I know we joke about the 'nothing has changed' stuff, but it seriously cannot be normal that literally the same story that ran back in December about there being another meaningful vote being run depending on how big the defeat is, with hopes of it being around by around 100, is being circulated again with the dates changed and a 3 after MV instead of a 2?
I mean, that is bonkers. I know May has no other plan to get something agreed other than playing for time, but for heaven's sake MPs, you are going to be very clear how much you do not want to pass this deal, it cannot be beyond even your wit to realise it is time to pass something else to break the impasse?
I fear 'something else' will be passed on the afternoon of March 29th and a Revoke letter will be couriered to Brussels by helicopter later that evening.
We can't do no deal, so that seems quite likely. Not a very satisfactory outcome for anyone.
Wrong. It is for me and I guess about 16m others.
If you look at the Leavers on here, I think around 60% - including such luminaries as Sean_F, MaxPB, Richard_Tyndall and myself - are in favour of the Deal.
This isn't to say that we think it was optimal outcome from 2016. But it's probably the optimal outcome from here.
This is true, although trying to put the point non-snarkily, this would correlate with being well-informed, and you guys are out there on one end of that spectrum in a place that may be quite distant from the majority of Leave voters.
Some Leavers here who ought to be in that category who are against the deal.
But membership of many international bodies ties us to their rules with no possibility of independent arbitration.
And much of that is a feature of leaving, and surviving just over the fence from one of the world's biggest blocs, anyway. Farage and co hoped the EU would fall apart; otherwise we were always going to be following many of its rules and standards, in or out.
Given the only referendum the Commons would countenance would be Remain v Leave with Deal no it would not
I agree that's the most likely thing for parliament to pass but if we're looking at the hypothetical "what could the factions do apart from their current thing", you could see a referendum with No Deal on the ballot going through if the Tory Leavers got behind it.
From a more cynical POV some might want it on the ballot but defeated (brave call) so they can shut down those who would complain that victory was snatched from the people or some other kind of democratic betrayal.
The one thing that is nailed on is that many of the obsessive leavers will declare the outcome a betrayal; given the impossibility of their dream, there is no outcome that can escape such cries.
Given the only referendum the Commons would countenance would be Remain v Leave with Deal no it would not
I agree that's the most likely thing for parliament to pass but if we're looking at the hypothetical "what could the factions do apart from their current thing", you could see a referendum with No Deal on the ballot going through if the Tory Leavers got behind it.
From a more cynical POV some might want it on the ballot but defeated (brave call) so they can shut down those who would complain that victory was snatched from the people or some other kind of democratic betrayal.
The one thing that is nailed on is that many of the obsessive leavers will declare the outcome a betrayal; given the impossibility of their dream, there is no outcome that can escape such cries.
It is that one thing that puts me strongly against the deal and in favour of another referendum, why force an unloved deal on the public who don't want it if you think there is a better alternative. Nobody is going to own the deal afterwards, May will go and everyone will declare they hated it but were forced into it from various angles so nobody will take responsibility.
Given the only referendum the Commons would countenance would be Remain v Leave with Deal no it would not
I agree that's the most likely thing for parliament to pass but if we're looking at the hypothetical "what could the factions do apart from their current thing", you could see a referendum with No Deal on the ballot going through if the Tory Leavers got behind it.
From a more cynical POV some might want it on the ballot but defeated (brave call) so they can shut down those who would complain that victory was snatched from the people or some other kind of democratic betrayal.
The one thing that is nailed on is that many of the obsessive leavers will declare the outcome a betrayal; given the impossibility of their dream, there is no outcome that can escape such cries.
It is that one thing that puts me strongly against the deal and in favour of another referendum, why force an unloved deal on the public who don't want it if you think there is a better alternative. Nobody is going to own the deal afterwards, May will go and everyone will declare they hated it but were forced into it from various angles so nobody will take responsibility.
Or, to put it another way, since the strong leavers are going to be unhappy whatever, how about making the remainers feel better?
Given the only referendum the Commons would countenance would be Remain v Leave with Deal no it would not
I agree that's the most likely thing for parliament to pass but if we're looking at the hypothetical "what could the factions do apart from their current thing", you could see a referendum with No Deal on the ballot going through if the Tory Leavers got behind it.
From a more cynical POV some might want it on the ballot but defeated (brave call) so they can shut down those who would complain that victory was snatched from the people or some other kind of democratic betrayal.
The one thing that is nailed on is that many of the obsessive leavers will declare the outcome a betrayal; given the impossibility of their dream, there is no outcome that can escape such cries.
It is that one thing that puts me strongly against the deal and in favour of another referendum, why force an unloved deal on the public who don't want it if you think there is a better alternative. Nobody is going to own the deal afterwards, May will go and everyone will declare they hated it but were forced into it from various angles so nobody will take responsibility.
Or, to put it another way, since the strong leavers are going to be unhappy whatever, how about making the remainers feel better?
The strongest leaves also want remain rather than the deal, so remaining should make them happy too.
I know we joke about the 'nothing has changed' stuff, but it seriously cannot be normal that literally the same story that ran back in December about there being another meaningful vote being run depending on how big the defeat is, with hopes of it being around by around 100, is being circulated again with the dates changed and a 3 after MV instead of a 2?
I mean, that is bonkers. I know May has no other plan to get something agreed other than playing for time, but for heaven's sake MPs, you are going to be very clear how much you do not want to pass this deal, it cannot be beyond even your wit to realise it is time to pass something else to break the impasse?
I fear 'something else' will be passed on the afternoon of March 29th and a Revoke letter will be couriered to Brussels by helicopter later that evening.
We can't do no deal, so that seems quite likely. Not a very satisfactory outcome for anyone.
Wrong. It is for me and I guess about 16m others.
If you look at the Leavers on here, I think around 60% - including such luminaries as Sean_F, MaxPB, Richard_Tyndall and myself - are in favour of the Deal.
This isn't to say that we think it was optimal outcome from 2016. But it's probably the optimal outcome from here.
I think an ardent Eurofederalist whose government facilitated the rise of a Fascist coalition through a series of hare-brained changes is somebody who should keep his mouth shut frankly.
His views are pretty well worthless given his track record and will only harden Eurosceptic attitudes.
I know we joke about the 'nothing has changed' stuff, but it seriously cannot be normal that literally the same story that ran back in December about there being another meaningful vote being run depending on how big the defeat is, with hopes of it being around by around 100, is being circulated again with the dates changed and a 3 after MV instead of a 2?
I mean, that is bonkers. I know May has no other plan to get something agreed other than playing for time, but for heaven's sake MPs, you are going to be very clear how much you do not want to pass this deal, it cannot be beyond even your wit to realise it is time to pass something else to break the impasse?
I fear 'something else' will be passed on the afternoon of March 29th and a Revoke letter will be couriered to Brussels by helicopter later that evening.
We can't do no deal, so that seems quite likely. Not a very satisfactory outcome for anyone.
Wrong. It is for me and I guess about 16m others.
If you look at the Leavers on here, I think around 60% - including such luminaries as Sean_F, MaxPB, Richard_Tyndall and myself - are in favour of the Deal.
This isn't to say that we think it was optimal outcome from 2016. But it's probably the optimal outcome from here.
Just reinforces my point that many Leavers either haven’t read it or don’t understand it.
I particularly cherish the moment that I think it was Grabcocque made many very confident and totally wrong assertions about it, and when challenged said that he hadn't read it and was sure his critics hadn't either, further stridently claiming 'anyone who says they have read it is lying.'
The problems with this whole debate in a nutshell.
Just reinforces my point that many Leavers either haven’t read it or don’t understand it.
There is a meaningful minority of leavers (cough, Nadine Dorries, cough) who believe that if the EU is willing to agree to it, then it must be bad for the UK.
The latest one is that Geoffrey Cox has gone to the EU to propose an independent body to verify that treaty obligations (in particular vis-a-vis Ireland and the EU actually attempting to implement a technical solution) are being fulfilled.
But he's got his legs completely cut out from under him by the ERG demanding that there cannot be EU representation on the body. Wait: if there are 12 members of this body, of which one is from the UK and one from the EU, then that's unacceptable because there's an EU representative???
I know we joke about the 'nothing has changed' stuff, but it seriously cannot be normal that literally the same story that ran back in December about there being another meaningful vote being run depending on how big the defeat is, with hopes of it being around by around 100, is being circulated again with the dates changed and a 3 after MV instead of a 2?
I mean, that is bonkers. I know May has no other plan to get something agreed other than playing for time, but for heaven's sake MPs, you are going to be very clear how much you do not want to pass this deal, it cannot be beyond even your wit to realise it is time to pass something else to break the impasse?
I fear 'something else' will be passed on the afternoon of March 29th and a Revoke letter will be couriered to Brussels by helicopter later that evening.
We can't do no deal, so that seems quite likely. Not a very satisfactory outcome for anyone.
Wrong. It is for me and I guess about 16m others.
If you look at the Leavers on here, I think around 60% - including such luminaries as Sean_F, MaxPB, Richard_Tyndall and myself - are in favour of the Deal.
This isn't to say that we think it was optimal outcome from 2016. But it's probably the optimal outcome from here.
And me.
I am Spartacus!
I think 60% is an underestimate of the leavers who are currently posting. I would acknowledge that some of the more intemperate leavers such as Archer from Australia would not.
Just reinforces my point that many Leavers either haven’t read it or don’t understand it.
There is a meaningful minority of leavers (cough, Nadine Dorries, cough) who believe that if the EU is willing to agree to it, then it must be bad for the UK.
The latest one is that Geoffrey Cox has gone to the EU to propose an independent body to verify that treaty obligations (in particular vis-a-vis Ireland and the EU actually attempting to implement a technical solution) are being fulfilled.
But he's got his legs completely cut out from under him by the ERG demanding that there cannot be EU representation on the body. Wait: if there are 12 members of this body, of which one is from the UK and one from the EU, then that's unacceptable because there's an EU representative???
It's insane.
The ERG tests, like the earlier Labour ones, are designed (though description that might be generous in this case) to be failed.
Just reinforces my point that many Leavers either haven’t read it or don’t understand it.
I particularly cherish the moment that I think it was Grabcocque made many very confident and totally wrong assertions about it, and when challenged said that he hadn't read it and was sure his critics hadn't either, further stridently claiming 'anyone who says they have read it is lying.'
The problems with this whole debate in a nutshell.
Just reinforces my point that many Leavers either haven’t read it or don’t understand it.
I particularly cherish the moment that I think it was Grabcocque made many very confident and totally wrong assertions about it, and when challenged said that he hadn't read it and was sure his critics hadn't either, further stridently claiming 'anyone who says they have read it is lying.'
The problems with this whole debate in a nutshell.
In fairness it is a difficult document to follow because of the references to other documents and provisions. It is a long way from being a stand alone document and that at times makes its actual effect unclear to the casual reader looking for a quick quote.
Just reinforces my point that many Leavers either haven’t read it or don’t understand it.
There is a meaningful minority of leavers (cough, Nadine Dorries, cough) who believe that if the EU is willing to agree to it, then it must be bad for the UK.
The latest one is that Geoffrey Cox has gone to the EU to propose an independent body to verify that treaty obligations (in particular vis-a-vis Ireland and the EU actually attempting to implement a technical solution) are being fulfilled.
But he's got his legs completely cut out from under him by the ERG demanding that there cannot be EU representation on the body. Wait: if there are 12 members of this body, of which one is from the UK and one from the EU, then that's unacceptable because there's an EU representative???
It's insane.
They are either insane, politically posturing to their audience and/or not serious about Leaving.
He's an MP looking to honour the referendum result.
He's looking to prevent the disaster of No Deal, something Leavers said wouldn't happen/is Project Fear.
An MP meeting with a foreign government for the purpose of frustrating our government’s plans is not acceptable
(Pedant hat on: if Lady Hermon were to meet with representatives of the Irish government to try and 'prevent No Deal' I don't think we would regard it as unacceptable. What makes it unacceptable - or at least rather poor behaviour - is that he was elected on a manifesto implementing the referendum result.)
Weird is right. Came out as 77% "liberal" though; apparently my brain is a Democrat. Was quite surprised at some of the questions, though.
I'm 51% Republican!?!
Blue Labour?
Between you and me, Sandy, that doesn't surprise me in the least.
What's the difference between Donald Trump and Jeremy Corbyn?
One is a stupid posh boy with bad hair, who has never done a day's work in his life, can't keep his hands off younger women, has policies that make no sense whatsoever, is accused of interfering in all sorts of investigations, who claimed to have won an election despite losing the popular vote, and will always take the side of Russia.
And the other is the President of the United States.
Just reinforces my point that many Leavers either haven’t read it or don’t understand it.
I particularly cherish the moment that I think it was Grabcocque made many very confident and totally wrong assertions about it, and when challenged said that he hadn't read it and was sure his critics hadn't either, further stridently claiming 'anyone who says they have read it is lying.'
The problems with this whole debate in a nutshell.
It takes a good two hours to speed read the 587 pages of the WA, taking in its scope and key points, and any good lawyer who’s reviewed contracts before would be able to do so without much trouble.
Reading the political declaration takes about 15 minutes, and is much clearer and easier to digest.
Weird is right. Came out as 77% "liberal" though; apparently my brain is a Democrat. Was quite surprised at some of the questions, though.
I'm 51% Republican!?!
Blue Labour?
Between you and me, Sandy, that doesn't surprise me in the least.
What's the difference between Donald Trump and Jeremy Corbyn?
One is a stupid posh boy with bad hair, who has never done a day's work in his life, can't keep his hands off younger women, has policies that make no sense whatsoever, is accused of interfering in all sorts of investigations, who claimed to have won an election despite losing the popular vote, and will always take the side of Russia.
And the other is the President of the United States.
Just reinforces my point that many Leavers either haven’t read it or don’t understand it.
I particularly cherish the moment that I think it was Grabcocque made many very confident and totally wrong assertions about it, and when challenged said that he hadn't read it and was sure his critics hadn't either, further stridently claiming 'anyone who says they have read it is lying.'
The problems with this whole debate in a nutshell.
In fairness it is a difficult document to follow because of the references to other documents and provisions. It is a long way from being a stand alone document and that at times makes its actual effect unclear to the casual reader looking for a quick quote.
That's true, and if it wasn't for the fact that I quite enjoy posting on this board, then I wouldn't have spent time leafing through reading it. But if you download the WA, and you combine it with this super secret tool called "Google", then it's far from incomprehensible.
Just reinforces my point that many Leavers either haven’t read it or don’t understand it.
I particularly cherish the moment that I think it was Grabcocque made many very confident and totally wrong assertions about it, and when challenged said that he hadn't read it and was sure his critics hadn't either, further stridently claiming 'anyone who says they have read it is lying.'
The problems with this whole debate in a nutshell.
In fairness it is a difficult document to follow because of the references to other documents and provisions. It is a long way from being a stand alone document and that at times makes its actual effect unclear to the casual reader looking for a quick quote.
That's true, and if it wasn't for the fact that I quite enjoy posting on this board, then I wouldn't have spent time leafing through reading it. But if you download the WA, and you combine it with this super secret tool called "Google", then it's far from incomprehensible.
Google, I may have to try that. But you also need to understand the effect of these other documents referred to which isn't always straightforward. I am no fan of May these days but I think that the more you study it the better the deal that she got is.
So does everyone agree that because he is still a Tory MP, Theresa May is obviously a big Islamophobe and is facilitating Islamophobia in the Tory party?
I’ve not seen the image
Was it deliberate as you imply or was it - as the guardian suggests - two balloons in the background of another picture bumping up against each other in the way balloons do?
Just reinforces my point that many Leavers either haven’t read it or don’t understand it.
I particularly cherish the moment that I think it was Grabcocque made many very confident and totally wrong assertions about it, and when challenged said that he hadn't read it and was sure his critics hadn't either, further stridently claiming 'anyone who says they have read it is lying.'
The problems with this whole debate in a nutshell.
In fairness it is a difficult document to follow because of the references to other documents and provisions. It is a long way from being a stand alone document and that at times makes its actual effect unclear to the casual reader looking for a quick quote.
That's true, and if it wasn't for the fact that I quite enjoy posting on this board, then I wouldn't have spent time leafing through reading it. But if you download the WA, and you combine it with this super secret tool called "Google", then it's far from incomprehensible.
Google, I may have to try that. But you also need to understand the effect of these other documents referred to which isn't always straightforward. I am no fan of May these days but I think that the more you study it the better the deal that she got is.
Oh, I agree.
The deal manages to:
- maintain a close trading relationship with our neighbour - deal with most of the things that were of concern to Leave voters - recover large swathes of sovereignty - take us out of the CAP/CFP - save us money
I used to have a boss whose catchphrase was "don't let great be the enemy of good." This is a classic example of this.
So does everyone agree that because he is still a Tory MP, Theresa May is obviously a big Islamophobe and is facilitating Islamophobia in the Tory party?
I’ve not seen the image
Was it deliberate as you imply or was it - as the guardian suggests - two balloons in the background of another picture bumping up against each other in the way balloons do?
Two balloons in the background of another picture...
So does everyone agree that because he is still a Tory MP, Theresa May is obviously a big Islamophobe and is facilitating Islamophobia in the Tory party?
I’ve not seen the image
Was it deliberate as you imply or was it - as the guardian suggests - two balloons in the background of another picture bumping up against each other in the way balloons do?
Two balloons in the background of another picture...
Wow. There's some pretty sick shit out there.
First puns and now balloons, nothing is sacred anymore!
I know we joke about the 'nothing has changed' stuff, but it seriously cannot be normal that literally the same story that ran back in December about there being another meaningful vote being run depending on how big the defeat is, with hopes of it being around by around 100, is being circulated again with the dates changed and a 3 after MV instead of a 2?
I mean, that is bonkers. I know May has no other plan to get something agreed other than playing for time, but for heaven's sake MPs, you are going to be very clear how much you do not want to pass this deal, it cannot be beyond even your wit to realise it is time to pass something else to break the impasse?
I fear 'something else' will be passed on the afternoon of March 29th and a Revoke letter will be couriered to Brussels by helicopter later that evening.
We can't do no deal, so that seems quite likely. Not a very satisfactory outcome for anyone.
Wrong. It is for me and I guess about 16m others.
If you look at the Leavers on here, I think around 60% - including such luminaries as Sean_F, MaxPB, Richard_Tyndall and myself - are in favour of the Deal.
This isn't to say that we think it was optimal outcome from 2016. But it's probably the optimal outcome from here.
And me.
I am Spartacus!
I think 60% is an underestimate of the leavers who are currently posting. I would acknowledge that some of the more intemperate leavers such as Archer from Australia would not.
This non-luminary (but also (hopefully) non-intemperate) Leaver also backs the Deal.
And was also having severe doubts, even prior to the referendum, that our ability to strike bespoke trade deals would outweigh the benefits to us of having the EU do them on our behalf, largely neutral to our interests but bringing their greater bargaining power, plus their legendary negotiative intransigence. I'd probably be fairly happy with a permanent customs union if it didn't cost much.
Weird is right. Came out as 77% "liberal" though; apparently my brain is a Democrat. Was quite surprised at some of the questions, though.
73% Dem for me, but I think those of us who are doing jobs at the more biological end of human existence have different ideas of disgusting. Republicans must be a prissy lot!
Brexit can happen next week, if the ERG unicorn hunt was called off. But they don't really want to leave, because what would they do with their rest of their lives?
Leaving properly and trading with your neighbours isn't a unicorn what happens the rest of the world over. The rest of the f***ing world finds a way to exist, why can't we?
#rattled
Not rattled, I've said repeatedly here I couldn't care less if we remain instead of this deal. Irritated and bored by the insane unicorn bullshit.
Every standard country in the world can operate its borders without unicorns. So can we.
Britain's border with NI can certainly be operated without unicorns. It can be open, with the same regulatory regime on both sides, or closed, allowing the British side to diverge. There are lots of examples of these two arrangements in the world.
The unicorn part is where you need it be simultaneously open, to avoid restarting The Troubles, and closed, to allow the British to take back control of all the things. This is where if you say, "give us an example of another border that works like this" there doesn't seem to be a convincing answer, suggesting that either unicorns don't exist, or they exist but they're not interested in national border issues.
The answer being “this is a unique situation requiring a bespoke solution”
(I also don’t believe that the Troubkes will restart of the border is operated)
Weird is right. Came out as 77% "liberal" though; apparently my brain is a Democrat. Was quite surprised at some of the questions, though.
73% Dem for me, but I think those of us who are doing jobs at the more biological end of human existence have different ideas of disgusting. Republicans must be a prissy lot!
I certainly wouldn't want to be looked after in my extreme old age by a Republican carer!
Weird is right. Came out as 77% "liberal" though; apparently my brain is a Democrat. Was quite surprised at some of the questions, though.
73% Dem for me, but I think those of us who are doing jobs at the more biological end of human existence have different ideas of disgusting. Republicans must be a prissy lot!
I thought it was the opposite?
Higher score more prissy, lower score more dirty...
65% being about the perfect level of clean but not prissy.
Just reinforces my point that many Leavers either haven’t read it or don’t understand it.
I particularly cherish the moment that I think it was Grabcocque made many very confident and totally wrong assertions about it, and when challenged said that he hadn't read it and was sure his critics hadn't either, further stridently claiming 'anyone who says they have read it is lying.'
The problems with this whole debate in a nutshell.
In fairness it is a difficult document to follow because of the references to other documents and provisions. It is a long way from being a stand alone document and that at times makes its actual effect unclear to the casual reader looking for a quick quote.
That's true, and if it wasn't for the fact that I quite enjoy posting on this board, then I wouldn't have spent time leafing through reading it. But if you download the WA, and you combine it with this super secret tool called "Google", then it's far from incomprehensible.
Google, I may have to try that. But you also need to understand the effect of these other documents referred to which isn't always straightforward. I am no fan of May these days but I think that the more you study it the better the deal that she got is.
Oh, I agree.
The deal manages to:
- maintain a close trading relationship with our neighbour - deal with most of the things that were of concern to Leave voters - recover large swathes of sovereignty - take us out of the CAP/CFP - save us money
I used to have a boss whose catchphrase was "don't let great be the enemy of good." This is a classic example of this.
May's Deal doesn't settle the relationship with the EU that applies after the transition period. Therefore it leaves these aims open rather than dealing with them. In reality, the first (close relationship) is highly likely to mean the others won't apply (sovereignty, CAP/CFP in practice if not in name, saving significant money).
Henry Newman is wrong on a couple of his claimed advantages for the Deal as it stands, and several of the others are hypothetical and only apply as long as the UK doesn't enter into a long term agreement with the EU.
If the investigation goes ahead, this is a good story for the Conservatives in the short term, as it keeps Labour's problems in the open.
In the medium term it could be a so-so story for the Conservatives (if the inquiry clears Labour), or good (if it criticises them). Chances are it will both clear and criticise (e.g. it might say there is no institutional racism, but that complainants on all sorts of issues have been poorly treated).
In the long term, it might be bad for the Conservatives, as a precedent has been set, and that precedent could equally apply to them.
There's an added risk to Labour that it might reveal other stuff that shouldn't be happening...
Because the "free movement" only exists during the implementation period.
Until it is re-established in the future trade deal.
So on the chance that might happen we should ensure we keep it for certain by not leaving? Given that is a very real possibility should there be a referendum or an extension. The same applies to complaints the WA only settles things for the transition.
If the investigation goes ahead, this is a good story for the Conservatives in the short term, as it keeps Labour's problems in the open.
In the medium term it could be a so-so story for the Conservatives (if the inquiry clears Labour), or good (if it criticises them). Chances are it will both clear and criticise (e.g. it might say there is no institutional racism, but that complainants on all sorts of issues have been poorly treated).
In the long term, it might be bad for the Conservatives, as a precedent has been set, and that precedent could equally apply to them.
There's an added risk to Labour that it might reveal other stuff that shouldn't be happening...
Makes sense. Also, can anyone else really leave the party while it is going on without appearing to prejudge its outcome?
I know we joke about the 'nothing has changed' stuff, but it seriously cannot be normal that literally the same story that ran back in December about there being another meaningful vote being run depending on how big the defeat is, with hopes of it being around by around 100, is being circulated again with the dates changed and a 3 after MV instead of a 2?
I mean, that is bonkers. I know May has no other plan to get something agreed other than playing for time, but for heaven's sake MPs, you are going to be very clear how much you do not want to pass this deal, it cannot be beyond even your wit to realise it is time to pass something else to break the impasse?
I fear 'something else' will be passed on the afternoon of March 29th and a Revoke letter will be couriered to Brussels by helicopter later that evening.
We can't do no deal, so that seems quite likely. Not a very satisfactory outcome for anyone.
Wrong. It is for me and I guess about 16m others.
If you look at the Leavers on here, I think around 60% - including such luminaries as Sean_F, MaxPB, Richard_Tyndall and myself - are in favour of the Deal.
This isn't to say that we think it was optimal outcome from 2016. But it's probably the optimal outcome from here.
I know we joke about the 'nothing has changed' stuff, but it seriously cannot be normal that literally the same story that ran back in December about there being another meaningful vote being run depending on how big the defeat is, with hopes of it being around by around 100, is being circulated again with the dates changed and a 3 after MV instead of a 2?
I mean, that is bonkers. I know May has no other plan to get something agreed other than playing for time, but for heaven's sake MPs, you are going to be very clear how much you do not want to pass this deal, it cannot be beyond even your wit to realise it is time to pass something else to break the impasse?
I fear 'something else' will be passed on the afternoon of March 29th and a Revoke letter will be couriered to Brussels by helicopter later that evening.
We can't do no deal, so that seems quite likely. Not a very satisfactory outcome for anyone.
Wrong. It is for me and I guess about 16m others.
If you look at the Leavers on here, I think around 60% - including such luminaries as Sean_F, MaxPB, Richard_Tyndall and myself - are in favour of the Deal.
This isn't to say that we think it was optimal outcome from 2016. But it's probably the optimal outcome from here.
Given less than 50% tend to make Remain on first preferences over Deal or No Deal it would need to go to preferences which the polling shows the Deal would be more likely to win head to head v Remain or No Deal
I know we joke about the 'nothing has changed' stuff, but it seriously cannot be normal that literally the same story that ran back in December about there being another meaningful vote being run depending on how big the defeat is, with hopes of it being around by around 100, is being circulated again with the dates changed and a 3 after MV instead of a 2?
I mean, that is bonkers. I know May has no other plan to get something agreed other than playing for time, but for heaven's sake MPs, you are going to be very clear how much you do not want to pass this deal, it cannot be beyond even your wit to realise it is time to pass something else to break the impasse?
I fear 'something else' will be passed on the afternoon of March 29th and a Revoke letter will be couriered to Brussels by helicopter later that evening.
We can't do no deal, so that seems quite likely. Not a very satisfactory outcome for anyone.
Wrong. It is for me and I guess about 16m others.
If you look at the Leavers on here, I think around 60% - including such luminaries as Sean_F, MaxPB, Richard_Tyndall and myself - are in favour of the Deal.
This isn't to say that we think it was optimal outcome from 2016. But it's probably the optimal outcome from here.
And me.
I am Spartacus!
I think 60% is an underestimate of the leavers who are currently posting. I would acknowledge that some of the more intemperate leavers such as Archer from Australia would not.
As an aside, I'm (slowly) reading After the Ice, about mankind from 20,000 to 5,000 BC. There's an interesting section on trying to use genetics to work out the past migrations of people from East Asia into the Americas via the-then passable Russia to Alaska route.
However, it's not worked, really, because rates of mutation are uncertain and intermingling of genes through frisky time have made it all a bit of a tangled mess.
Which does make me wonder if these "Gosh, I'm 73% Spanish" type websites and 'tests' are just a bit of speculative silliness. Not that I'd need such a test. I'm clearly a Yorkshireman.
He's an MP looking to honour the referendum result.
He's looking to prevent the disaster of No Deal, something Leavers said wouldn't happen/is Project Fear.
An MP meeting with a foreign government for the purpose of frustrating our government’s plans is not acceptable
(Pedant hat on: if Lady Hermon were to meet with representatives of the Irish government to try and 'prevent No Deal' I don't think we would regard it as unacceptable. What makes it unacceptable - or at least rather poor behaviour - is that he was elected on a manifesto implementing the referendum result.)
That would be just as bad.
The Executive governs.
Parliament is a check and balance and a legislative body
Where an MP cooperated with a foreign power to change U.K. policy in a direction desired by that foreign power...
Weird is right. Came out as 77% "liberal" though; apparently my brain is a Democrat. Was quite surprised at some of the questions, though.
73% Dem for me, but I think those of us who are doing jobs at the more biological end of human existence have different ideas of disgusting. Republicans must be a prissy lot!
I suspect the same applies to those of us exposed to the realities of living in the countryside. I'm no Republican, but was astonished to find myself 82% Democrat.
Weird is right. Came out as 77% "liberal" though; apparently my brain is a Democrat. Was quite surprised at some of the questions, though.
I'm 51% Republican!?!
Blue Labour?
Between you and me, Sandy, that doesn't surprise me in the least.
What's the difference between Donald Trump and Jeremy Corbyn?
One is a stupid posh boy with bad hair, who has never done a day's work in his life, can't keep his hands off younger women, has policies that make no sense whatsoever, is accused of interfering in all sorts of investigations, who claimed to have won an election despite losing the popular vote, and will always take the side of Russia.
And the other is the President of the United States.
*Grabs tinfoil hat and ducks*
I was told by an Israeli political player that I am close to that Bibi is the prototype for Trump and a good predictor of where things will end up.
There’s some very interesting stuff happening behind the scenes
So does everyone agree that because he is still a Tory MP, Theresa May is obviously a big Islamophobe and is facilitating Islamophobia in the Tory party?
I’ve not seen the image
Was it deliberate as you imply or was it - as the guardian suggests - two balloons in the background of another picture bumping up against each other in the way balloons do?
Two balloons in the background of another picture...
Wow. There's some pretty sick shit out there.
Apparently one balloon is trying to mount the other. (I’m going with helium balloons but what do I know)
I know we joke about the 'nothing has changed' stuff, but it seriously cannot be normal that literally the same story that ran back in December about there being another meaningful vote being run depending on how big the defeat is, with hopes of it being around by around 100, is being circulated again with the dates changed and a 3 after MV instead of a 2?
I mean, that is bonkers. I know May has no other plan to get something agreed other than playing for time, but for heaven's sake MPs, you are going to be very clear how much you do not want to pass this deal, it cannot be beyond even your wit to realise it is time to pass something else to break the impasse?
I fear 'something else' will be passed on the afternoon of March 29th and a Revoke letter will be couriered to Brussels by helicopter later that evening.
We can't do no deal, so that seems quite likely. Not a very satisfactory outcome for anyone.
Wrong. It is for me and I guess about 16m others.
If you look at the Leavers on here, I think around 60% - including such luminaries as Sean_F, MaxPB, Richard_Tyndall and myself - are in favour of the Deal.
This isn't to say that we think it was optimal outcome from 2016. But it's probably the optimal outcome from here.
And me.
I am Spartacus!
I think 60% is an underestimate of the leavers who are currently posting. I would acknowledge that some of the more intemperate leavers such as Archer from Australia would not.
Moi aussi
You would also acknowledge?... or, like Archer, you would also not support the deal?
At Belvedere Forum @CER_Grant says chances of May deal passing next week 20-25%, Customs Union 25 %, No Deal 10 %, General Election 20 %, and further referendum 20 %. "Essentially we don't know what is going to happen."
That feels like it underestimates the chances of TMay's deal failing again, and her pulling the rest of the votes to prevent anything else from passing.
At Belvedere Forum @CER_Grant says chances of May deal passing next week 20-25%, Customs Union 25 %, No Deal 10 %, General Election 20 %, and further referendum 20 %. "Essentially we don't know what is going to happen."
That feels like it underestimates the chances of TMay's deal failing again, and her pulling the rest of the votes to prevent anything else from passing.
Yeah I didn't see May's deal passing next week (not 20-25%) but maybe if she goes again, although I suppose that chance may get taken away...
Comments
*In the good future where things turn out for the best.
https://www.channel4.com/news/former-italian-pm-paolo-gentiloni-brexit-biggest-mistake-by-a-european-country-since-war
30% favour the Deal?
If you want it there is a mechanism:
https://twitter.com/sarahwollaston/status/1103421729232297985?s=19
And the Pope, he thinks, is Catholic.
A rabbi is arrested by the KGB for trying to learn Hebrew. The Colonel asks him why he did it.
'In case I go to Heaven, and everyone is speaking Hebrew,' comes the reply.
'Huh! And what if you go to Hell?'
'No problem, Comrade, I already speak excellent Russian.'
His views are pretty well worthless given his track record and will only harden Eurosceptic attitudes.
https://mobile.twitter.com/HenryNewman/status/1103404253786370059
Is a tweet spelling a billionaire funder’s name with a “$” not a ”S” anti-Semitic just because he happens to have a Jewish Dad?
I’d have thought it’s more anti rich people?
I came out as Republican.
But they're asking the scorpion not to sting the frog.
Just reinforces my point that many Leavers either haven’t read it or don’t understand it.
The problems with this whole debate in a nutshell.
Blue Labour?
The latest one is that Geoffrey Cox has gone to the EU to propose an independent body to verify that treaty obligations (in particular vis-a-vis Ireland and the EU actually attempting to implement a technical solution) are being fulfilled.
But he's got his legs completely cut out from under him by the ERG demanding that there cannot be EU representation on the body. Wait: if there are 12 members of this body, of which one is from the UK and one from the EU, then that's unacceptable because there's an EU representative???
It's insane.
I think 60% is an underestimate of the leavers who are currently posting. I would acknowledge that some of the more intemperate leavers such as Archer from Australia would not.
Are we sure all the ERGers are even literate ?
Possibly all three.
One is a stupid posh boy with bad hair, who has never done a day's work in his life, can't keep his hands off younger women, has policies that make no sense whatsoever, is accused of interfering in all sorts of investigations, who claimed to have won an election despite losing the popular vote, and will always take the side of Russia.
And the other is the President of the United States.
*Grabs tinfoil hat and ducks*
Reading the political declaration takes about 15 minutes, and is much clearer and easier to digest.
Google’s AIs regularly confuse the two.
Mr. Doethur, I don't think tinfoil ducks will help you.
Was it deliberate as you imply or was it - as the guardian suggests - two balloons in the background of another picture bumping up against each other in the way balloons do?
The deal manages to:
- maintain a close trading relationship with our neighbour
- deal with most of the things that were of concern to Leave voters
- recover large swathes of sovereignty
- take us out of the CAP/CFP
- save us money
I used to have a boss whose catchphrase was "don't let great be the enemy of good." This is a classic example of this.
Wow. There's some pretty sick shit out there.
And was also having severe doubts, even prior to the referendum, that our ability to strike bespoke trade deals would outweigh the benefits to us of having the EU do them on our behalf, largely neutral to our interests but bringing their greater bargaining power, plus their legendary negotiative intransigence. I'd probably be fairly happy with a permanent customs union if it didn't cost much.
https://twitter.com/GeorginaEWright/status/1103565098768125952
(I also don’t believe that the Troubkes will restart of the border is operated)
Higher score more prissy, lower score more dirty...
65% being about the perfect level of clean but not prissy.
Henry Newman is wrong on a couple of his claimed advantages for the Deal as it stands, and several of the others are hypothetical and only apply as long as the UK doesn't enter into a long term agreement with the EU.
In the medium term it could be a so-so story for the Conservatives (if the inquiry clears Labour), or good (if it criticises them). Chances are it will both clear and criticise (e.g. it might say there is no institutional racism, but that complainants on all sorts of issues have been poorly treated).
In the long term, it might be bad for the Conservatives, as a precedent has been set, and that precedent could equally apply to them.
There's an added risk to Labour that it might reveal other stuff that shouldn't be happening...
I was 71% democrat
However, it's not worked, really, because rates of mutation are uncertain and intermingling of genes through frisky time have made it all a bit of a tangled mess.
Which does make me wonder if these "Gosh, I'm 73% Spanish" type websites and 'tests' are just a bit of speculative silliness. Not that I'd need such a test. I'm clearly a Yorkshireman.
The Executive governs.
Parliament is a check and balance and a legislative body
Where an MP cooperated with a foreign power to change U.K. policy in a direction desired by that foreign power...
There’s some very interesting stuff happening behind the scenes
Er, right.
Say those who stand on the left on escalators?