politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Rendering unto Caesar
Options
Comments
-
The numbers signing the petition are impressive, but having said that most of them are coming from areas that voted very heavily for Remain in the referendum like Oxbridge, London, Bristol, Edinburgh, etc.0
-
Theresa May seems determined to do as much damage on the way out as she can possibly manage.Danny565 said:
No doubt PB commentators will soon be telling us that, although any abuse that Tory MPs get is always the fault of Corbyn/Labour, abuse towards Labour MPs cannot possibly be May's fault.Theuniondivvie said:0 -
We might at least get 'clean' parties out of itJonathan said:
Uncertainty is perhaps better than the current slow death march.dyedwoolie said:
I think if we revoke the Tories split and probably labour too and we enter very uncertain times politicallyeek said:
Which is fine - but given where we currently are:dyedwoolie said:
And we have euro elections where Brexit parties sweep up, EU considers evicting uskyf_100 said:
No deal - unconscionable.dyedwoolie said:No deal - horrible
Revoke - horrible for democracy without the cover of a referendum
Deal - the logical answer but seems doomed
So basically we are relying on the EU twiddling their thumbs for 1 or 2 years while Britain has a midlife crisis. Ain't gonna happen
Deal - Clearly, the sane option. Repeatedly rejected.
Revoke - works, but has to be simultaneously accompanied by a combination of a) May's resignation, b) a second referendum (deal or no deal, but we have to revoke to do it on our timeframe rather than the EU's) or c) a general election ("let the next lot sort it out, but also judge us for our decision to revoke")
a) deal repeatedly rejected
b) no-one prepared for No deal
c) no chance of a long extension
Revoke is the sane option.
And as I said before chances are TIG or some other pro-EU group will win enough votes to be the biggest UK party...0 -
Revoke is a real option but not sure 'sane' comes into iteek said:
Which is fine - but given where we currently are:dyedwoolie said:
And we have euro elections where Brexit parties sweep up, EU considers evicting uskyf_100 said:
No deal - unconscionable.dyedwoolie said:No deal - horrible
Revoke - horrible for democracy without the cover of a referendum
Deal - the logical answer but seems doomed
So basically we are relying on the EU twiddling their thumbs for 1 or 2 years while Britain has a midlife crisis. Ain't gonna happen
Deal - Clearly, the sane option. Repeatedly rejected.
Revoke - works, but has to be simultaneously accompanied by a combination of a) May's resignation, b) a second referendum (deal or no deal, but we have to revoke to do it on our timeframe rather than the EU's) or c) a general election ("let the next lot sort it out, but also judge us for our decision to revoke")
a) deal repeatedly rejected
b) no-one prepared for No deal
c) no chance of a long extension
Revoke is the sane option.
And as I said before chances are TIG or some other pro-EU group will win enough votes to be the biggest UK party...
The best way is the deal or the deal subject to publlic confirmation.
However, public confirmation requires us to pass enabling EU election legislation by mid April and i cannot see it happening0 -
That's hardly a surprise is it? Their opinions are equally valid. In some constituencies over 6% of the electorate have signed the petition which is amazing.AndyJS said:The numbers signing the petition are impressive, but having said that most of them are coming from areas that voted very heavily for Remain in the referendum like Oxbridge, London, Bristol, Edinburgh, etc.
0 -
On the whole demagogues need a bit more charisma. Still she has activated Williamson:AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May seems determined to do as much damage on the way out as she can possibly manage.Danny565 said:
No doubt PB commentators will soon be telling us that, although any abuse that Tory MPs get is always the fault of Corbyn/Labour, abuse towards Labour MPs cannot possibly be May's fault.Theuniondivvie said:
https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1108780409494609920?s=190 -
Speaking as a Tory, May's a prat who should have been replaced last December and her tin eared speech yesterday was mad.Danny565 said:
No doubt PB commentators will soon be telling us that, although any abuse that Tory MPs get is always the fault of Corbyn/Labour, abuse towards Labour MPs cannot possibly be May's fault.Theuniondivvie said:
Do you accept that? Is that clear enough?0 -
Agreed. It's amazing how many times these people told themselves "Okay, well this time she can't make things any worse than they already are"Philip_Thompson said:
No doubt that MP was one who decided to give her confidence after she pulled the plug on the December vote last year. Zero sympathy for him.AndyJS said:
The writing was on the wall then. MPs who kept her then but complain now are pathetic. Nothing has changed.0 -
Nationalistdyedwoolie said:
We might at least get 'clean' parties out of itJonathan said:
Uncertainty is perhaps better than the current slow death march.dyedwoolie said:
I think if we revoke the Tories split and probably labour too and we enter very uncertain times politicallyeek said:
Which is fine - but given where we currently are:dyedwoolie said:
And we have euro elections where Brexit parties sweep up, EU considers evicting uskyf_100 said:
No deal - unconscionable.dyedwoolie said:No deal - horrible
Revoke - horrible for democracy without the cover of a referendum
Deal - the logical answer but seems doomed
So basically we are relying on the EU twiddling their thumbs for 1 or 2 years while Britain has a midlife crisis. Ain't gonna happen
Deal - Clearly, the sane option. Repeatedly rejected.
Revoke - works, but has to be simultaneously accompanied by a combination of a) May's resignation, b) a second referendum (deal or no deal, but we have to revoke to do it on our timeframe rather than the EU's) or c) a general election ("let the next lot sort it out, but also judge us for our decision to revoke")
a) deal repeatedly rejected
b) no-one prepared for No deal
c) no chance of a long extension
Revoke is the sane option.
And as I said before chances are TIG or some other pro-EU group will win enough votes to be the biggest UK party...
Liberal Progressive
Social Democrat
Left
?0 -
The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.0 -
I am expecting it Wednesdaynico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.0 -
https://twitter.com/francesogrady/status/1108726253849378816?s=21
May has united the country is ways hitherto unimaginable.0 -
Isn't that just the existing left-wing parties?Jonathan said:
Nationalistdyedwoolie said:
We might at least get 'clean' parties out of itJonathan said:
Uncertainty is perhaps better than the current slow death march.dyedwoolie said:
I think if we revoke the Tories split and probably labour too and we enter very uncertain times politicallyeek said:
Which is fine - but given where we currently are:dyedwoolie said:
And we have euro elections where Brexit parties sweep up, EU considers evicting uskyf_100 said:
No deal - unconscionable.dyedwoolie said:No deal - horrible
Revoke - horrible for democracy without the cover of a referendum
Deal - the logical answer but seems doomed
So basically we are relying on the EU twiddling their thumbs for 1 or 2 years while Britain has a midlife crisis. Ain't gonna happen
Deal - Clearly, the sane option. Repeatedly rejected.
Revoke - works, but has to be simultaneously accompanied by a combination of a) May's resignation, b) a second referendum (deal or no deal, but we have to revoke to do it on our timeframe rather than the EU's) or c) a general election ("let the next lot sort it out, but also judge us for our decision to revoke")
a) deal repeatedly rejected
b) no-one prepared for No deal
c) no chance of a long extension
Revoke is the sane option.
And as I said before chances are TIG or some other pro-EU group will win enough votes to be the biggest UK party...
Liberal Progressive
Social Democrat
Left
?
SNP
Lib Dems
TIG/New Labour
Corbynite Labour0 -
Interesting article, but it raises some free speech issues in relation not just to what is taught, but also in relation to the right to disagree with State orthodoxy. If, say, you're a teacher who disagrees with the view that gender is purely a matter of self I/D, are you allowed to say so, during discussions about transgender issues with your class? Or, if you're a pupil who disagrees with gay marriage (probably a common view at Parkfield school) would you be disciplined for expressing that opinion? Or if you disagree with abortion, would you be allowed to invite a speaker from SPUC to the school?
There are plenty of circumstances where this would be deemed hate speech.0 -
Yeah I think we get Tiggers however they brand, a Farage/ERG populist right wing party, a national liberal style Tory rump, SDP2 (Watson and scooby gang) and Labour (hard left variety)Jonathan said:
Nationalistdyedwoolie said:
We might at least get 'clean' parties out of itJonathan said:
Uncertainty is perhaps better than the current slow death march.dyedwoolie said:
I think if we revoke the Tories split and probably labour too and we enter very uncertain times politicallyeek said:
Which is fine - but given where we currently are:dyedwoolie said:
And we have euro elections where Brexit parties sweep up, EU considers evicting uskyf_100 said:
No deal - unconscionable.dyedwoolie said:No deal - horrible
Revoke - horrible for democracy without the cover of a referendum
Deal - the logical answer but seems doomed
So basically we are relying on the EU twiddling their thumbs for 1 or 2 years while Britain has a midlife crisis. Ain't gonna happen
Deal - Clearly, the sane option. Repeatedly rejected.
Revoke - works, but has to be simultaneously accompanied by a combination of a) May's resignation, b) a second referendum (deal or no deal, but we have to revoke to do it on our timeframe rather than the EU's) or c) a general election ("let the next lot sort it out, but also judge us for our decision to revoke")
a) deal repeatedly rejected
b) no-one prepared for No deal
c) no chance of a long extension
Revoke is the sane option.
And as I said before chances are TIG or some other pro-EU group will win enough votes to be the biggest UK party...
Liberal Progressive
Social Democrat
Left
?0 -
She does indeed need a plan B. But various MP groups need to agree on a plan B too. No dealers are out, they are so close they can taste it.Jonathan said:https://twitter.com/francesogrady/status/1108726253849378816?s=21
May has united the country is ways hitherto unimaginable.0 -
If it's no deal we might see six more "bastards" walk away. Not the end of the world.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.0 -
Tried to avoid current namesPhilip_Thompson said:
Isn't that just the existing left-wing parties?Jonathan said:
Nationalistdyedwoolie said:
We might at least get 'clean' parties out of itJonathan said:
Uncertainty is perhaps better than the current slow death march.dyedwoolie said:
I think if we revoke the Tories split and probably labour too and we enter very uncertain times politicallyeek said:
Which is fine - but given where we currently are:dyedwoolie said:
And we have euro elections where Brexit parties sweep up, EU considers evicting uskyf_100 said:
No deal - unconscionable.dyedwoolie said:No deal - horrible
Revoke - horrible for democracy without the cover of a referendum
Deal - the logical answer but seems doomed
So basically we are relying on the EU twiddling their thumbs for 1 or 2 years while Britain has a midlife crisis. Ain't gonna happen
Deal - Clearly, the sane option. Repeatedly rejected.
Revoke - works, but has to be simultaneously accompanied by a combination of a) May's resignation, b) a second referendum (deal or no deal, but we have to revoke to do it on our timeframe rather than the EU's) or c) a general election ("let the next lot sort it out, but also judge us for our decision to revoke")
a) deal repeatedly rejected
b) no-one prepared for No deal
c) no chance of a long extension
Revoke is the sane option.
And as I said before chances are TIG or some other pro-EU group will win enough votes to be the biggest UK party...
Liberal Progressive
Social Democrat
Left
?
SNP
Lib Dems
TIG/New Labour
Corbynite Labour
Nationalist (UKIP, ERG continuity)
Liberal Progressive (Cameroon, Orange Bookers)
Social Democrat (TIG, Labour < 2015)
Left (Momentum)0 -
Well yes, of course. But that doesn't have much to do with making a decision, since that can happen whether she goes or not. The sooner she goes the better, but talk of it is still a distraction.AndyJS said:0 -
Sadly, that is so true and if it happens it is a collective failure of the HOCkle4 said:
She does indeed need a plan B. But various MP groups need to agree on a plan B too. No dealers are out, they are so close they can taste it.Jonathan said:https://twitter.com/francesogrady/status/1108726253849378816?s=21
May has united the country is ways hitherto unimaginable.0 -
If its true as the FT is reporting that May has decided to exit no deal if her deal is rejected next week . . . given where we are now, while I'm sure you would regret that would you accept or even agree with that?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Revoke is a real option but not sure 'sane' comes into iteek said:
Which is fine - but given where we currently are:dyedwoolie said:
And we have euro elections where Brexit parties sweep up, EU considers evicting uskyf_100 said:
No deal - unconscionable.dyedwoolie said:No deal - horrible
Revoke - horrible for democracy without the cover of a referendum
Deal - the logical answer but seems doomed
So basically we are relying on the EU twiddling their thumbs for 1 or 2 years while Britain has a midlife crisis. Ain't gonna happen
Deal - Clearly, the sane option. Repeatedly rejected.
Revoke - works, but has to be simultaneously accompanied by a combination of a) May's resignation, b) a second referendum (deal or no deal, but we have to revoke to do it on our timeframe rather than the EU's) or c) a general election ("let the next lot sort it out, but also judge us for our decision to revoke")
a) deal repeatedly rejected
b) no-one prepared for No deal
c) no chance of a long extension
Revoke is the sane option.
And as I said before chances are TIG or some other pro-EU group will win enough votes to be the biggest UK party...
The best way is the deal or the deal subject to publlic confirmation.
However, public confirmation requires us to pass enabling EU election legislation by mid April and i cannot see it happening
Or would you prefer a unilateral revoke rather than no deal.0 -
Ah well, nice to know you think our views don't count ...AndyJS said:The numbers signing the petition are impressive, but having said that most of them are coming from areas that voted very heavily for Remain in the referendum like Oxbridge, London, Bristol, Edinburgh, etc.
(I haven't signed this.)0 -
-
Is watching a counter click up on the internet the modern equivalent of watching paint dry?0
-
It is without precedent, and utterly disgraceful, that a Prime Minister is prepared to inflict such a calamity upon the country.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.0 -
I expect that either way, one must just cause a faster implosion.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.
How can she possibly delay the vote until Wednesday? On what grounds does she justify delay given nothing new is happening? Surely parliament can force her hand on that?
That said, since I am busy all day Monday, Tuesday would be good for me.0 -
This.Philip_Thompson said:
If it's no deal we might see six more "bastards" walk away. Not the end of the world.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.
Once the deed is done, parliament and the party will be forced to move on (presumably with a new leader).
We'll need an election, though, otherwise we'll have more years of parliament attempting to force the government's hand on trade negotiations and again failing to make a decision.0 -
Not that scratched record. May had plenty of opportunity of to promote a plan B, but in her deliberate game of brinkmanship closed debate down to create the false binary choice we have today.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Sadly, that is so true and if it happens it is a collective failure of the HOCkle4 said:
She does indeed need a plan B. But various MP groups need to agree on a plan B too. No dealers are out, they are so close they can taste it.Jonathan said:https://twitter.com/francesogrady/status/1108726253849378816?s=21
May has united the country is ways hitherto unimaginable.0 -
Amir Ahmed, a lead campaigner for the parents, told Sima Kotecha: "Morally, we do not accept homosexuality as a valid sexual relationship to have."AndyJS said:
Surely by stating so bluntly this is a moral issue about sexuality generally and nothing to do with age appropriateness, there has to be recourse to act here?0 -
The end of the Tory party for quite a few years would be a silver lining . The public will punish the Tories and Leavers who were told by the ERG it would be no problem will also turn .Philip_Thompson said:
If it's no deal we might see six more "bastards" walk away. Not the end of the world.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.
Looks like Corbyn should put the removal men on speed dial .
0 -
Probably yes, but we may be watching the early stages of Brexit collapse. However it regularly crashes, and the conspiracy theorists will have a field day.ralphmalph said:Is watching a counter click up on the internet the modern equivalent of watching paint dry?
0 -
Surely if a final vote in the HoC comes down to May's Deal vs No Deal (with absolutely no time left for any other options like a second referendum or a new deal), her deal will win easily because most Labour MPs will support it?0
-
Now that is a very difficult question.Philip_Thompson said:
If its true as the FT is reporting that May has decided to exit no deal if her deal is rejected next week . . . given where we are now, while I'm sure you would regret that would you accept or even agree with that?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Revoke is a real option but not sure 'sane' comes into iteek said:
Which is fine - but given where we currently are:dyedwoolie said:
And we have euro elections where Brexit parties sweep up, EU considers evicting uskyf_100 said:
No deal - unconscionable.dyedwoolie said:No deal - horrible
Revoke - horrible for democracy without the cover of a referendum
Deal - the logical answer but seems doomed
So basically we are relying on the EU twiddling their thumbs for 1 or 2 years while Britain has a midlife crisis. Ain't gonna happen
Deal - Clearly, the sane option. Repeatedly rejected.
Revoke - works, but has to be simultaneously accompanied by a combination of a) May's resignation, b) a second referendum (deal or no deal, but we have to revoke to do it on our timeframe rather than the EU's) or c) a general election ("let the next lot sort it out, but also judge us for our decision to revoke")
a) deal repeatedly rejected
b) no-one prepared for No deal
c) no chance of a long extension
Revoke is the sane option.
And as I said before chances are TIG or some other pro-EU group will win enough votes to be the biggest UK party...
The best way is the deal or the deal subject to publlic confirmation.
However, public confirmation requires us to pass enabling EU election legislation by mid April and i cannot see it happening
Or would you prefer a unilateral revoke rather than no deal.
If the HOC have failed to prevent no deal I will very greatly regret it but hope that the UK and EU will mitigate the worst excesses
Revoke to me would be toxic without a referendum first0 -
I actually highly doubt the Cameroons will split from the Tories on a no deal Brexit. Especially if they feel that it was Labour opportunism that helped cause it.Jonathan said:
Tried to avoid current namesPhilip_Thompson said:
Isn't that just the existing left-wing parties?Jonathan said:
Nationalistdyedwoolie said:
We might at least get 'clean' parties out of itJonathan said:
Uncertainty is perhaps better than the current slow death march.dyedwoolie said:
I think if we revoke the Tories split and probably labour too and we enter very uncertain times politicallyeek said:
Which is fine - but given where we currently are:dyedwoolie said:
And we have euro elections where Brexit parties sweep up, EU considers evicting uskyf_100 said:
No deal - unconscionable.dyedwoolie said:No deal - horrible
Revoke - horrible for democracy without the cover of a referendum
Deal - the logical answer but seems doomed
So basically we are relying on the EU twiddling their thumbs for 1 or 2 years while Britain has a midlife crisis. Ain't gonna happen
Deal - Clearly, the sane option. Repeatedly rejected.
Revoke - works, but has to be simultaneously accompanied by a combination of a) May's resignation, b) a second referendum (deal or no deal, but we have to revoke to do it on our timeframe rather than the EU's) or c) a general election ("let the next lot sort it out, but also judge us for our decision to revoke")
a) deal repeatedly rejected
b) no-one prepared for No deal
c) no chance of a long extension
Revoke is the sane option.
And as I said before chances are TIG or some other pro-EU group will win enough votes to be the biggest UK party...
Liberal Progressive
Social Democrat
Left
?
SNP
Lib Dems
TIG/New Labour
Corbynite Labour
Nationalist (UKIP, ERG continuity)
Liberal Progressive (Cameroon, Orange Bookers)
Social Democrat (TIG, Labour < 2015)
Left (Momentum)
The fact is that if/once we exit with no deal the debates end and it becomes COBRA-meetings and dealing with life.
While the Tories are in office, anyone who walks away from the Tories now will lose their ability to shape what happens next.
Had May announced 2 years ago or even 3 months ago that she was actively seeking no deal then I think a split would have been much more likely. Right now though we're too close to the event horizon.0 -
After 2017 that’s the triumph of hope over experience.AnotherEngineer said:
This.Philip_Thompson said:
If it's no deal we might see six more "bastards" walk away. Not the end of the world.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.
Once the deed is done, parliament and the party will be forced to move on (presumably with a new leader).
We'll need an election, though, otherwise we'll have more years of parliament attempting to force the government's hand on trade negotiations and again failing to make a decision.
If there’s ever a spread bet offered on defections after no deal, I’m buying at 6.0 -
Brexit collapse started some time ago, we're just now reaching the point where it cannot be propped up any longer.jayfdee said:
Probably yes, but we may be watching the early stages of Brexit collapse. However it regularly crashes, and the conspiracy theorists will have a field day.ralphmalph said:Is watching a counter click up on the internet the modern equivalent of watching paint dry?
0 -
OK. Thanks for saying that.Philip_Thompson said:
Speaking as a Tory, May's a prat who should have been replaced last December and her tin eared speech yesterday was mad.Danny565 said:
No doubt PB commentators will soon be telling us that, although any abuse that Tory MPs get is always the fault of Corbyn/Labour, abuse towards Labour MPs cannot possibly be May's fault.Theuniondivvie said:
Do you accept that? Is that clear enough?
Now let's see if the likes of BigG NorthWales and Richard Nabavi, who clutch their pearls anytime Corbyn says something "divisive" and who blame him personally if any of his critics are abused, are also willing to hold May responsible for an MP being assaulted within 24 hours of her encouraging the public to think of MPs like him as traitors.0 -
My view is that, yes, the teacher should be allowed to disagree, yes, the SPUC speaker should be invited to speak and, no, the pupil should not be disciplined for disagreeing, only if he bullied a gay pupil. The intention of such teaching is to get pupils to empathise with those who are different, to develop some empathy and imagine themselves in someone else’s shoes, to view matters from a different perspective, to understand that there are different perspectives.Sean_F said:
Interesting article, but it raises some free speech issues in relation not just to what is taught, but also in relation to the right to disagree with State orthodoxy. If, say, you're a teacher who disagrees with the view that gender is purely a matter of self I/D, are you allowed to say so, during discussions about transgender issues with your class? Or, if you're a pupil who disagrees with gay marriage (probably a common view at Parkfield school) would you be disciplined for expressing that opinion? Or if you disagree with abortion, would you be allowed to invite a speaker from SPUC to the school?
There are plenty of circumstances where this would be deemed hate speech.
I am a bit of a free speech fundamentalist and consider all this No Platforming and “ooh, I’m offended” wailing a lot of babyish and dangerous nonsense.0 -
6 is meaningless. 6 would be brushed off, less so due to current Parliamentary numbers but SDP its not.AlastairMeeks said:
After 2017 that’s the triumph of hope over experience.AnotherEngineer said:
This.Philip_Thompson said:
If it's no deal we might see six more "bastards" walk away. Not the end of the world.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.
Once the deed is done, parliament and the party will be forced to move on (presumably with a new leader).
We'll need an election, though, otherwise we'll have more years of parliament attempting to force the government's hand on trade negotiations and again failing to make a decision.
If there’s ever a spread bet offered on defections after no deal, I’m buying at 6.0 -
May was tin eared but I don't hold her responsible. People on all sides have been calling each other traitors and other insults for the last two years now. This would have likely happened with or without last night's speech.Danny565 said:
OK. Thanks for saying that.Philip_Thompson said:
Speaking as a Tory, May's a prat who should have been replaced last December and her tin eared speech yesterday was mad.Danny565 said:
No doubt PB commentators will soon be telling us that, although any abuse that Tory MPs get is always the fault of Corbyn/Labour, abuse towards Labour MPs cannot possibly be May's fault.Theuniondivvie said:
Do you accept that? Is that clear enough?
Now let's see if the likes of BigG NorthWales and Richard Nabavi, who clutch their pearls anytime Corbyn says something "divisive" and who blame him personally if any of his critics are abused, are also willing to hold May responsible for an MP being assaulted within 24 hours of her encouraging the public to think of MPs like him as traitors.0 -
Well, yes. That is how we must see it.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:kle4 said:
That they do not like the options before them and think May a prat for making those the options is understandable, but that they've not yet decided on anything in favour or against definitively, rather makes their wailings lacking in persuasive ability. It's yet more displacement activity from making a hard choice, be it revoke, remove May or deal.numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.
Polls are finding huge support for No Deal, who do you think these people are? The options for brexit available have to be seen in terms of Tribal British politics. This government cannot revoke, but they can go to no deal and keep their party and public vote together whilst destroying Labour.
Yes. That is what I am saying. That’s what I believe.0 -
I’m deeply uncomfortable with a revocation . I’d rather she resigned after taking a longer extension and let someone else try and get a deal .Philip_Thompson said:
If its true as the FT is reporting that May has decided to exit no deal if her deal is rejected next week . . . given where we are now, while I'm sure you would regret that would you accept or even agree with that?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Revoke is a real option but not sure 'sane' comes into iteek said:
Which is fine - but given where we currently are:dyedwoolie said:
And we have euro elections where Brexit parties sweep up, EU considers evicting uskyf_100 said:
No deal - unconscionable.dyedwoolie said:No deal - horrible
Revoke - horrible for democracy without the cover of a referendum
Deal - the logical answer but seems doomed
So basically we are relying on the EU twiddling their thumbs for 1 or 2 years while Britain has a midlife crisis. Ain't gonna happen
Deal - Clearly, the sane option. Repeatedly rejected.
Revoke - works, but has to be simultaneously accompanied by a combination of a) May's resignation, b) a second referendum (deal or no deal, but we have to revoke to do it on our timeframe rather than the EU's) or c) a general election ("let the next lot sort it out, but also judge us for our decision to revoke")
a) deal repeatedly rejected
b) no-one prepared for No deal
c) no chance of a long extension
Revoke is the sane option.
And as I said before chances are TIG or some other pro-EU group will win enough votes to be the biggest UK party...
The best way is the deal or the deal subject to publlic confirmation.
However, public confirmation requires us to pass enabling EU election legislation by mid April and i cannot see it happening
Or would you prefer a unilateral revoke rather than no deal.
Leavers might accept a longer delay if May went .
0 -
No. Because the way the majority of the house have run away from the deal even when told, not without cause, that this might be it, shows that they could hold the vote at 1045pm on 29 March and Labour MPs, and others, would not vote for it as they will never accept it is the choice before them even if it is. They will moan that it is not fair May is making that the choice and refuse, as they have until now. Bluntly, the prospective Lab votes for the deal are among the more dishonest of actors in this - plenty of people remain and leave are very consistently against the deal, but seem focused on just presenting as if they might, to avoid no deal, but never actually doing it, while also not having the honesty of openly seeking a referendum or remain or no deal.AndyJS said:Surely if a final vote in the HoC comes down to May's Deal vs No Deal (with absolutely no time left for any other options like a second referendum or a new deal), her deal will win easily because most Labour MPs will support it?
That some people apparently have changed their minds about possibly supporting the deal because May was rude to them demonstrates there was never any intention of doing so. And Corbyn and co will never do it, and despite the jokes most Lab MPs are loyal.0 -
Faisal Islam suggesting EU leaders are having difficult conversations with each other and options are going off in differing directions. France very bullish, Ireland not so, Germany who knows and it will be a long night0
-
Perhaps. But what could anyone achieve by walking away? It would be too late to do anything about Brexit.AlastairMeeks said:
After 2017 that’s the triumph of hope over experience.AnotherEngineer said:
This.Philip_Thompson said:
If it's no deal we might see six more "bastards" walk away. Not the end of the world.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.
Once the deed is done, parliament and the party will be forced to move on (presumably with a new leader).
We'll need an election, though, otherwise we'll have more years of parliament attempting to force the government's hand on trade negotiations and again failing to make a decision.
If there’s ever a spread bet offered on defections after no deal, I’m buying at 6.
It would just mean oblivion via FPTP, anyway.0 -
A whole host of the more sensible Tories have already said they would resign if the government goes no deal.dots said:
Well, yes. That is how we must see it.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:kle4 said:
That they do not like the options before them and think May a prat for making those the options is understandable, but that they've not yet decided on anything in favour or against definitively, rather makes their wailings lacking in persuasive ability. It's yet more displacement activity from making a hard choice, be it revoke, remove May or deal.numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with ey can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.
Polls are finding huge support for No Deal, who do you think these people are? The options for brexit available have to be seen in terms of Tribal British politics. This government cannot revoke, but they can go to no deal and keep their party and public vote together whilst destroying Labour.
Yes. That is what I am saying. That’s what I believe.0 -
Thanks, and on that basis, I'd largely agree with you.Cyclefree said:
My view is that, yes, the teacher should be allowed to disagree, yes, the SPUC speaker should be invited to speak and, no, the pupil should not be disciplined for disagreeing, only if he bullied a gay pupil. The intention of such teaching is to get pupils to empathise with those who are different, to develop some empathy and imagine themselves in someone else’s shoes, to view matters from a different perspective, to understand that there are different perspectives.Sean_F said:
Interesting article, but it raises some free speech issues in relation not just to what is taught, but also in relation to the right to disagree with State orthodoxy. If, say, you're a teacher who disagrees with the view that gender is purely a matter of self I/D, are you allowed to say so, during discussions about transgender issues with your class? Or, if you're a pupil who disagrees with gay marriage (probably a common view at Parkfield school) would you be disciplined for expressing that opinion? Or if you disagree with abortion, would you be allowed to invite a speaker from SPUC to the school?
There are plenty of circumstances where this would be deemed hate speech.
I am a bit of a free speech fundamentalist and consider all this No Platforming and “ooh, I’m offended” wailing a lot of babyish and dangerous nonsense.0 -
Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.0
-
Easy to stop that - Have Chuka stand next to Her Maj.El_Capitano said:0 -
It would be a lot more than six.Philip_Thompson said:
6 is meaningless. 6 would be brushed off, less so due to current Parliamentary numbers but SDP its not.AlastairMeeks said:
After 2017 that’s the triumph of hope over experience.AnotherEngineer said:
This.Philip_Thompson said:
If it's no deal we might see six more "bastards" walk away. Not the end of the world.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.
Once the deed is done, parliament and the party will be forced to move on (presumably with a new leader).
We'll need an election, though, otherwise we'll have more years of parliament attempting to force the government's hand on trade negotiations and again failing to make a decision.
If there’s ever a spread bet offered on defections after no deal, I’m buying at 6.
Also, you might want to think what government would look like in the current Parliament with six fewer MPs. Not easily brushed off.0 -
The disease is spreading. We might break the EUBig_G_NorthWales said:Faisal Islam suggesting EU leaders are having difficult conversations with each other and options are going off in differing directions. France very bullish, Ireland not so, Germany who knows and it will be a long night
0 -
My worry is they take an easy way out. I know none of them want no deal either, but I don't see how dragging it out is good for them either, surely making us confront deal/revoke/nodeal is better for them?Big_G_NorthWales said:Faisal Islam suggesting EU leaders are having difficult conversations with each other and options are going off in differing directions. France very bullish, Ireland not so, Germany who knows and it will be a long night
To my mind short extension equals no deal, because parliament is still implacably opposed to the only deal option that could occur in a short extension. A longer extension probably leads to remain, but it still a year or so of yet more agonising politics to play out.0 -
That's the trouble with holding all the cards - but different countries playing different games.Big_G_NorthWales said:Faisal Islam suggesting EU leaders are having difficult conversations with each other and options are going off in differing directions. France very bullish, Ireland not so, Germany who knows and it will be a long night
0 -
Splendid. Glad to know the People Who Matter (TM) will be safely tucked away behind six or more feet of solid concrete when the shit hits the fan. Truly reassuring...Foxy said:
On the whole demagogues need a bit more charisma. Still she has activated Williamson:AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May seems determined to do as much damage on the way out as she can possibly manage.Danny565 said:
No doubt PB commentators will soon be telling us that, although any abuse that Tory MPs get is always the fault of Corbyn/Labour, abuse towards Labour MPs cannot possibly be May's fault.Theuniondivvie said:
https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1108780409494609920?s=19
0 -
Crush the saboteursAramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
0 -
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.0 -
Agree emphatically about free speechCyclefree said:
My view is that, yes, the teacher should be allowed to disagree, yes, the SPUC speaker should be invited to speak and, no, the pupil should not be disciplined for disagreeing, only if he bullied a gay pupil. The intention of such teaching is to get pupils to empathise with those who are different, to develop some empathy and imagine themselves in someone else’s shoes, to view matters from a different perspective, to understand that there are different perspectives.Sean_F said:
Interesting article, but it raises some free speech issues in relation not just to what is taught, but also in relation to the right to disagree with State orthodoxy. If, say, you're a teacher who disagrees with the view that gender is purely a matter of self I/D, are you allowed to say so, during discussions about transgender issues with your class? Or, if you're a pupil who disagrees with gay marriage (probably a common view at Parkfield school) would you be disciplined for expressing that opinion? Or if you disagree with abortion, would you be allowed to invite a speaker from SPUC to the school?
There are plenty of circumstances where this would be deemed hate speech.
I am a bit of a free speech fundamentalist and consider all this No Platforming and “ooh, I’m offended” wailing a lot of babyish and dangerous nonsense.0 -
According to Sky leaders (ex TM) having frank discussions and for the first time all is not in harmonyAramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
He expects a late night so doubt TM will speak until after Tusk and Junckers, who were scheduled to hold a press conference at 7.00pm0 -
You're not serious?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
I've never understood the urge to consume alcohol as much as I do right now.0 -
Calamity?ThomasNashe said:
It is without precedent, and utterly disgraceful, that a Prime Minister is prepared to inflict such a calamity upon the country.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.
its hardly the end of days0 -
That is such a misunderstanding of how religion works that it's difficult to know where to start. A young Orthodox Jew would have no contact with someone outside their community let alone to the joys of LGBT until at least their late teens if then. Then they marry.
They have 613 obligations and the retribution meted out by their divinity trumps 'liberal values' any day of the week. They learn it in their Jewish homes and they learn it in their Jewish schools. At what point would you think it appropriate to tell them that being gay or trans is a great choice. Time for God to get with the program?
There is a wonderful book called 'Foreskin's Lament' by the New York author Shalom Auslander. It's very funny but accurately describes where fear of the law comes when compared to fear of God......
" When I was very young my parents and teachers told me about a man who was very strong. They told me he could destroy the whole world. They told me he could move mountains and part the sea. It was important to keep the man happy. When we obeyed him he liked us. He liked us so much he killed anyone who didn't like us. But when we didn't obey him he hated us. Some days he hated us so much he killed us or let others kill us.........we call these days 'holidays'"
It does become very funny.......seriously!0 -
Actually I think No Deal could save the Tory party. The tribes would split into Pro-Brexit anything-bad-happening-is-due-to-the-EU-and-remainers vs Pro-Eu everything-bad-happening-is-due-to-the-Tories. And so onwards for a decade.nico67 said:
The end of the Tory party for quite a few years would be a silver lining . The public will punish the Tories and Leavers who were told by the ERG it would be no problem will also turn .Philip_Thompson said:
If it's no deal we might see six more "bastards" walk away. Not the end of the world.nico67 said:The FT reporting that May is willing to accept no deal .
Whether this is a leak to frighten MPs or whether she really is going to go for that only time will tell .
A key indicator might be when the vote is held . The later in the week the easier for her to do that , if the vote is earlier then less chance .
If it’s no deal then I expect a complete implosion in the Tory party.
Looks like Corbyn should put the removal men on speed dial .0 -
Is there a market on who will she will attack this time?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
MPs Evens
The media 3/1
Foreigners 5/1
Wheat field farmers 8/1
Her husband for not putting the bins out 12/1
0 -
They are all backing themselves into a corner - not necessarily the same corner.dots said:
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.0 -
I can't drink, as I'm on a bunch of medication in advance of an operation. Please drink on my behalf.kle4 said:
You're not serious?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
I've never understood the urge to consume alcohol as much as I do right now.
Might just up my dose to get me through.0 -
It has been happening for far too long. Prescott was egged, Farage was hassled, Labour activists stand outside Tory Conference and chant "Tory scum get out of Brum."Philip_Thompson said:
May was tin eared but I don't hold her responsible. People on all sides have been calling each other traitors and other insults for the last two years now. This would have likely happened with or without last night's speech.Danny565 said:
OK. Thanks for saying that.Philip_Thompson said:
Speaking as a Tory, May's a prat who should have been replaced last December and her tin eared speech yesterday was mad.Danny565 said:
No doubt PB commentators will soon be telling us that, although any abuse that Tory MPs get is always the fault of Corbyn/Labour, abuse towards Labour MPs cannot possibly be May's fault.Theuniondivvie said:
Do you accept that? Is that clear enough?
Now let's see if the likes of BigG NorthWales and Richard Nabavi, who clutch their pearls anytime Corbyn says something "divisive" and who blame him personally if any of his critics are abused, are also willing to hold May responsible for an MP being assaulted within 24 hours of her encouraging the public to think of MPs like him as traitors.
I condone none of it but the political class need to sit down and have a think about how they collectively take the intolerance out of the situation.0 -
If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/11088022223290900480 -
As usual, spot on. When can we start voting for you?Cyclefree said:
My view is that, yes, the teacher should be allowed to disagree, yes, the SPUC speaker should be invited to speak and, no, the pupil should not be disciplined for disagreeing, only if he bullied a gay pupil. The intention of such teaching is to get pupils to empathise with those who are different, to develop some empathy and imagine themselves in someone else’s shoes, to view matters from a different perspective, to understand that there are different perspectives.Sean_F said:
Interesting article, but it raises some free speech issues in relation not just to what is taught, but also in relation to the right to disagree with State orthodoxy. If, say, you're a teacher who disagrees with the view that gender is purely a matter of self I/D, are you allowed to say so, during discussions about transgender issues with your class? Or, if you're a pupil who disagrees with gay marriage (probably a common view at Parkfield school) would you be disciplined for expressing that opinion? Or if you disagree with abortion, would you be allowed to invite a speaker from SPUC to the school?
There are plenty of circumstances where this would be deemed hate speech.
I am a bit of a free speech fundamentalist and consider all this No Platforming and “ooh, I’m offended” wailing a lot of babyish and dangerous nonsense.0 -
Yes because next week the nukes fly.........kyf_100 said:
Splendid. Glad to know the People Who Matter (TM) will be safely tucked away behind six or more feet of solid concrete when the shit hits the fan. Truly reassuring...Foxy said:
On the whole demagogues need a bit more charisma. Still she has activated Williamson:AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May seems determined to do as much damage on the way out as she can possibly manage.Danny565 said:
No doubt PB commentators will soon be telling us that, although any abuse that Tory MPs get is always the fault of Corbyn/Labour, abuse towards Labour MPs cannot possibly be May's fault.Theuniondivvie said:
https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1108780409494609920?s=19
0 -
The rumours seem to be that the French are successfully arguing for the extension to be shorter, possibly up to early May only.0
-
Plus, GreensJonathan said:
Tried to avoid current namesPhilip_Thompson said:
Isn't that just the existing left-wing parties?Jonathan said:
Nationalistdyedwoolie said:
We might at least get 'clean' parties out of itJonathan said:
Uncertainty is perhaps better than the current slow death march.dyedwoolie said:
I think if we revoke the Tories split and probably labour too and we enter very uncertain times politicallyeek said:
Which is fine - but given where we currently are:dyedwoolie said:
And we have euro elections where Brexit parties sweep up, EU considers evicting uskyf_100 said:
No deal - unconscionable.dyedwoolie said:No deal - horrible
Revoke - horrible for democracy without the cover of a referendum
Deal - the logical answer but seems doomed
So basically we are relying on the EU twiddling their thumbs for 1 or 2 years while Britain has a midlife crisis. Ain't gonna happen
Deal - Clearly, the sane option. Repeatedly rejected.
Revoke - works, but has to be simultaneously accompanied by a combination of a) May's resignation, b) a second referendum (deal or no deal, but we have to revoke to do it on our timeframe rather than the EU's) or c) a general election ("let the next lot sort it out, but also judge us for our decision to revoke")
a) deal repeatedly rejected
b) no-one prepared for No deal
c) no chance of a long extension
Revoke is the sane option.
And as I said before chances are TIG or some other pro-EU group will win enough votes to be the biggest UK party...
Liberal Progressive
Social Democrat
Left
?
SNP
Lib Dems
TIG/New Labour
Corbynite Labour
Nationalist (UKIP, ERG continuity)
Liberal Progressive (Cameroon, Orange Bookers)
Social Democrat (TIG, Labour < 2015)
Left (Momentum)
Plus, The Nationalists Aren't Nationalist Enough Nationalists
Plus, The Nationalists Don't Hate The Muslims & Jews Enough Nationalists
0 -
This petition site is going down more often than [MODERATED].0
-
Only by the Education Secretary or the Equalities Minister, Damian Hinds or Penny Mordaunt, standing up and saying, very clearly, to Amir Ahmed and everyone else who thinks like him that this is irrelevant. He is living in a country where homosexuality is lawful and all children, regardless of their religion, need to understand that. He cannot opt out of the laws of the country he is living in.kle4 said:
Amir Ahmed, a lead campaigner for the parents, told Sima Kotecha: "Morally, we do not accept homosexuality as a valid sexual relationship to have."AndyJS said:
Surely by stating so bluntly this is a moral issue about sexuality generally and nothing to do with age appropriateness, there has to be recourse to act here?
This issue is as important, IMO, as the Rushdie fatwa 40 years ago. Britain was equivocal then and sought to appease the fundamentalists then. It must not make the same mistake again.
Or - since they are probably too feeble to do so - they can ask me to do it. In fact, I might send them my article.0 -
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.dots said:
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.0 -
So who do you think next weeks No Deal exit hurts most? Its Labour party R.I.P. in my opinion because conservative members and supporters in the country are behind no deal, Labours aren’t, and labour voters and members have plenty of other options throughout UK to go to as this year develops and the party remains buried under the media barrage for voting with ERG to make no deal happen.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.
Labour are sleepwalking to oblivion voting down the WA this last time and creating No Deal brexit. From 11th April they get the blame, for days, weeks, years and decades to come.0 -
oh god no.......AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
"nothing has changed"?
0 -
April 11 being toutedIanB2 said:The rumours seem to be that the French are successfully arguing for the extension to be shorter, possibly up to early May only.
0 -
Christ, the woman's self-righteousness has driven her insane:
Chris Wilkins, a former speechwriter for May, said that he thought that she was finally running out of road as prime minister.
But he did not expect her to resign because of her dogged determination to carry on with her duties: “I think that if the entire cabinet resigned, she would not go because in her mind she cannot be forced out under party rules. If there was a cabinet of one, she would sit in it.”
The ex-No 10 aide added that he believed that May’s televised address was a mistake, because it attacked parliament at a time when she needs their support. It was characteristic of her core beliefs that “I’m the one who is the grown up” and that many other MPs did not undertake their jobs with sufficient seriousness, he added.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/21/cabinet-ministers-believe-risk-of-no-deal-brexit-now-very-real0 -
And how do the HOC pass enabling legislation for the EU elections with the ERG and probably most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in Julykle4 said:If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/11088022223290900480 -
Would it be right to assume that, after a GE where the DUP no longer held the balance of power, Parliament would therefore be able to legislate to repeal the necessary laws? That hopefully gives a way forward.DougSeal said:
There is an assumption that Westminster would resume legislating directly but, again, at the moment politically it isn't really in much of a position to do so.kle4 said:
Did the convention anticipate what to do if the devolved legislature is not in a position to agree or disagree?DougSeal said:
In theory yes. Parliament remains sovereign over the whole UK and it would merely take an amendment to the Abortion Act 1967 (specifically repealing section 7(3) and replacing it with a clause explicitly extending its territorial scope to Northern Ireland. However politically that would be very difficult because of the Sewel Convention -Richard_Tyndall said:Brilliant article and agree with every word.
One question to The House as I don't know the legal position. Since the governance of NI has been temporarily returned to Westminster because of the stalemate at Stormont could Parliament not legislate right now to sweep away the bigotry laws in NI?
"14. The United Kingdom Parliament retains authority to legislate on any issue, whether devolved or not. It is ultimately for Parliament to decide what use to make of that power. However, the UK Government will proceed in accordance with the convention that the UK Parliament would not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters except with the agreement of the devolved legislature. The devolved administrations will be responsible for seeking such agreement as may be required for this purpose on an approach from the UK Government."
- Memorandum of Understanding between the UK Govt and the devolved administrations
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/316157/MoU_between_the_UK_and_the_Devolved_Administrations.pdf0 -
Meeting likely to overrun by up to two hours.Big_G_NorthWales said:
According to Sky leaders (ex TM) having frank discussions and for the first time all is not in harmonyAramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
He expects a late night so doubt TM will speak until after Tusk and Junckers, who were scheduled to hold a press conference at 7.00pm0 -
This works for me, everything is on the table then. Probably makes a GE slightly more likely.kle4 said:If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/11088022223290900480 -
The extension will be 30 Feb or 1 Nextember.0
-
What the hell do you think Labour have been doing?Jonathan said:
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.dots said:
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
There is a deal on the table. We could pass it tomorrow and all of this would go away. It is not perfect but it is better than no deal.
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That iso close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.0 -
You do realise that nothing will happen, don't you? Fear of being accused of racism will stop any action.kle4 said:
Amir Ahmed, a lead campaigner for the parents, told Sima Kotecha: "Morally, we do not accept homosexuality as a valid sexual relationship to have."AndyJS said:
Surely by stating so bluntly this is a moral issue about sexuality generally and nothing to do with age appropriateness, there has to be recourse to act here?0 -
Deal - badJonathan said:Deal - bad
No Deal - mad
Extension - sad
Referendum - glad
No Deal - badderer
Extension - mad as f***
Referendum - mad as f*** but even more so0 -
Probably, but do we really want all options still on the table? We need to start narrowing down the damn options, else they'll just return to the same position at the end of the extension period!AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
This works for me, everything is on the table then. Probably makes a GE slightly more likely.kle4 said:If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/11088022223290900480 -
Give me examples of when parties put the country before their party?Jonathan said:
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.dots said:
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.0 -
It is better than now, where our options are dire deal or no deal.kle4 said:
Probably, but do we really want all options still on the table? We need to start narrowing down the damn options, else they'll just return to the same position at the end of the extension period!AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
This works for me, everything is on the table then. Probably makes a GE slightly more likely.kle4 said:If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/11088022223290900480 -
The EU won't guarantee that and no mention if it will be made in the communique. It's a leak of their wargamingBig_G_NorthWales said:
And how do the HOC pass enabling legislation for the EU elections with the ERG and probably most of the Country very opposed to sending MEPs to EU in Julykle4 said:If true this ensures the deal is defeated again? (Not that more ensuring is needed). With a ready made long extension in the bag no one need change to back the deal since all the no deal/referendum and Lab deal options will theoretically at least be on the table, in the minds of their supporters at least.
https://twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/11088022223290900480 -
Yes, probablyExiledInScotland said:
You do realise that nothing will happen, don't you? Fear of being accused of racism will stop any action.kle4 said:
Amir Ahmed, a lead campaigner for the parents, told Sima Kotecha: "Morally, we do not accept homosexuality as a valid sexual relationship to have."AndyJS said:
Surely by stating so bluntly this is a moral issue about sexuality generally and nothing to do with age appropriateness, there has to be recourse to act here?0 -
Everyone during Good Friday Agreement.dots said:
Give me examples of when parties put the country before their party?Jonathan said:
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.dots said:
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.0 -
The Tories only survive no deal if it’s not a disaster .0
-
How about this from just the other dayralphmalph said:
It has been happening for far too long. Prescott was egged, Farage was hassled, Labour activists stand outside Tory Conference and chant "Tory scum get out of Brum."Philip_Thompson said:
May was tin eared but I don't hold her responsible. People on all sides have been calling each other traitors and other insults for the last two years now. This would have likely happened with or without last night's speech.Danny565 said:
OK. Thanks for saying that.Philip_Thompson said:
Speaking as a Tory, May's a prat who should have been replaced last December and her tin eared speech yesterday was mad.Danny565 said:
No doubt PB commentators will soon be telling us that, although any abuse that Tory MPs get is always the fault of Corbyn/Labour, abuse towards Labour MPs cannot possibly be May's fault.Theuniondivvie said:
Do you accept that? Is that clear enough?
Now let's see if the likes of BigG NorthWales and Richard Nabavi, who clutch their pearls anytime Corbyn says something "divisive" and who blame him personally if any of his critics are abused, are also willing to hold May responsible for an MP being assaulted within 24 hours of her encouraging the public to think of MPs like him as traitors.
I condone none of it but the political class need to sit down and have a think about how they collectively take the intolerance out of the situation.
https://order-order.com/2019/03/20/labour-group-leader-likes-call-may-hanged/
Kinder, gentler etc
0 -
The LibDems are an obvious example.dots said:
Give me examples of when parties put the country before their party?Jonathan said:
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.dots said:
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.0 -
Surely there will be an immediate election in the chaos when moderate Tories quit? Who knows what happens then, but not sure it is going to be good for the Toriesnico67 said:The Tories only survive no deal if it’s not a disaster .
0 -
Actually -up to a point I would accept that.IanB2 said:
The LibDems are an obvious example.dots said:
Give me examples of when parties put the country before their party?Jonathan said:
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.dots said:
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labour government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.0 -
Will she be giving us an honest apprasal of how things went?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Great news - she's apparently going to make a statement this evening.
https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/11087996987296890880 -
Ramsay Macdonalddots said:
Give me examples of when parties put the country before their party?Jonathan said:
You’re saying the Tories would put party before country. I don’t like them much, but they are not that bad.dots said:
And you are right. Hence revoke is off the table. Labour MPs need to appreciate this before voting on the WAFloater said:
I would put it differently - revoke destroys the tory party.IanB2 said:
Lol @ "no deal saves the Tory party" !dots said:
I am removing revoke.eek said:
As I continually repeat - until an item is removed from the table 3 options exist. We need to remove (or have a majority for that option) to force a decision on the other 2 options.kle4 said:numbertwelve said:
For the last time for those at the back.eek said:
I am becoming absolutely livid at MPs not just holding their nose and voting for it. Although May has been a gigantic prat and has handled this atrociously, MPs will share a tremendous amount of the responsibility if they precipitate a no deal Brexit.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option. 0
This discussion has been closed.