very crap I have no doubt, but this government and its farcical MPs deserve to see him become PM, and as bad as that will be for us, it'd be better than this shower.
    Yes he could, and he would. Let's keep a sense of perspective here. May has Major (pun intended) faults but she hasn't launched a Chavez or Yeltsin style catastrophe on us.
    Neither has Corbyn. Your point being?
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    So tomorrow are we seriously going to be treated to the spectacle of May failing to get parliament to sabotage her own deal?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,626
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Ben Gummer was never the Cabinet Secretary.
    He was Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General.

    (Have the image of him taking brown envelopes round Westminster to all MPs, with their weekly wages in....)
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    kinabalu said:

    matt said:

    Saying the same thing repeatedly, albeit with subtle tonal variations, doesn’t equal insight.

    It depends what that thing is, surely.

    A certain Theresa May has said "Brexit means Brexit" about a hundred times but has the repetition lessened its power and relevance?

    I think not.
    To be honest, it was a pretty low starting point
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    I did tell you the Cooper amendment would not pass! It now seems the Labour leadership is keener on a No Deal Brexit than the government.

    Now? Hasn't it always been?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Ben Gummer was never the Cabinet Secretary.
    Cabinet Office Minister then
    Fairly important distinction!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    MaxPB said:

    I did tell you the Cooper amendment would not pass! It now seems the Labour leadership is keener on a No Deal Brexit than the government.

    Now? Hasn't it always been?
    The issue that this re-exposes is what proportion of the PLP is actually loyal to its current leadership.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426
    Streeter said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Er, no. They have not proven that. .

    Yes, they have. Corbyn could not be more incompetent than the Tories right now. They certainly haven't proven he would be any good, he'd be very crap I have no doubt, but this government and its farcical MPs deserve to see him become PM, and as bad as that will be for us, it'd be better than this shower.
    Yes he could, and he would. Let's keep a sense of perspective here. May has Major (pun intended) faults but she hasn't launched a Chavez or Yeltsin style catastrophe on us.
    Neither has Corbyn. Your point being?
    Well, be fair, you have to get into power before you can prove how epically and disastrously you would screw things up. I mean, in 1991 there were people who thought Yeltsin was the answer to Russia's major problems. In 1998 Chavez won a popular election even though people knew he was a treacherous and violent scumbag who thought democracy applied to other people, because he promised to end corruption (which would be amusing if the consequences hadn't been so tragic).

    And it's not that long ago a huge majority thought May was a good Prime Minister.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,199

    The following have all been true since last summer:

    1) The ERG and the DUP will never support a deal with a backstop
    2) The EU will never agree a withdrawal agreement without a backstop
    3) Labour will not support a deal under any circumstances.

    Here we are, endless displacement activity in full view, and yet every single one of those three statements is a completely true as it has ever been.

    Nothing has changed.

    3 is not true. The vast majority of our MPs respect the referendum result.
    If Labour had any intention of supporting a deal, they'd not have drafted six tests to make it impossible.

    If Labour were planning to support a deal, they'd not be letting the Labour leader do everything in his power ensure that May's hands are duct taped to the wheel when we go over the cliff edge.

    What Labour wants is for the Tories to get the blame for Tory No Deal Brexit Chaos.
    If Corbyn has not backed EUref2 by Brexit Day if we go to No Deal all the polls are clear Labour will be hit hard with mass defections of Labour Remainers to the LDs
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Stop saying "extend" to some endless point, Gummer, and have the balls to say you want to cancel Brexit. Yes, you will be deselected, but at least you can hold your head up high.
    Watching the Tories push away their traditional core support amongst educated middle class businesspeople is a sight to behold. Historians will watch and wonder.
    I really resent the fact that wanting to extend Article 50 is invariably interpreted as code for remain.

    I think I speak for the sane majority when I say we will accept a consensus on any of the following: May's deal, Norway, Referendum choice between May's deal and Remain, Revoke.

    What we will not accept is 'no deal' - because we love our country and its citizens too much to accept such a catastrophic outcome!!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,426

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Ben Gummer was never the Cabinet Secretary.
    He was Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General.

    (Have the image of him taking brown envelopes round Westminster to all MPs, with their weekly wages in....)
    Never heard 'brown envelope' jobs called 'wages' before.

    But the Cabinet Secretary is a distinct post.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    edited January 2019

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Stop saying "extend" to some endless point, Gummer, and have the balls to say you want to cancel Brexit. Yes, you will be deselected, but at least you can hold your head up high.
    Watching the Tories push away their traditional core support amongst educated middle class businesspeople is a sight to behold. Historians will watch and wonder.
    I really resent the fact that wanting to extend Article 50 is invariably interpreted as code for remain.

    I think I speak for the sane majority when I say we will accept a consensus on any of the following: May's deal, Norway, Referendum choice between May's deal and Remain, Revoke.

    What we will not accept is 'no deal' - because we love our country and its citizens too much to accept such a catastrophic outcome!!
    But you don't need an extension to decide whether to do the deal, Norway, referendum etc. You need an extension once that option has been picked, to prepare for a vote, or get the necessary legislation through and so on.

    A consensus is no more likely in 3 months than it is now, in which case it should be made to be now, whatever that consensus should be. It could well be a referendum, or remain, or a permanent customs union, that's fine. But MPs have discussed it all to death, why give them more time to do that?

    That's why extension is seen by some as code for remain. Because it seems to be intended to ease us into a remain position, when if that is needed, of BINO, or No deal, we can decide that now.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Stop saying "extend" to some endless point, Gummer, and have the balls to say you want to cancel Brexit. Yes, you will be deselected, but at least you can hold your head up high.
    Watching the Tories push away their traditional core support amongst educated middle class businesspeople is a sight to behold. Historians will watch and wonder.
    I really resent the fact that wanting to extend Article 50 is invariably interpreted as code for remain.

    I think I speak for the sane majority when I say we will accept a consensus on any of the following: May's deal, Norway, Referendum choice between May's deal and Remain, Revoke.

    What we will not accept is 'no deal' - because we love our country and its citizens too much to accept such a catastrophic outcome!!
    The point is that the envelope within the Tory party has shifted to such an extent that such a view would now be regarded as extreme.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Stop saying "extend" to some endless point, Gummer, and have the balls to say you want to cancel Brexit. Yes, you will be deselected, but at least you can hold your head up high.
    Watching the Tories push away their traditional core support amongst educated middle class businesspeople is a sight to behold. Historians will watch and wonder.
    We are in a world where genuflecting to the views of the stupid is the dominant culture. Will that change? I hope so, but I’m not optimistic.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,626
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Ben Gummer was never the Cabinet Secretary.
    He was Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General.

    (Have the image of him taking brown envelopes round Westminster to all MPs, with their weekly wages in....)
    Never heard 'brown envelope' jobs called 'wages' before.
    That's the Pay-off Master General......
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Mr. Divvie, Piers Morgan is a moron. However, Greer may be 'courteous' but he's also the author of this, as you may've seen:
    https://twitter.com/Ross_Greer/status/1088871720382091264

    Churchill was certainly a white supremacist by today's lights. Mass murder, meh, however he was certainly careless with the lives of brown people in his beloved empire.

    In any case if I felt strongly about it I'd marshal a decent rebuttal rather than that 'you'd be speaking German' pish, and a better insult than 'ginger turd'. Hard to believe that use of words & language is actually the basis of Morgan's career.
    If the EU is a German superstate, why can't more of us speak German?
    We've escaped assimilation into the Germanosphere by the skin of our teeth.
    We do speak a sort of German.
    Certainly a lot of Anglo Saxon spoken on PB with the additional asterisk letter used.

    The Evershed family name was Everesheved back in the 1200s and is Anglo Saxon for Wild Boer's Head.

    Ich bin ein Anglo Saxoner.
    The Irish side of the family got to know Coeur De Lion after being imprisonned with him in Austria.

    First hand experience of European hospitality
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    Charles said:

    Mr. Divvie, Piers Morgan is a moron. However, Greer may be 'courteous' but he's also the author of this, as you may've seen:
    https://twitter.com/Ross_Greer/status/1088871720382091264

    Churchill was certainly a white supremacist by today's lights. Mass murder, meh, however he was certainly careless with the lives of brown people in his beloved empire.

    In any case if I felt strongly about it I'd marshal a decent rebuttal rather than that 'you'd be speaking German' pish, and a better insult than 'ginger turd'. Hard to believe that use of words & language is actually the basis of Morgan's career.
    If the EU is a German superstate, why can't more of us speak German?
    We've escaped assimilation into the Germanosphere by the skin of our teeth.
    We do speak a sort of German.
    Certainly a lot of Anglo Saxon spoken on PB with the additional asterisk letter used.

    The Evershed family name was Everesheved back in the 1200s and is Anglo Saxon for Wild Boer's Head.

    Ich bin ein Anglo Saxoner.
    The Irish side of the family got to know Coeur De Lion after being imprisonned with him in Austria.

    First hand experience of European hospitality
    Do you have any further humblebrags that you’d like to share?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,199
    viewcode said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Just.Remain.Already. Why insult us with the extension nonsense? He can talk about the legislation needed for brexit all he wants, but that's a distraction if the brexit direction is not decided, we can request extensions if needed after we decide to deal or not deal.
    The extension of course would be to enable moves towards Norway Plus or Customs Union BINO or Remain v Deal EUref2.

    That is why if the Cooper amendment extending Article 50 and the Grieve amendment enabling Parliament to put forward its own Brexit proposals every Tuesday both pass Parliament will have taken control of the Brexit process
    Unfortunately, every outcome other than the existing deal and no-deal requires the consent of the EU.
    And Juncker has already said the EU would accept a renegotiation based on a permanent Customs Union at the weekend and the EU would also allow most likely a Remain v Deal referendum both of which outcomes would be acceptable to them, especially the former
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    Will it get through before Brexit

    Taliban talks: Draft framework for Afghanistan peace 'agreed'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-47028177
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    HYUFD said:

    viewcode said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Just.Remain.Already. Why insult us with the extension nonsense? He can talk about the legislation needed for brexit all he wants, but that's a distraction if the brexit direction is not decided, we can request extensions if needed after we decide to deal or not deal.
    The extension of course would be to enable moves towards Norway Plus or Customs Union BINO or Remain v Deal EUref2.

    That is why if the Cooper amendment extending Article 50 and the Grieve amendment enabling Parliament to put forward its own Brexit proposals every Tuesday both pass Parliament will have taken control of the Brexit process
    Unfortunately, every outcome other than the existing deal and no-deal requires the consent of the EU.
    And Juncker has already said the EU would accept a renegotiation based on a permanent Customs Union at the weekend and the EU would also allow most likely a Remain v Deal referendum both of which outcomes would be acceptable to them, especially the former
    Another reason why people think extension is code for remain. Personally I'd go for the latter, but talk of it seems to have dropped off in the past week or so.
  • kle4 said:


    That's why extension is seen by some as code for remain. Because it seems to be intended to ease us into a remain position, when if that is needed, of BINO, or No deal, we can decide that now.

    Nobody wants to make a decision. As long as the EU will agree to extend A50, Parliament can avoid ever deciding what sort of Brexit it wants.

    Displacement ad infinitum.

    This, incidentally, is why I think Labour won't support the Cooper amendment in the end, and why the EU would never agree to an extension anyway.

    Both Labour and the EU have a vested interest in forcing the UK to the cliff edge so the government is forced to make a decision.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    matt said:

    Charles said:

    Mr. Divvie, Piers Morgan is a moron. However, Greer may be 'courteous' but he's also the author of this, as you may've seen:
    https://twitter.com/Ross_Greer/status/1088871720382091264

    Churchill was certainly a white supremacist by today's lights. Mass murder, meh, however he was certainly careless with the lives of brown people in his beloved empire.

    In any case if I felt strongly about it I'd marshal a decent rebuttal rather than that 'you'd be speaking German' pish, and a better insult than 'ginger turd'. Hard to believe that use of words & language is actually the basis of Morgan's career.
    If the EU is a German superstate, why can't more of us speak German?
    We've escaped assimilation into the Germanosphere by the skin of our teeth.
    We do speak a sort of German.
    Certainly a lot of Anglo Saxon spoken on PB with the additional asterisk letter used.

    The Evershed family name was Everesheved back in the 1200s and is Anglo Saxon for Wild Boer's Head.

    Ich bin ein Anglo Saxoner.
    The Irish side of the family got to know Coeur De Lion after being imprisonned with him in Austria.

    First hand experience of European hospitality
    Do you have any further humblebrags that you’d like to share?
    There was something humble in that brag? Seems more like an explanabrag.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    I did like this turn of phrase

    Alas, as each side likes one of those outcomes, none has an incentive to back her until one is off the table. What we have instead is a game of chicken with multiple players, all with their pedals still pressed to the floor, driving on different paths towards a collision in the middle, and in which any swerve to avoid one crash simply puts Mrs May in the path of another vehicle.

    https://www.ft.com/content/3cbbcc18-22de-11e9-8ce6-5db4543da632?desktop=true&segmentId=d8d3e364-5197-20eb-17cf-2437841d178a#myft:notification:instant-email:content
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,298
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Stop saying "extend" to some endless point, Gummer, and have the balls to say you want to cancel Brexit. Yes, you will be deselected, but at least you can hold your head up high.
    Watching the Tories push away their traditional core support amongst educated middle class businesspeople is a sight to behold. Historians will watch and wonder.
    I really resent the fact that wanting to extend Article 50 is invariably interpreted as code for remain.

    I think I speak for the sane majority when I say we will accept a consensus on any of the following: May's deal, Norway, Referendum choice between May's deal and Remain, Revoke.

    What we will not accept is 'no deal' - because we love our country and its citizens too much to accept such a catastrophic outcome!!
    But you don't need an extension to decide whether to do the deal, Norway, referendum etc. You need an extension once that option has been picked, to prepare for a vote, or get the necessary legislation through and so on.

    A consensus is no more likely in 3 months than it is now, in which case it should be made to be now, whatever that consensus should be. It could well be a referendum, or remain, or a permanent customs union, that's fine. But MPs have discussed it all to death, why give them more time to do that?

    That's why extension is seen by some as code for remain. Because it seems to be intended to ease us into a remain position, when if that is needed, of BINO, or No deal, we can decide that now.
    We need new MPs and/or a new leader. Three months gives us time for that to happen, although you're quite right that May doesn't accept that logic.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    MPs says May got a cheer turning against Boris Johnson in meeting
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,239

    Guardian reporting that John Trckett has said that Cooper's amendment does not respect the vote and most likely the party will allow a free vote

    Do you want to split the Labour Party? Because that's how you split the Labour Party.

    No, I take that back. Labour politicians' tribal loyalty is such that Corbyn could announce the slaughtering of the first-born and the centrists would tut, tweet in exasperation, and then do precisely nothing.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,239
    IanB2 said:

    MPs says May got a cheer turning against Boris Johnson in meeting

    Yes, well done Theresa. Just as Boris is showing signs of coming round to your deal, you take the opportunity to humiliate him in front of all his fellow Conservative MPs. Very smart, S-M-R-T.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Stop saying "extend" to some endless point, Gummer, and have the balls to say you want to cancel Brexit. Yes, you will be deselected, but at least you can hold your head up high.
    Watching the Tories push away their traditional core support amongst educated middle class businesspeople is a sight to behold. Historians will watch and wonder.
    I really resent the fact that wanting to extend Article 50 is invariably interpreted as code for remain.

    I think I speak for the sane majority when I say we will accept a consensus on any of the following: May's deal, Norway, Referendum choice between May's deal and Remain, Revoke.

    What we will not accept is 'no deal' - because we love our country and its citizens too much to accept such a catastrophic outcome!!
    But you don't need an extension to decide whether to do the deal, Norway, referendum etc. You need an extension once that option has been picked, to prepare for a vote, or get the necessary legislation through and so on.

    A consensus is no more likely in 3 months than it is now, in which case it should be made to be now, whatever that consensus should be. It could well be a referendum, or remain, or a permanent customs union, that's fine. But MPs have discussed it all to death, why give them more time to do that?

    That's why extension is seen by some as code for remain. Because it seems to be intended to ease us into a remain position, when if that is needed, of BINO, or No deal, we can decide that now.
    I don't really understand this line of reasoning. May has been incredibly obstructionist to any possibility except her own deal, so it's perfectly possible that once it's finally defeated again tomorrow progress can start on coalescing around a plan B. Given how slow parliament moves, 2 months seems like a very tight timescale for that, so it makes sense to move that deadline. Plus for somebody who thinks No Deal is way worse than any other option, taking it off the table (to the extent that's possible) is a goal unto itself, and one that's got much broader support than any specific final outcome, so why not focus on it?

    Even if you're certain extra time won't help pick an outcome, how will it "help ease us into a remain position"? Surely the same logic that says no other option can gain ground in post-March extra time says the same thing about Remain?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871

    IanB2 said:

    MPs says May got a cheer turning against Boris Johnson in meeting

    Yes, well done Theresa. Just as Boris is showing signs of coming round to your deal, you take the opportunity to humiliate him in front of all his fellow Conservative MPs. Very smart, S-M-R-T.
    Nevertheless good to see that Boris is still very unpopular within the PCP
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Stop saying "extend" to some endless point, Gummer, and have the balls to say you want to cancel Brexit. Yes, you will be deselected, but at least you can hold your head up high.
    Watching the Tories push away their traditional core support amongst educated middle class businesspeople is a sight to behold. Historians will watch and wonder.
    I really resent the fact that wanting to extend Article 50 is invariably interpreted as code for remain.

    I think I s a catastrophic outcome!!
    But you don't need an extension to decide whether to do the deal, Norway, referendum etc. You need an extension once that option has been picked, to prepare for a vote, or get the necessary legislation through and so on.

    A consensus is no more likely in 3 months than it is now, in which case it should be made to be now, whatever that consensus should be. It could well be a referendum, or remain, or a permanent customs union, that's fine. But MPs have discussed it all to death, why give them more time to do that?

    That's why extension is seen by some as code for remain. Because it seems to be intended to ease us into a remain position, when if that is needed, of BINO, or No deal, we can decide that now.
    I don't really understand this line of reasoning. May has been incredibly obstructionist to any possibility except her own deal, so it's perfectly possible that once it's finally defeated again tomorrow progress can start on coalescing around a plan B. Given how slow parliament moves, 2 months seems like a very tight timescale for that, so it makes sense to move that deadline. Plus for somebody who thinks No Deal is way worse than any other option, taking it off the table (to the extent that's possible) is a goal unto itself, and one that's got much broader support than any specific final outcome, so why not focus on it?

    Even if you're certain extra time won't help pick an outcome, how will it "help ease us into a remain position"? Surely the same logic that says no other option can gain ground in post-March extra time says the same thing about Remain?
    It's the one option that does better the more time there is for chaos on the other options. But in fairness you are right it doesn't make remain certain, that's the 'revoke and we'll sort brexit out later, we promise' option.
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,543

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Ben Gummer was never the Cabinet Secretary.
    He was Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General.

    (Have the image of him taking brown envelopes round Westminster to all MPs, with their weekly wages in....)
    So Nick Clegg's gopher?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,505

    IanB2 said:

    Those of us who wish the U.K. to leave the EU and voted accordingly look likely to be disappointed. Too many MPs are content to be paid for simply doing as Brussels tells them and are currently seeking to seize hold of parliamentary business, for which they have no electoral mandate, to stick two fingers up to the electorate. The second is that Brexit has shown the entire British political class and civil service to be unfit for the task of governing Britain. For Leave, it means they have virtually no MPs in parliament capable of articulating what Brexit should look like. Remain supporting MPs don’t have that problem; Brussels simply tells them what to do.

    May is not going to resign so it’s hard to see her leaving until she is forced out by a vote of no confidence. The Tories will support her against Corbyn so she’s safe for about another year - another year in which absolutely nothing gets done but vast quantities of hot air get expended.

    You seem to have missed the Elephant In The Room - inaction leads to No Deal and you get your precious Brexit.
    Not really, if you read and understood my comment. If MPs are successful in grabbing control of the parliamentary agenda, which I referred to up front, there won’t be a Brexit.
    I took the implication of your post to be that nothing will happen. As you say, MPs are deadlocked and the Maybot's programming does not allow her to make decisions and the Tories have made her invulnerable from deselection until the end of 2019.

    No Deal looks nailed on (as they say around this parish)
    I'm betting on No Deal as much as personal insurance as for a political bet.

    At 6/1 on Betfair it's obvious value.
    Worth reading the small print to that bet, which only pays off for a departure with no deal at end March. If there is any delay or extension then the bet fails, even if we eventually leave with no deal. Given that proviso I think the 6/1 is fair, not value

    Edit/ and a lot less valuable as insurance against being shafted by no deal.
    Thanks. Useful warning.
    Still interested in the definition of “a deal” too. Because I suspect there’s a much slimmer “open in case of emergency” envelope in Barnier’s desk which basically says “OK, OK, we get it. How about we sort the planes and meds and stuff for 6 months?”. Is *that* a deal?

    I'd have thought it's a package that's both ratified by the UK Parliament and the EU institutions under A50, but willing to be proved wrong on this.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Chris said:

    Mr. Divvie, Piers Morgan is a moron. However, Greer may be 'courteous' but he's also the author of this, as you may've seen:
    https://twitter.com/Ross_Greer/status/1088871720382091264

    Churchill was certainly a white supremacist by today's lights. Mass murder, meh, however he was certainly careless with the lives of brown people in his beloved empire.

    In any case if I felt strongly about it I'd marshal a decent rebuttal rather than that 'you'd be speaking German' pish, and a better insult than 'ginger turd'. Hard to believe that use of words & language is actually the basis of Morgan's career.
    If the EU is a German superstate, why can't more of us speak German?
    We've escaped assimilation into the Germanosphere by the skin of our teeth.
    We do speak a sort of German.
    Certainly a lot of Anglo Saxon spoken on PB with the additional asterisk letter used.

    It's quite interesting that the word f*ck, though often assumed to be Anglo-Saxon, isn't actually attested before late medieval times.

    It seems the earliest unequivocal use of the word with a sexual connotation is in a surname - Roger Fuckebythenavele is recorded in Chester in 1310 and 1311:
    https://web.archive.org/web/20151101114206/http://new.spectator.co.uk/2015/09/the-remarkable-discovery-of-roger-fuckebythenavele/
    You mean “filed under carnal knowledge” isn’t actually true...

    I am so disappointed!
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,505

    Churchill may have been a white supremacist and mass murderer, but he was OUR white supremacist and mass murderer.

    If Churchill was all of those things, what was Hitler?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,505

    Lillico is an idiot, but as it happens, he's stopped-clock right about this. Remain is not a bad outcome for the ERG and the DUP at all.

    If May cancels Brexit, the DUP will have a lucky escape and the ERG will have a party grassroots seething with rage from a very public betrayal, and a freshly energized bully pulpit from which to denounce traitors and generally render the Tories ungovernable for perhaps decades to come.

    Really they'd be delighted with that.

    I'm done with the ERG.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,626
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    MPs says May got a cheer turning against Boris Johnson in meeting

    Yes, well done Theresa. Just as Boris is showing signs of coming round to your deal, you take the opportunity to humiliate him in front of all his fellow Conservative MPs. Very smart, S-M-R-T.
    Nevertheless good to see that Boris is still very unpopular within the PCP
    It's the only reason she's still in the job....

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,626

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Former Cabinet Secretary Ben Gummer 'Threat to leave the EU with No Deal is pie in the sky, so extend Article 50'

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/threat-to-leave-eu-with-no-deal-is-pie-in-the-sky-so-extend-article-50-a4050536.html

    Ben Gummer was never the Cabinet Secretary.
    He was Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General.

    (Have the image of him taking brown envelopes round Westminster to all MPs, with their weekly wages in....)
    So Nick Clegg's gopher?
    Isn't that the guy with Ye Book of Faces?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,298

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    MPs says May got a cheer turning against Boris Johnson in meeting

    Yes, well done Theresa. Just as Boris is showing signs of coming round to your deal, you take the opportunity to humiliate him in front of all his fellow Conservative MPs. Very smart, S-M-R-T.
    Nevertheless good to see that Boris is still very unpopular within the PCP
    It's the only reason she's still in the job....

    Do you still think May's deal without a backstop could pass? Seems like Brady amendment will fail.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    AndyJS said:

    "Brexit: High risk of UK crashing out - EU negotiator

    There is a high risk of the UK crashing out of the EU without a deal by accident, the EU's deputy chief negotiator Sabine Weyand has said.
    She said there was "full ownership of what was agreed" in the EU, but "no ownership" of it in the UK Parliament."


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47024450

    They keep saying it was agreed

    May - AIUI - has no authority to agree a deal without approval from Parliament

    Therefore it is not agreed
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    Next meaningful vote is on the 13th February

    No election in that case before March 21st!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,257

    Labour politicians' tribal loyalty is such that Corbyn could announce the slaughtering of the first-born and the centrists would tut, tweet in exasperation, and then do precisely nothing.
    You talk as if party discipline is a bad thing. It is in fact essential. A Corbyn government will face much opposition. I doubt it will be able to do the things it wants to do. Without a well behaved parliamentary party it will have no chance at all.
  • FA cup

    Chelsea v Man Utd

    If winner draws City in next round, the winner of that then turns this years FA cup into the most boring one for years
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,626
    justin124 said:

    Next meaningful vote is on the 13th February

    No election in that case before March 21st!
    Make it the 4th April then.

    With no Brexit decision by MPs prior to dissolution.

    We can Hard No Deal Brexit during the campaign. What could possibly go wrong?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    Next meaningful vote is on the 13th February

    We can say this for Mrs May: she doesn't like to be rushed.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,742
    justin124 said:

    Next meaningful vote is on the 13th February

    No election in that case before March 21st!
    March 28th election would be cutting it a little fine!

    In other news, Bernie looks like a laugh...

    https://twitter.com/TopRopeTravis/status/1089909214213038081?s=19
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,732
    Charles said:

    AndyJS said:

    "Brexit: High risk of UK crashing out - EU negotiator

    There is a high risk of the UK crashing out of the EU without a deal by accident, the EU's deputy chief negotiator Sabine Weyand has said.
    She said there was "full ownership of what was agreed" in the EU, but "no ownership" of it in the UK Parliament."


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47024450

    They keep saying it was agreed

    May - AIUI - has no authority to agree a deal without approval from Parliament

    Therefore it is not agreed
    Crown in parliament, innit.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,134
    edited January 2019
    Alistair said:
    Columnist Isabel Hardman said it was important to acknowledge where great figures got things wrong, but she objected to the tone of Ross Greer's tweet.

    She said: "I think this tweet is an example of where our political discourse is going which is a sort of 'Miley Cyrus-isation' of politics where everyone is trying to get attention, including with little clappy hands in the tweet to sort of say 'look at me' - and I don't think that's particularly helpful.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-47028246

    And yet because it he is going to be on national telly again....
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,414

    FA cup

    Chelsea v Man Utd

    If winner draws City in next round, the winner of that then turns this years FA cup into the most boring one for years

    Au contraire. Will be nice to see someone, anyone different in the final. And the chances of a Wembley semi are opening up for everyone who can avoid those three. I make that interesting.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,742
    kinabalu said:

    Labour politicians' tribal loyalty is such that Corbyn could announce the slaughtering of the first-born and the centrists would tut, tweet in exasperation, and then do precisely nothing.
    You talk as if party discipline is a bad thing. It is in fact essential. A Corbyn government will face much opposition. I doubt it will be able to do the things it wants to do. Without a well behaved parliamentary party it will have no chance at all.
    It would have to be a complete disintegration of the Tories and SNP for Jezza to have a working majority to overule his sensible centrists, so chill and enjoy the ride.
  • kinabalu said:

    Labour politicians' tribal loyalty is such that Corbyn could announce the slaughtering of the first-born and the centrists would tut, tweet in exasperation, and then do precisely nothing.
    You talk as if party discipline is a bad thing. It is in fact essential. A Corbyn government will face much opposition. I doubt it will be able to do the things it wants to do. Without a well behaved parliamentary party it will have no chance at all.
    Lol! And Jeremy's voting record in support of his Party's leadership whilst he was a backbencher was...…?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,505

    Alistair said:
    Columnist Isabel Hardman said it was important to acknowledge where great figures got things wrong, but she objected to the tone of Ross Greer's tweet.

    She said: "I think this tweet is an example of where our political discourse is going which is a sort of 'Miley Cyrus-isation' of politics where everyone is trying to get attention, including with little clappy hands in the tweet to sort of say 'look at me' - and I don't think that's particularly helpful.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-47028246

    And yet because it he is going to be on national telly again....
    That's exactly it.

    It's working, though, isn't it? He's got himself noticed and we're all talking about him, including me.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    dixiedean said:

    FA cup

    Chelsea v Man Utd

    If winner draws City in next round, the winner of that then turns this years FA cup into the most boring one for years

    Au contraire. Will be nice to see someone, anyone different in the final. And the chances of a Wembley semi are opening up for everyone who can avoid those three. I make that interesting.
    Agreed. I think it's a really interesting competition this season.
  • Alistair said:
    Columnist Isabel Hardman said it was important to acknowledge where great figures got things wrong, but she objected to the tone of Ross Greer's tweet.

    She said: "I think this tweet is an example of where our political discourse is going which is a sort of 'Miley Cyrus-isation' of politics where everyone is trying to get attention, including with little clappy hands in the tweet to sort of say 'look at me' - and I don't think that's particularly helpful.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-47028246

    And yet because it he is going to be on national telly again....
    That's exactly it.

    It's working, though, isn't it? He's got himself noticed and we're all talking about him, including me.
    Katie Hopkins made a career out of it...
  • Alistair said:
    Columnist Isabel Hardman said it was important to acknowledge where great figures got things wrong, but she objected to the tone of Ross Greer's tweet.

    She said: "I think this tweet is an example of where our political discourse is going which is a sort of 'Miley Cyrus-isation' of politics where everyone is trying to get attention, including with little clappy hands in the tweet to sort of say 'look at me' - and I don't think that's particularly helpful.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-47028246

    And yet because it he is going to be on national telly again....
    That's exactly it.

    It's working, though, isn't it? He's got himself noticed and we're all talking about him, including me.
    Katie Hopkins made a career out of it...
    And then got herself into bankruptcy?
This discussion has been closed.