Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New YouGov polling on party Brexit awareness highlights the ch

124

Comments

  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    Still no winner of the Euromillions tonight. Must be clsoe to £200m on Friday.

    The jackpot reached its €190m ceiling several draws ago. More money has been distributed on lower tiers of prizes instead.
  • rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,504
    Scott_P said:

    This is it.

    Take it or leave it.

    Do or die.

    https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1179150112712515589

    Scott_P said:

    This is it.

    Take it or leave it.

    Do or die.

    https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1179150112712515589

    I’m lost. I thought it was Bunter who wanted the time limit, not the EU?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    Scott_P said:
    "...in 2018 the approval rating of the Conservative Party falls by 400%. The once-great Province of Northern Ireland becomes the one maximum-security customs area for the whole country. A fifty-foot customs barrier is erected along the Foyle estuary, out into the Atlantic and Irish Sea, then back along the Republic border. The HMRC, like an army, are encamped along the border. There are no Gardai, just Ulstermen and the worlds they create. The rules are simple: once goods go in, they don't come out..."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBWC2p_T738
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    Scott_P said:
    Love the idea of Philip Schofield as acting PM.

    Though given how ragtag and absurd the Rabble Alliance are becoming its more likely to become Rylan Clark-Neal instead.
    Instead of Philip Schofield we could have Edd the Duck or Gordon the Gopher.
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,337
    edited October 2019

    GIN1138 said:

    I'm wondering whether Downing St have found some way for the PM to take us out of the EU with No Deal without having to wait until 31st October?
    If he had a majority for it he could simply amend Exit Day in the Withdrawal Act.
    A vote which would see every opposition MP, Tory exiles and probably a few extra, troop through the lobby against it. The first Miller court victory would really come into its own - and continues the long saga of parliament being clear what it’s against, without having a scooby what it’s *for*
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Nigelb said:

    Scott_P said:
    Love the idea of Philip Schofield as acting PM.

    Though given how ragtag and absurd the Rabble Alliance are becoming its more likely to become Rylan Clark-Neal instead.
    Holly Willoughby would do me fine.
    When you say “do me”......?
    I’m fairly sure she wouldn’t.

    She needs Anabobazina more than Anabobazina needs her. She will agree to his request if she's convinced that Anabobazina is willing to walk away.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,239

    Scott_P said:
    Love the idea of Philip Schofield as acting PM.

    Though given how ragtag and absurd the Rabble Alliance are becoming its more likely to become Rylan Clark-Neal instead.
    Holly Willoughby would do me fine.
    In your dreams...
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,504
    viewcode said:

    Scott_P said:
    "...in 2018 the approval rating of the Conservative Party falls by 400%. The once-great Province of Northern Ireland becomes the one maximum-security customs area for the whole country. A fifty-foot customs barrier is erected along the Foyle estuary, out into the Atlantic and Irish Sea, then back along the Republic border. The HMRC, like an army, are encamped along the border. There are no Gardai, just Ulstermen and the worlds they create. The rules are simple: once goods go in, they don't come out..."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBWC2p_T738
    Clever
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Perhaps Bozo has put forward something so shocking to them that they’ll accept a time limit to the original backstop as a relief .

  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,504
    AndyJS said:

    Scott_P said:
    Love the idea of Philip Schofield as acting PM.

    Though given how ragtag and absurd the Rabble Alliance are becoming its more likely to become Rylan Clark-Neal instead.
    Instead of Philip Schofield we could have Edd the Duck or Gordon the Gopher.

    Gordon is too divisive a figure.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited October 2019
    tyson said:

    Scott_P said:
    Love the idea of Philip Schofield as acting PM.

    Though given how ragtag and absurd the Rabble Alliance are becoming its more likely to become Rylan Clark-Neal instead.
    Comrade...the ragtag alliance have a Parliamentary majority and have control..

    Whatever Boris Johnson says means nowt.... that sociopathic piece of shit doesn't deserve anything else..his response with the Cox question, a young female who was horrifically murdered.....says it all about the man doesn't it?
    They don't have "control", all they can agree is negatives. They don't want Brexit, they don't want a deal, they don't want no deal, they don't want an exit on 31/10, they don't want an election, they don't want a VONC, they don't want any of their rivals within the "alliance" becoming PM.

    In order to take control you need to decide what you do want, not what you don't. Perhaps I was unfair on Rylan, their new PM will be . . . Andy Pipkin from Little Britain just sitting there going "I don't like it"
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    "Greggs stockpiles pork for sausage rolls ahead of Brexit"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49890034

    Those sausage rolls could be well-dodgy by 2020.

    I wonder if the supermarkets are stocking up on gammon.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It's terrible because a Customs border trashes much of the border economy.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,912
    edited October 2019

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Absolutely sweet F.A. for the UK. The only explanation that makes any sense is that Boris is pursuing this approach to keep his ERG backers onside. So it's entirely to benefit his political career, all the disruption it may cause, and the money and jobs it may cost, are of a secondary and distant concern to Boris.

    We're being governed by a man who only thinks of himself, just like the USA is currently.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons
    Entirely in line with his uncle being his aunt if only she had balls.

  • HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons
    Why didn't you vote for Leave in 2016? There must have been a reason.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,504
    Noo said:

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_P said:
    Love the idea of Philip Schofield as acting PM.

    Though given how ragtag and absurd the Rabble Alliance are becoming its more likely to become Rylan Clark-Neal instead.
    Holly Willoughby would do me fine.
    When you say “do me”......?
    I’m fairly sure she wouldn’t.

    She needs Anabobazina more than Anabobazina needs her. She will agree to his request if she's convinced that Anabobazina is willing to walk away.
    😆it’s the walking away bit I might struggle with.
  • StreeterStreeter Posts: 684
    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons
    We've moved on chap. That line is past its sell-by date.
  • AndyJS said:

    Scott_P said:
    Love the idea of Philip Schofield as acting PM.

    Though given how ragtag and absurd the Rabble Alliance are becoming its more likely to become Rylan Clark-Neal instead.
    Instead of Philip Schofield we could have Edd the Duck or Gordon the Gopher.
    Larry the Loafer!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f64H3hDa93Y
  • HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293
    edited October 2019
    Scott_P said:
    Powell seemed very upset and downbeat.

    Wonder if there might be something in this that all sides can work with? ;)
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Scott_P said:
    I stand ready to serve should an unknown figurehead be required.
  • Scott_P said:

    This is it.

    Take it or leave it.

    Do or die.

    https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1179150112712515589

    I’m lost. I thought it was Bunter who wanted the time limit, not the EU?
    No he doesn't want a time limit, he wants total abolition of the backstop.

    He's moving the Overton Window and setting up a time limit as a compromise on both side, rather than the EU caving to the UK.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    AndyJS said:

    Scott_P said:
    Love the idea of Philip Schofield as acting PM.

    Though given how ragtag and absurd the Rabble Alliance are becoming its more likely to become Rylan Clark-Neal instead.
    Instead of Philip Schofield we could have Edd the Duck or Gordon the Gopher.
    We might end up with Fungus the Goveyman
  • ozymandiasozymandias Posts: 1,503
    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Powell seemed very upset and downbeat.

    Wonder if there might be something in this that all sides can work with? ;)
    Don’t ruin the “everything is shit” vibe.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,504

    Scott_P said:
    Love the idea of Philip Schofield as acting PM.

    Though given how ragtag and absurd the Rabble Alliance are becoming its more likely to become Rylan Clark-Neal instead.
    Holly Willoughby would do me fine.
    In your dreams...

    Maybe if I accuse her of being an avaricious gold-digger, verbally abuse her in public for months on end, attack every value she holds dear, and impose a hard border between her bathroom and wardrobe, she’ll miraculously come around to giving me what I want at Halloween.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    Scott_P said:

    This is it.

    Take it or leave it.

    Do or die.

    https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1179150112712515589

    I’m lost. I thought it was Bunter who wanted the time limit, not the EU?
    No he doesn't want a time limit, he wants total abolition of the backstop.

    He's moving the Overton Window and setting up a time limit as a compromise on both side, rather than the EU caving to the UK.
    That line about the Overton Window doesn't get any more convincing when you repeat it
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151
    Streeter said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons
    We've moved on chap. That line is past its sell-by date.
    It isn't it Remains as true now as ever
  • glw said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Absolutely sweet F.A. for the UK. The only explanation that makes any sense is that Boris is pursuing this approach to keep his ERG backers onside. So it's entirely to benefit his political career, all the disruption it may cause, and the money and jobs it may cost, are of a secondary and distant concern to Boris.

    We're being governed by a man who only thinks of himself, just like the USA is currently.

    Yep - it’s par for the course for Johnson. He has no interest in anything or anyone but himself. It will not end well.

  • glwglw Posts: 9,912

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    I'm fairly sure he doesn't think it benefits the UK, but he's painted himself into a corner and now has to appease lunatics like Mark Francois.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Scott_P said:
    Love the idea of Philip Schofield as acting PM.

    Though given how ragtag and absurd the Rabble Alliance are becoming its more likely to become Rylan Clark-Neal instead.
    Holly Willoughby would do me fine.
    In your dreams...

    Maybe if I accuse her of being an avaricious gold-digger, verbally abuse her in public for months on end, attack every value she holds dear, and impose a hard border between her bathroom and wardrobe, she’ll miraculously come around to giving me what I want at Halloween.
    Oh god. Brexit is negging. Why didn't I see it before? I saw the incel angle but then everybody else did.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal

    OK. So we blame the EU for No Deal. Then what? UK citizens and businesses will be less free, the government will have less control. What’s the plan to deal with this?

  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    glw said:


    I'm fairly sure he doesn't think it benefits the UK, but he's painted himself into a corner and now has to appease lunatics like Mark Francois.

    He's miles away from a majority though - what difference does it make whether they support him or not?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    The problem is the offer is so complicated with two borders .

    A bureaucratic nightmare , how on earth are small businesses in particular going to cope with this .

    And this means a hard border re customs which trashes promises made in the 2017 agreement .

    And the way the offer is being delivered with a lot of showboating at the conference isn’t going to go down well with the EU.

    Bozo is more interested in looking like the tough guy than getting a deal .
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    edited October 2019

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal

    OK. So we blame the EU for No Deal. Then what? UK citizens and businesses will be less free, the government will have less control. What’s the plan to deal with this?

    Easy. Find more scapegoats.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal

    OK. So we blame the EU for No Deal. Then what? UK citizens and businesses will be less free, the government will have less control. What’s the plan to deal with this?

    4 letters: JFDI.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,912
    Andrew said:

    glw said:


    I'm fairly sure he doesn't think it benefits the UK, but he's painted himself into a corner and now has to appease lunatics like Mark Francois.

    He's miles away from a majority though - what difference does it make whether they support him or not?
    If they don't support him Brosi won't even remain leader for long, as they will get rid of him and appoint someone even more Brexity.
  • "Greggs stockpiles pork for sausage rolls ahead of Brexit"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49890034

    Those sausage rolls could be well-dodgy by 2020.

    What about the vegan ones?
    0% pork :)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal

    OK. So we blame the EU for No Deal. Then what? UK citizens and businesses will be less free, the government will have less control. What’s the plan to deal with this?

    We will have more control, able to decide our own trade and immigration policy and more voters now back No Deal over further extension (though if Boris got a Tory majority he would likely go for a NI only backstop)

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1177322931967467520?s=20
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131

    viewcode said:

    Scott_P said:
    "...in 2018 the approval rating of the Conservative Party falls by 400%. The once-great Province of Northern Ireland becomes the one maximum-security customs area for the whole country. A fifty-foot customs barrier is erected along the Foyle estuary, out into the Atlantic and Irish Sea, then back along the Republic border. The HMRC, like an army, are encamped along the border. There are no Gardai, just Ulstermen and the worlds they create. The rules are simple: once goods go in, they don't come out..."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBWC2p_T738
    Clever
    Thank you
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    The sheer hilarity of the outrage over what is known of the UK offer is illuminating.
    Why do you imagine Bloomberg were briefed about time limited backstops being discussed by Europe? And then tonight it transpires it's part if the UK offer, the time is halfway between the UK and EU start points and the EU were briefed yesterday so knew this before leaking the Bloomberg story today. Clearly theres a feeling something can be sorted. And its making the cancel Brexit types nervous
  • Scott_P said:
    Scott_P said:
    Yes, looks like Dom wrote this on the back of an envelope in the full knowledge that it would fail. I don't think the mechanics of Brexit really interest him any more. It's all about Boris's career now. So, as ever, if the next GE can be framed as St Boris the Brexit martyr versus perfidious parliament then Boris is on a winner. I think that's all that matters to them.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,912
    nico67 said:

    The problem is the offer is so complicated with two borders .

    A bureaucratic nightmare , how on earth are small businesses in particular going to cope with this .

    And this means a hard border re customs which trashes promises made in the 2017 agreement .

    And the way the offer is being delivered with a lot of showboating at the conference isn’t going to go down well with the EU.

    Bozo is more interested in looking like the tough guy than getting a deal .

    It's the UK's version of Trump's wall. It makes no bloody sense and Mexico isn't paying for it, but Trump will build it (or at least replace some of what already exists) because he made the promise, staking his Presidency on it, and so it has to be delivered no matter what.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,236

    Scott_P said:

    This is it.

    Take it or leave it.

    Do or die.

    https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1179150112712515589

    I’m lost. I thought it was Bunter who wanted the time limit, not the EU?
    No he doesn't want a time limit, he wants total abolition of the backstop.

    He's moving the Overton Window and setting up a time limit as a compromise on both side, rather than the EU caving to the UK.
    I'm not sure this is an example of the Overton Window.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v-hzc6blGI
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992

    Scott_P said:
    Scott_P said:
    Yes, looks like Dom wrote this on the back of an envelope in the full knowledge that it would fail. I don't think the mechanics of Brexit really interest him any more. It's all about Boris's career now. So, as ever, if the next GE can be framed as St Boris the Brexit martyr versus perfidious parliament then Boris is on a winner. I think that's all that matters to them.
    I think Dom wants to leave the EU. He is either a visionary and will do it or, the other side of the coin, is deluded and will fail.

    I can't see Boris surviving either scenario.
  • DruttDrutt Posts: 1,124
    Noo said:

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_P said:
    Love the idea of Philip Schofield as acting PM.

    Though given how ragtag and absurd the Rabble Alliance are becoming its more likely to become Rylan Clark-Neal instead.
    Holly Willoughby would do me fine.
    When you say “do me”......?
    I’m fairly sure she wouldn’t.

    She needs Anabobazina more than Anabobazina needs her. She will agree to his request if she's convinced that Anabobazina is willing to walk away.
    For max bants Byronic should now reveal the he is Holly Willoughby.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293

    The sheer hilarity of the outrage over what is known of the UK offer is illuminating.
    Why do you imagine Bloomberg were briefed about time limited backstops being discussed by Europe? And then tonight it transpires it's part if the UK offer, the time is halfway between the UK and EU start points and the EU were briefed yesterday so knew this before leaking the Bloomberg story today. Clearly theres a feeling something can be sorted. And its making the cancel Brexit types nervous

    Yep. Just need Farage and Baker to start complaining and all the right people will be up in arms. ;)
  • glwglw Posts: 9,912
    TOPPING said:

    I think Dom wants to leave the EU. He is either a visionary and will do it or, the other side of the coin, is deluded and will fail.

    I can't see Boris surviving either scenario.

    Yes I think he would be quite happy to be the man who forced Brexit through, even if it costs Boris his job and the Tory Party an election victory as a consequence.
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    HYUFD said:


    3 groups identified, the first led by Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab and Cummings says Boris must commit to deliver Brexit on 31st October even at the cost of losing a VONC.

    The second group led by Justice Secretary Robert Buckland says the PM must accept the Benn Law and extend. A third group, supposedly 'pragmatists' say Boris can survive an extension having done everything to avoid it

    Even a cursory assessment of the options leads to only one as a realistic avenue.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,724
    glw said:

    nico67 said:

    The problem is the offer is so complicated with two borders .

    A bureaucratic nightmare , how on earth are small businesses in particular going to cope with this .

    And this means a hard border re customs which trashes promises made in the 2017 agreement .

    And the way the offer is being delivered with a lot of showboating at the conference isn’t going to go down well with the EU.

    Bozo is more interested in looking like the tough guy than getting a deal .

    It's the UK's version of Trump's wall. It makes no bloody sense and Mexico isn't paying for it, but Trump will build it (or at least replace some of what already exists) because he made the promise, staking his Presidency on it, and so it has to be delivered no matter what.
    The proposal is not meant for the EU, it is for the audience tommorow.
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,337
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal
    My view for some time has been that the government which delivers a (any) shit Brexit will own it as far as UK voters are concerned. “It’s the EU’s fault” may get you a few weeks or months, but eventually, the newly-sovereign UK govt would have to come up with the jobs, growth and short passport queues in Mallorca that the GB public desire.

    Having already developed that view under May, when she had maintained that No Deal was sub-optimal, the chances of Boris successfully blaming “our friends and partners” after virtually championing No Deal would be an impressive victory for even his snake oil vending skills :)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,236
    As an aside, I think if Boris Johnson had gone for the "time limited backstop" idea from the start, I think it would probably have passed the Houses of Parliament. It would have been enough of May's deal for all those who backed it to continue to do so. And it would have been enough to bring the ERG into line.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, I think if Boris Johnson had gone for the "time limited backstop" idea from the start, I think it would probably have passed the Houses of Parliament. It would have been enough of May's deal for all those who backed it to continue to do so. And it would have been enough to bring the ERG into line.

    But again would likely have been rejected by the EU. For very sensible reasons.

    You are becoming a tadge WA with no backstop is the answer HYUFD-ish.

    There is another counterparty to the negotiations.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,912
    Foxy said:

    glw said:

    nico67 said:

    The problem is the offer is so complicated with two borders .

    A bureaucratic nightmare , how on earth are small businesses in particular going to cope with this .

    And this means a hard border re customs which trashes promises made in the 2017 agreement .

    And the way the offer is being delivered with a lot of showboating at the conference isn’t going to go down well with the EU.

    Bozo is more interested in looking like the tough guy than getting a deal .

    It's the UK's version of Trump's wall. It makes no bloody sense and Mexico isn't paying for it, but Trump will build it (or at least replace some of what already exists) because he made the promise, staking his Presidency on it, and so it has to be delivered no matter what.
    The proposal is not meant for the EU, it is for the audience tommorow.
    I didn't mean the proposal itself, I mean the No Deal Brexit it delivers as a consequence of being unacceptable to the EU.

    No Deal Brexit is our Trump's wall. Essentially nobody who isn't an idiot thinks it's a good idea, but we have to do it because the Leader has staked his Leadership on it being delivered no matter what the consequences are.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal

    OK. So we blame the EU for No Deal. Then what? UK citizens and businesses will be less free, the government will have less control. What’s the plan to deal with this?

    We will have more control, able to decide our own trade and immigration policy and more voters now back No Deal over further extension (though if Boris got a Tory majority he would likely go for a NI only backstop)

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1177322931967467520?s=20

    No Deal means no FTA with the EU or the US. That’s well over 50% of our export markets. As a matter of objective fact it also leaves British citizens and businesses less free than they are now, while the government will be dependent on the goodwill of others in all sorts of areas we currently take totally for granted. While I can see this might help Tory FC win an election, I still don’t get how it benefits the UK. It’s pretty clear you don’t either!!

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal
    My view for some time has been that the government which delivers a (any) shit Brexit will own it as far as UK voters are concerned. “It’s the EU’s fault” may get you a few weeks or months, but eventually, the newly-sovereign UK govt would have to come up with the jobs, growth and short passport queues in Mallorca that the GB public desire.

    Having already developed that view under May, when she had maintained that No Deal was sub-optimal, the chances of Boris successfully blaming “our friends and partners” after virtually championing No Deal would be an impressive victory for even his snake oil vending skills :)
    Most voters now want No Deal over No Brexit with gold standard Survation, Boris just represents their view

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1177322931967467520?s=20
  • IanB2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    ... and the EU will reject it anyway because it breaks their red lines. A backstop that can be unilaterally cancelled is not a backstop.
    So apart from Remainers, Labour leavers, Tory headbanger leavers, and the EU, everybody’s happy?

    What tremendous progress Bozo has made.
    LOL!
  • glwglw Posts: 9,912

    Having already developed that view under May, when she had maintained that No Deal was sub-optimal, the chances of Boris successfully blaming “our friends and partners” after virtually championing No Deal would be an impressive victory for even his snake oil vending skills :)

    How we can go "it's their fault" when we could instead choose to revoke/referendum/negotiate/pass the WA is beyond me. If we No Deal Brexit it's down to the government and nobody else.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal

    OK. So we blame the EU for No Deal. Then what? UK citizens and businesses will be less free, the government will have less control. What’s the plan to deal with this?

    We will have more control, able to decide our own trade and immigration policy and more voters now back No Deal over further extension (though if Boris got a Tory majority he would likely go for a NI only backstop)

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1177322931967467520?s=20

    No Deal means no FTA with the EU or the US. That’s well over 50% of our export markets. As a matter of objective fact it also leaves British citizens and businesses less free than they are now, while the government will be dependent on the goodwill of others in all sorts of areas we currently take totally for granted. While I can see this might help Tory FC win an election, I still don’t get how it benefits the UK. It’s pretty clear you don’t either!!

    As I said if the Tories win an election with a majority Boris will go for a NI only backstop rather than No Deal anyway
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal

    OK. So we blame the EU for No Deal. Then what? UK citizens and businesses will be less free, the government will have less control. What’s the plan to deal with this?

    We will have more control, able to decide our own trade and immigration policy and more voters now back No Deal over further extension (though if Boris got a Tory majority he would likely go for a NI only backstop)

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1177322931967467520?s=20

    No Deal means no FTA with the EU or the US. That’s well over 50% of our export markets. As a matter of objective fact it also leaves British citizens and businesses less free than they are now, while the government will be dependent on the goodwill of others in all sorts of areas we currently take totally for granted. While I can see this might help Tory FC win an election, I still don’t get how it benefits the UK. It’s pretty clear you don’t either!!

    As I said if the Tories win an election with a majority Boris will go for a NI only backstop rather than No Deal anyway

    We’ll be out by the time the election happens, though, won’t we? Once we’ve No Dealed we’re stuck with it for a long time.

  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,337
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal
    My view for some time has been that the government which delivers a (any) shit Brexit will own it as far as UK voters are concerned. “It’s the EU’s fault” may get you a few weeks or months, but eventually, the newly-sovereign UK govt would have to come up with the jobs, growth and short passport queues in Mallorca that the GB public desire.

    Having already developed that view under May, when she had maintained that No Deal was sub-optimal, the chances of Boris successfully blaming “our friends and partners” after virtually championing No Deal would be an impressive victory for even his snake oil vending skills :)
    Most voters now want No Deal over No Brexit with gold standard Survation, Boris just represents their view

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1177322931967467520?s=20
    Happy to accept that. And if Brexit is a soaraway success he’s home and dry. But the GB public are a fickle bunch, and if half the No Deal Nasties come home to roost, they’ll soon believe he’s the one who should have fixed it/warned them/given out *actual* unicorns.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869
    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:
    Scott_P said:
    Yes, looks like Dom wrote this on the back of an envelope in the full knowledge that it would fail. I don't think the mechanics of Brexit really interest him any more. It's all about Boris's career now. So, as ever, if the next GE can be framed as St Boris the Brexit martyr versus perfidious parliament then Boris is on a winner. I think that's all that matters to them.
    I think Dom wants to leave the EU. He is either a visionary and will do it or, the other side of the coin, is deluded and will fail.

    I can't see Boris surviving either scenario.
    His blog suggests that his motivation is mostly (supposedly creative) destruction. He despises the establishment, especially the Tory establishment, and also the ERG. I doubt their future political best interests figure highly in his thinking.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal

    OK. So we blame the EU for No Deal. Then what? UK citizens and businesses will be less free, the government will have less control. What’s the plan to deal with this?

    4 letters: JFDI.
    Justice for Diane Ibbott?
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    The question now is what will remainer MPs do if a deal arrives back in parliament as it is starting to look like it will.

    If they vote it down it will strip away any credibility they had left in their 'avoid no deal at all costs' claim.

    And knowing how febrile the atmosphere in the country is I suspect that a lot of remain MPs who have been holding out hoping to overturn the referendum result will throw their cards in.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,912

    Happy to accept that. And if Brexit is a soaraway success he’s home and dry. But the GB public are a fickle bunch, and if half the No Deal Nasties come home to roost, they’ll soon believe he’s the one who should have fixed it/warned them/given out *actual* unicorns.

    It's Russian roulette, except rather than there being only one bullet in the revolver there's only one empty chamber, and Boris is hoping he pulls the trigger on it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151
    edited October 2019

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal

    OK. So we blame the EU for No Deal. Then what? UK citizens and businesses will be less free, the government will have less control. What’s the plan to deal with this?

    We will have more control, able to decide our own trade and immigration policy and more voters now back No Deal over further extension (though if Boris got a Tory majority he would likely go for a NI only backstop)

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1177322931967467520?s=20

    No Deal means no FTA with the EU or the US. That’s well over 50% of our export markets. As a matter of objective fact it also leaves British citizens and businesses less free than they are now, while the government will you don’t either!!

    As I said if the Tories win an election with a majority Boris will go for a NI only backstop rather than No Deal anyway

    We’ll be out by the time the election happens, though, won’t we? Once we’ve No Dealed we’re stuck with it for a long time.

    We won't be now thanks to the Benn Act, we only get Brexit with a Tory majority
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    edited October 2019


    No Deal means no FTA with the EU or the US. That’s well over 50% of our export markets. As a matter of objective fact it also leaves British citizens and businesses less free than they are now, while the government will be dependent on the goodwill of others in all sorts of areas we currently take totally for granted. While I can see this might help Tory FC win an election, I still don’t get how it benefits the UK. It’s pretty clear you don’t either!!

    For a while remainers have been warned about their apocalyptic predictions in the event of no-deal.

    Only complete economic and social meltdown would justify the hysteria. Remainers have set such a low bar that even moderate disruptions will seem inconsequential to a public expecting the worst.



  • rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:

    This is it.

    Take it or leave it.

    Do or die.

    https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1179150112712515589

    I’m lost. I thought it was Bunter who wanted the time limit, not the EU?
    No he doesn't want a time limit, he wants total abolition of the backstop.

    He's moving the Overton Window and setting up a time limit as a compromise on both side, rather than the EU caving to the UK.
    I'm not sure this is an example of the Overton Window.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v-hzc6blGI
    If you swap Trump for Brexiteer Conservatives isn't that exactly what is happening in the UK?

    The ramping up of No Deal talk and prep, the promotion of JRM, people like Rudd and Grieve now being viewed as to the left of the government not of the right.

    Under May if a time-limited backstop was proposed it would have been viewed as an entirely-British ambition, it would have been an ambitious aim for May. If now though it is agreed in the next few weeks it will be a major step back from no deal or complete abolition. It would be the UK compromising rather than getting what it wants. It will be the EU getting what it wants initially at least, rather than compromising.
  • There is only one explanation: Boris still thinks he's running for the Tory leadership.
  • SunnyJim said:


    No Deal means no FTA with the EU or the US. That’s well over 50% of our export markets. As a matter of objective fact it also leaves British citizens and businesses less free than they are now, while the government will be dependent on the goodwill of others in all sorts of areas we currently take totally for granted. While I can see this might help Tory FC win an election, I still don’t get how it benefits the UK. It’s pretty clear you don’t either!!

    For a while remainers have been warned about their apocalyptic predictions in the event of no-deal.

    Only complete economic and social meltdown would justify the hysteria. Remainers have set such a low bar that even moderate disruptions will seem inconsequential to a public expecting the worst.

    No, the government has told us No deal is no problem, that everything will be fine. People are expecting things to carry on pretty much as usual.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,236
    SunnyJim said:


    No Deal means no FTA with the EU or the US. That’s well over 50% of our export markets. As a matter of objective fact it also leaves British citizens and businesses less free than they are now, while the government will be dependent on the goodwill of others in all sorts of areas we currently take totally for granted. While I can see this might help Tory FC win an election, I still don’t get how it benefits the UK. It’s pretty clear you don’t either!!

    For a while remainers have been warned about their apocalyptic predictions in the event of no-deal.

    Only complete economic and social meltdown would justify the hysteria. Remainers have set such a low bar that even moderate disruptions will seem inconsequential to a public expecting the worst.



    I disagree.

    If we go into a recession, and house prices fall, and unemployment goes to 1.5 million, then people won't say "Ha! It was much better than those Remainers said - there was no shortage of medicines, it wasn't a meltdown, it was merely a nasty recession."

    On the contrary, people who lose their jobs or their homes will blame Brexit - irrespective of whether the real culprit was Donald Trump's trade war with China, Britain's overextended consumer or No Deal Brexit.

    The nation is divided into two groups: one who expects no consequences (or even positive ones) from No Deal; while the other expects armageddon.

    While I am aware of the dangers of the Middle Ground Fallacy, I think the truth is that British exports will face higher tariffs, both with the EU and with other countries the UK has FTAs (via the EU) with. Some industries will be hit quite hard by this. There are also consequences, such as dropping out the EU's rules on double taxation and withholding taxes, that will negatively impact investment in the UK. None of these things are country destroyers, but cumulatively, they will weigh on the UK economy. And this at a time when the consumer is extended almost to 2007 levels, and Britain as a nation is significantly more in hock to the rest of the world than at any time in the post 1950 period.
  • There is only one explanation: Boris still thinks he's running for the Tory leadership.

    He is.

    If he loses the support of the voters, he loses the election and he will be out.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,236
    TOPPING said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, I think if Boris Johnson had gone for the "time limited backstop" idea from the start, I think it would probably have passed the Houses of Parliament. It would have been enough of May's deal for all those who backed it to continue to do so. And it would have been enough to bring the ERG into line.

    But again would likely have been rejected by the EU. For very sensible reasons.

    You are becoming a tadge WA with no backstop is the answer HYUFD-ish.

    There is another counterparty to the negotiations.
    Sure, but I think so long as the NAI has the final say, the EU would go for a time limited backstop.

    Why?

    Because they (probably correctly) think the NAI would never actually vote for Northern Ireland to leave the backstop.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    NI manufacturers dismayed by these proposals.

    The worst of all worlds .

    Effectively this hampers trade on two fronts . With the rest of the UK and the EU .

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,236

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:

    This is it.

    Take it or leave it.

    Do or die.

    https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1179150112712515589

    I’m lost. I thought it was Bunter who wanted the time limit, not the EU?
    No he doesn't want a time limit, he wants total abolition of the backstop.

    He's moving the Overton Window and setting up a time limit as a compromise on both side, rather than the EU caving to the UK.
    I'm not sure this is an example of the Overton Window.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v-hzc6blGI
    If you swap Trump for Brexiteer Conservatives isn't that exactly what is happening in the UK?

    The ramping up of No Deal talk and prep, the promotion of JRM, people like Rudd and Grieve now being viewed as to the left of the government not of the right.

    Under May if a time-limited backstop was proposed it would have been viewed as an entirely-British ambition, it would have been an ambitious aim for May. If now though it is agreed in the next few weeks it will be a major step back from no deal or complete abolition. It would be the UK compromising rather than getting what it wants. It will be the EU getting what it wants initially at least, rather than compromising.
    That's not the Overton window, though. The Overton window is about "the range of ideas tolerated in public discourse, also known as the window of discourse"

    What Boris is doing is using the traditional negotiating technique of demonstrating he is not afraid of a no deal outcome. Which is not the Overton window.
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
    edited October 2019
    rcs1000 said:

    TOPPING said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, I think if Boris Johnson had gone for the "time limited backstop" idea from the start, I think it would probably have passed the Houses of Parliament. It would have been enough of May's deal for all those who backed it to continue to do so. And it would have been enough to bring the ERG into line.

    But again would likely have been rejected by the EU. For very sensible reasons.

    You are becoming a tadge WA with no backstop is the answer HYUFD-ish.

    There is another counterparty to the negotiations.
    Sure, but I think so long as the NAI has the final say, the EU would go for a time limited backstop.

    Why?


    Because they (probably correctly) think the NAI would never actually vote for Northern Ireland to leave the backstop.
    Stormont is not likely to sit for the next 5 years.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    rcs1000 said:

    SunnyJim said:


    No Deal means no FTA with the EU or the US. That’s well over 50% of our export markets. As a matter of objective fact it also leaves British citizens and businesses less free than they are now, while the government will be dependent on the goodwill of others in all sorts of areas we currently take totally for granted. While I can see this might help Tory FC win an election, I still don’t get how it benefits the UK. It’s pretty clear you don’t either!!

    For a while remainers have been warned about their apocalyptic predictions in the event of no-deal.

    Only complete economic and social meltdown would justify the hysteria. Remainers have set such a low bar that even moderate disruptions will seem inconsequential to a public expecting the worst.



    I disagree.

    If we go into a recession, and house prices fall, and unemployment goes to 1.5 million, then people won't say "Ha! It was much better than those Remainers said - there was no shortage of medicines, it wasn't a meltdown, it was merely a nasty recession."

    On the contrary, people who lose their jobs or their homes will blame Brexit - irrespective of whether the real culprit was Donald Trump's trade war with China, Britain's overextended consumer or No Deal Brexit.

    The nation is divided into two groups: one who expects no consequences (or even positive ones) from No Deal; while the other expects armageddon.

    While I am aware of the dangers of the Middle Ground Fallacy, I think the truth is that British exports will face higher tariffs, both with the EU and with other countries the UK has FTAs (via the EU) with. Some industries will be hit quite hard by this. There are also consequences, such as dropping out the EU's rules on double taxation and withholding taxes, that will negatively impact investment in the UK. None of these things are country destroyers, but cumulatively, they will weigh on the UK economy. And this at a time when the consumer is extended almost to 2007 levels, and Britain as a nation is significantly more in hock to the rest of the world than at any time in the post 1950 period.
    Good post.
    And by the way, the whole "ha! you've gone too far and you'll look silly if you don't stop" is just the evolution of "stop talking Britain down". They just want not to hear it.
    In truth Brexists are afraid that the predictions are right. Brexists are mostly on the economic right, and they know there is a lot of sound economics behind the dangers and they can't take the cognitive dissonance of hearing it. Brexit has driven them mad.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,131
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal

    OK. So we blame the EU for No Deal. Then what? UK citizens and businesses will be less free, the government will have less control. What’s the plan to deal with this?

    We will have more control, able to decide our own trade and immigration policy and more voters now back No Deal over further extension (though if Boris got a Tory majority he would likely go for a NI only backstop)

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1177322931967467520?s=20

    No Deal means no FTA with the EU or the US. That’s well over 50% of our export markets. As a matter of objective fact it also leaves British citizens and businesses less free than they are now, while the government will be dependent on the goodwill of others in all sorts of areas we currently take totally for granted. While I can see this might help Tory FC win an election, I still don’t get how it benefits the UK. It’s pretty clear you don’t either!!

    As I said if the Tories win an election with a majority Boris will go for a NI only backstop rather than No Deal anyway
    By then it'll be too late: we'll have left with No Deal.
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    rcs1000 said:


    I disagree.

    If we go into a recession, and house prices fall, and unemployment goes to 1.5 million, then people won't say "Ha! It was much better than those Remainers said - there was no shortage of medicines, it wasn't a meltdown, it was merely a nasty recession."

    On the contrary, people who lose their jobs or their homes will blame Brexit - irrespective of whether the real culprit was Donald Trump's trade war with China, Britain's overextended consumer or No Deal Brexit.

    The nation is divided into two groups: one who expects no consequences (or even positive ones) from No Deal; while the other expects armageddon.

    While I am aware of the dangers of the Middle Ground Fallacy, I think the truth is that British exports will face higher tariffs, both with the EU and with other countries the UK has FTAs (via the EU) with. Some industries will be hit quite hard by this. There are also consequences, such as dropping out the EU's rules on double taxation and withholding taxes, that will negatively impact investment in the UK. None of these things are country destroyers, but cumulatively, they will weigh on the UK economy. And this at a time when the consumer is extended almost to 2007 levels, and Britain as a nation is significantly more in hock to the rest of the world than at any time in the post 1950 period.


    A global recession is pretty much baked in it would seem regardless of the Brexit outcome.

    As long as any recession in the UK is of less severity than the EU as a whole, or even when compared with France/Germany, then remainers will struggle to gain traction with their argument. What are they going to say?

  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,780
    rcs1000 said:

    justin124 said:

    I have never attached much weight to EU elections - and this year both major parties largely abstained from them.Nor do I share the widespread assumption that the the next election will be dominated by Brexit. Many expected that in 2017 and were proved wrong. I also recall that at that election we held different views as to the likely outcome in Remain strongholds such as Cambridge.

    Sure, but your whole argument is that the increased concentration of LibDem votes that happened between 1992 and 2010 is not going to recur. And neither the data from polling nor the ballot box matches that.

    If you want to argue that the LDs will subside to the low teens, or that Brexit will be less of a factor, then those would be perfectly reasonable views. But arguing that the LD vote share will become highly inefficient again, is an opinion without evidence.
    I think its a bit more nuanced than that - the Lib vote will become more inefficient in the 2019 general election to allow them to become more efficient in elections after that. The problem that the Libs have is that they polled under 8% at the 2017 election with their vote falling not rising even though they picked up a handful more seats. That's because their tactical vote in seats they held but lost badly in 2015 continued to unwind, even though they gained a handful of target seats where they were still competitive.

    That has two consequences:
    1. There are now quite a few seats which they held before 2015 but are very likely too far back to win from 2nd or 3rd. Moving into a competitive 2nd place at the 2019 GE is the first step to winning at the GE after, but in the meantime losing in 2nd place still means lots of wasted votes. e.g. Berwick, Montgomeryshire, Newton Abbot, Colchester, Solihull, Torbay
    2. There are numerous seats where Labour can't entertain hopes of gaining from 2nd but where it is not obvious that the Libs are the clear tactical choice, even though the Libs should move into 2nd.

    All that means lots of wasted Lib votes in 2019, as the first stage to more efficient votes in the election after when the Libs will once again be in contention in many more seats and gain more tactical votes even if the Libs national vote share is static.





  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151
    viewcode said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal

    OK. So we blame the EU for No Deal. Then what? UK citizens and businesses will be less free, the government will have less control. What’s the plan to deal with this?

    We will have more control, able to decide our own trade and immigration policy and more voters now back No Deal over further extension (though if Boris got a Tory majority he would likely go for a NI only backstop)

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1177322931967467520?s=20

    No Deal means no FTA with the EU or the US. That’s well over 50% of our export markets. As a matter of objective fact it also leaves British citizens and businesses less free than they are now, while the government will be dependent on the goodwill of others in all sorts of areas we currently take totally for granted. While I can see this might help Tory FC win an election, I still don’t get how it benefits the UK. It’s pretty clear you don’t either!!

    As I said if the Tories win an election with a majority Boris will go for a NI only backstop rather than No Deal anyway
    By then it'll be too late: we'll have left with No Deal.
    We won't as the extension is until the end of January, an election will be in November
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    TOPPING said:


    This does seem to be the plan. Having some kind of plan. No one can see it but either they are absolutely batshit crazy about to slam into the wall or they have this all thought out.

    I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the third possibility, which is that they don't know what to do so they're just sticking with their existing messaging and hoping something lucky happens.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,720

    The sheer hilarity of the outrage over what is known of the UK offer is illuminating.
    Why do you imagine Bloomberg were briefed about time limited backstops being discussed by Europe? And then tonight it transpires it's part if the UK offer, the time is halfway between the UK and EU start points and the EU were briefed yesterday so knew this before leaking the Bloomberg story today. Clearly theres a feeling something can be sorted. And its making the cancel Brexit types nervous

    Why do you assume the Bloomberg story was sourced from the EU?
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited October 2019
    HYUFD said:



    We won't as the extension is until the end of January, an election will be in November

    Says who?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,151
    Danny565 said:

    HYUFD said:



    We won't as the extension is until the end of January, an election will be in November

    Says who?
    The numbers, no PM even if they did extend would last beyond October 31st without losing a VONC
  • rcs1000 said:

    That's not the Overton window, though. The Overton window is about "the range of ideas tolerated in public discourse, also known as the window of discourse"

    What Boris is doing is using the traditional negotiating technique of demonstrating he is not afraid of a no deal outcome. Which is not the Overton window.

    I think that's a rather simplistic method of describing it. And I think the former is part and parcel of the latter.

    When May was PM the idea of a time-limited backstop was referred too as too radical, as a time-limited backstop was 'no backstop at all' while anything else was dismissed as an unthinkable idea or "unicorn". May kept trying to tweak the edges and never even went as far as demanding a time-limited backstop.

    Boris took over and bounded straight in, a time-limited backstop is too close to the existing proposal, we need a complete overhaul. Spitting out extreme idea, saying 'OK if you insist we need customs posts where should they be' etc

    As such a time-limited backstop, were it to be agreed, would be looked at by the overwhelming majority now I suspect as a sensible compromise and not a radical idea. Indeed should that be agreed it wouldn't surprise me now if remainers who months ago would have dismissed that as too radical because it was no real backstop would now instead claimed victory that the UK had conceded to agree to the backstop, even if its on a time-limited basis. The window has moved making a deal like that acceptable.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,869

    There is only one explanation: Boris still thinks he's running for the Tory leadership.

    He's gone into hiding again?
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    HYUFD said:

    Danny565 said:

    HYUFD said:



    We won't as the extension is until the end of January, an election will be in November

    Says who?
    The numbers, no PM even if they did extend would last beyond October 31st without losing a VONC
    The anti-Boris majority in Parliament are unlikely to allow an election until it looks impossible for Boris to win it.
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    edited October 2019
    Noo said:


    Good post.
    And by the way, the whole "ha! you've gone too far and you'll look silly if you don't stop" is just the evolution of "stop talking Britain down". They just want not to hear it.
    In truth Brexists are afraid that the predictions are right. Brexists are mostly on the economic right, and they know there is a lot of sound economics behind the dangers and they can't take the cognitive dissonance of hearing it. Brexit has driven them mad.

    I would contend that it is remainers who are terrified that their predictions are wrong.

    They know that unless the prophecies of doom materialize then the prospects for the public supporting rejoining the EU are very poor indeed.

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    HYUFD said:

    viewcode said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the UK's offer is not a bad one. It has:

    - customs checks away from the border
    - a four year time limit

    I think it may be amended to give the Northern Ireland assembly more power. (So, they could in theory remove themselves earlier, but can equally ask for for an extension.)

    It may still be unacceptable to some headbangers. It will probably be unacceptable to Remainers. Labour Leavers will still probably oppose it because it's a Tory Brexit.

    It’s not a serious offer. It creates a hard border. It therefore actually makes it much easier for the Irish and the EU to reject. For some reason Johnson wants a No Deal and as much inconvenience for UK-based businesses as possible. I genuinely don’t know what benefit for the UK he sees in that.

    Boris wants Brexit as 17 million voted for and his proposal is entirely in line with the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, the only Brexit solution to have got a majority in the Commons

    Johnson wants No Deal. What I don’t get is how he thinks that benefits the UK.

    No he wants the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, if the EU refuse to agree that it is they who want No Deal

    OK. So we blame the EU for No Deal. Then what? UK citizens and businesses will be less free, the government will have less control. What’s the plan to deal with this?



    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1177322931967467520?s=20

    No Deal means no FTA with the EU or the US. That’s well over 50% of our export markets. As a matter of objective fact it also leaves British citizens and businesses less free than they are now, while the government will be dependent on the goodwill of others in all sorts of areas we currently take totally for granted. While I can see this might help Tory FC win an election, I still don’t get how it benefits the UK. It’s pretty clear you don’t either!!

    As I said if the Tories win an election with a majority Boris will go for a NI only backstop rather than No Deal anyway
    By then it'll be too late: we'll have left with No Deal.
    We won't as the extension is until the end of January, an election will be in November
    Do you agree with me that an election in December or January is very unlikely?
This discussion has been closed.