politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » This morning’s front pages after the night before
Comments
-
On the assumption most of ERG will vote for TM deal tomorrow plus the conservatives who have backed it previously and some labour mps her deal may emerge tomorrow as the way forward.
0 -
For me:-Pulpstar said:So how would everyone fill out their indicitive ballots ?
6 options I can see that have some sort of support in the house:
Revoke
{2nd referendum/People's vote/May's deal subject to ratification by the public} <- All essentially identical
Common Market 2.0
May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
May's deal
No Deal
I'd possibly go
1) Common Market 2.0
2) May's deal
3) May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
4) 2nd Ref
5) No deal
6) Revocation
There's a clear enough dividing line between the top 3 and bottom 3 options for me.</p>
1. May's dea
2. May's deal plus CU
3. Common Market 2
4. No Deal
5. Referendum
6. No Deal0 -
Jacob Rees-Mogg is 5 years younger than me. Is he really wearing a fecking monocle? That would have been mid-eighties. People actually want to follow this out of touch twit.DecrepitJohnL said:
The pre-lunch vodka intake of hairdressers in the Windsor and Eton area? Even if nanny cut JRM's hair, how on earth does he end up with a fringe two inches lower on one side?WhisperingOracle said:
That haunted and distanced photo of Rees-Mogg suddenly makes me feel as if I understand something a bit better.Dura_Ace said:
L: Young Rees-Mogg about to flagellate himself before vespers.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Absolutely agree on 1 and 2Cyclefree said:There are, though, three good things about Brexit.
1. It has shown us in vivid Technicolour how utterly stupid and pig-ignorant many of our MPs are.
2. Katya Adler.
3. All those pictures of Donald Tusk when younger showing what a hottie he was.
Cannot comment on Tusk
R: Young Tusk protesting against Soviet totalitarianism on the streets of Gdansk.
0 -
Though of course they still want to be able to use the showers for free whenever they like.FF43 said:
People think the EU is something you can switch off and there are no consequences to doing so. Like the membership for the gym you never go to.Benpointer said:More anecdota:
Just back from a 12 day P&O cruise to the Canaries. I'd guess the demographic of the ship (average age 60+, mainly middle class, mostly from small towns across the UK) was 75% leave. We always like to share tables at in the restaurants and meet a lot of interesting (and some boring) people through the cruise.
Brexit has never got a mention on previous cruises but this time it was raised quite often, usually by one person on the table saying something like: "I can't understand why we just can't leave - we did fine in 1970".
What surprised me is that this was often met with embarrassed silence or mumblings. Also quite a few people saying things like: "It's such a mess", "We should just forget the whole thing", "I can't understand why we're bothering" (to which the rejoiner was "well you voted for it!")
I am sure it's true that the vast majority outside our PB bubble are thoroughly fed up to the back teeth with Brexit. I think many just want it done or dropped and don't really care much which.
As I say only anecdotal.0 -
It should have read "Diana's Assassins Have Stolen What's Left of Brexit."AlastairMeeks said:The Express headline has gone full fruitcake.
0 -
It's a shame that May's deal (WA) followed by a GE isn't on the list as that seems the most sensible option to me.Pulpstar said:I really didn't like the way 2nd reffers were angling to get their option outside of the indicitive ballots. It's of the utmost substance and not simply a process issue, most dishonest. Sure, include May's deal subject to a 2nd vote in the indicitive votes but you can't just take whatever option emerges and produce another "subject to ratification by the public" hurdle for it.
If it is Common Market 2.0, it is Common Market 2.0.0 -
You're missing out something about house prices, pensions and the weather...Sean_F said:
It should have read "Diana's Assassins Have Stolen What's Left of Brexit."AlastairMeeks said:The Express headline has gone full fruitcake.
0 -
What should have happened right from the starttlg86 said:
It's a shame that May's deal (WA) followed by a GE isn't on the list as that seems the most sensible option to me.Pulpstar said:I really didn't like the way 2nd reffers were angling to get their option outside of the indicitive ballots. It's of the utmost substance and not simply a process issue, most dishonest. Sure, include May's deal subject to a 2nd vote in the indicitive votes but you can't just take whatever option emerges and produce another "subject to ratification by the public" hurdle for it.
If it is Common Market 2.0, it is Common Market 2.0.0 -
What did we do about those people who decided not to participate in the EU Ref?TudorRose said:
I don't see this at all. I genuinely don't believe this system can work. First, what about those who decide not to participate (I can see that 'no dealers' may well decide to do this)? Second, even having established some sort of 'pecking order' you can't force an MP to vote for the collective first choice to become legislation. For example, would the SNP be willing to vote for any collectively-agreed form of Brexit given their stated support for revocation? I just don't see it working (and that's before Corbyn/May get the whips to work).Pulpstar said:
Nonsense. If someone sticks up 1) No Deal for instance then you simply discard the ballot after the first round if it loses. Any voting system rewards those who make more preferences anyway.Stereotomy said:If Letwin does go with some form of preference voting, it should be a requirement that a ballot ranks all of the available options, otherwise it is entirely invalidated. That would force everyone to either put it all on the public record or count themselves out of the process altogether.
I suspect May would choose the latter0 -
Very fair chance of a GE following any variant of leave (Except No deal) to be honest as they all must include the backstop so the DUP will probably stop supporting the Gov't.tlg86 said:
It's a shame that May's deal (WA) followed by a GE isn't on the list as that seems the most sensible option to me.Pulpstar said:I really didn't like the way 2nd reffers were angling to get their option outside of the indicitive ballots. It's of the utmost substance and not simply a process issue, most dishonest. Sure, include May's deal subject to a 2nd vote in the indicitive votes but you can't just take whatever option emerges and produce another "subject to ratification by the public" hurdle for it.
If it is Common Market 2.0, it is Common Market 2.0.0 -
I have to admire your optimism.Big_G_NorthWales said:On the assumption most of ERG will vote for TM deal tomorrow plus the conservatives who have backed it previously and some labour mps her deal may emerge tomorrow as the way forward.
If Brexit is blocked there is going to be a bloodbath at the local elections for the Conservatives. Particularly this year's batch.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_local_elections
Suspect the next discussions will be who takes the blame - but for the Con party does it really matter - the seats will be lost.
0 -
Sean_F said:
For me:-Pulpstar said:So how would everyone fill out their indicitive ballots ?
6 options I can see that have some sort of support in the house:
Revoke
{2nd referendum/People's vote/May's deal subject to ratification by the public} <- All essentially identical
Common Market 2.0
May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
May's deal
No Deal
I'd possibly go
1) Common Market 2.0
2) May's deal
3) May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
4) 2nd Ref
5) No deal
6) Revocation
There's a clear enough dividing line between the top 3 and bottom 3 options for me.</p>
1. May's dea
2. May's deal plus CU
3. Common Market 2
4. No Deal
5. Referendum
6. No Deal
Congratulations - you spoilt your ballot paper.
Edit I assume you meant 6. Revoke ?0 -
Check the Downing Street fire extinguishers.....Benpointer said:FPT: Just had to comment on this great summary from Dura_Ace
Theresa May as Miss Haversham is quite brilliant.Dura_Ace said:
Prince Chas has stood around in Cuba like he's got a glass cock.Sandpit said:Been away for a few days. Anything happened?
Casino went full Beautiful Mind over the 2 million strong Revoke March.
May has almost completed her transformation to her final form which the Miss Havisham of No. 10.
Mueller was meh but Trump is still an ignorant piece of ochre coloured shit.
Oliver Letlabourwin is apparently still a thing.
Pete Buttigieg is almost certainly not going to be POTUS but you can still make money betting that he will.
SeanT's Mrs is apparently turning into the wrong Mitford sister since she read some book about China.
Corbo danced next to a statue of some old c**t who used to be on the telly in Morecambe.
Brexit is proper LOL.
0 -
But MPs who don't participate in the indicative votes can still effectively veto legislation that they don't like later on in the process.Benpointer said:
What did we do about those people who decided not to participate in the EU Ref?TudorRose said:
I don't see this at all. I genuinely don't believe this system can work. First, what about those who decide not to participate (I can see that 'no dealers' may well decide to do this)? Second, even having established some sort of 'pecking order' you can't force an MP to vote for the collective first choice to become legislation. For example, would the SNP be willing to vote for any collectively-agreed form of Brexit given their stated support for revocation? I just don't see it working (and that's before Corbyn/May get the whips to work).Pulpstar said:
Nonsense. If someone sticks up 1) No Deal for instance then you simply discard the ballot after the first round if it loses. Any voting system rewards those who make more preferences anyway.Stereotomy said:If Letwin does go with some form of preference voting, it should be a requirement that a ballot ranks all of the available options, otherwise it is entirely invalidated. That would force everyone to either put it all on the public record or count themselves out of the process altogether.
I suspect May would choose the latter
0 -
I am sure they haven't thought it through like that. The EU isn't like gym membership. We know that; they don't. It is a lack of interest rather than stupidityBenpointer said:
Though of course they still want to be able to use the showers for free whenever they like.FF43 said:
People think the EU is something you can switch off and there are no consequences to doing so. Like the membership for the gym you never go to.Benpointer said:More anecdota:
Just back from a 12 day P&O cruise to the Canaries. I'd guess the demographic of the ship (average age 60+, mainly middle class, mostly from small towns across the UK) was 75% leave. We always like to share tables at in the restaurants and meet a lot of interesting (and some boring) people through the cruise.
Brexit has never got a mention on previous cruises but this time it was raised quite often, usually by one person on the table saying something like: "I can't understand why we just can't leave - we did fine in 1970".
What surprised me is that this was often met with embarrassed silence or mumblings. Also quite a few people saying things like: "It's such a mess", "We should just forget the whole thing", "I can't understand why we're bothering" (to which the rejoiner was "well you voted for it!")
I am sure it's true that the vast majority outside our PB bubble are thoroughly fed up to the back teeth with Brexit. I think many just want it done or dropped and don't really care much which.
As I say only anecdotal.0 -
Indeed - any Conservative MP voting for any of the options bar no deal is voting for a GE...Pulpstar said:
Very fair chance of a GE following any variant of leave (Except No deal) to be honest as they all must include the backstop so the DUP will probably stop supporting the Gov't.tlg86 said:
It's a shame that May's deal (WA) followed by a GE isn't on the list as that seems the most sensible option to me.Pulpstar said:I really didn't like the way 2nd reffers were angling to get their option outside of the indicitive ballots. It's of the utmost substance and not simply a process issue, most dishonest. Sure, include May's deal subject to a 2nd vote in the indicitive votes but you can't just take whatever option emerges and produce another "subject to ratification by the public" hurdle for it.
If it is Common Market 2.0, it is Common Market 2.0.
0 -
The weather is there (top left). They only talk about house prices when they are going up.Slackbladder said:
You're missing out something about house prices, pensions and the weather...Sean_F said:
It should have read "Diana's Assassins Have Stolen What's Left of Brexit."AlastairMeeks said:The Express headline has gone full fruitcake.
0 -
It could be May's F******s M****t.Big_G_NorthWales said:On the assumption most of ERG will vote for TM deal tomorrow plus the conservatives who have backed it previously and some labour mps her deal may emerge tomorrow as the way forward.
0 -
I am not convinced of the wisdom of now remaining, but I do wish people would stop suggesting that no MP should offer it as a logical alternative. Based upon the catastrophic way it has been handled it is a perfectly reasonable thing for an MP to say that in all conscience they cannot say it is in the interests of their constituents and the country. And good for them for holding that position. If a referendum voted for capital punishment it is ridiculous to suggest all MPs should fall in behind it.Sean_F said:
I think it was a Com Res poll from last week.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Need to see the poll before commentingwilliamglenn said:The self-awareness award of the day goes to Steve Baker.
https://twitter.com/SteveBakerHW/status/1110445379428990977
There's a distinction between those MP's who are trying to produce a form of Brexit (Boles, Letwin) and those who are trying to prevent Brexit (Cooper, Grieve, Benn) but this will probably not be apparent to the public.
0 -
I made exactly the opposite movement during the campaign, in part because of the 'arguments' of the people you mention!Philip_Thompson said:FPT @rcs1000
I missed you asking me this question yesterday so just to set the record straight I have spoken about having previously supported Remain. Which I did, until Cameron finished his renegotiations. I argued pro-Remain for years on this site getting into a number of disagreements with @iSam and @Richard_Tyndall in particular. I switched from Remain to Leave during the campaign and I was one of the few people on this forum to really struggle determining how to vote during the early part of the campaign and I ended up deciding Leave and said on this forum that I had switched from Remain to Leave before voting.rcs1000 said:
It leaves the UK in broadly the same position as Switzerland, only without the fees or the freedom of movement.Philip_Thompson said:Bah humbug, it leaves us permanently tied into the CU unless or until the EU decides its happy for us to leave.
How long before Switzerland and Norway start demanding that they pay our level of fees? Or that they can leave FoM?
The backstop is at least as uncomfortable for the EU as for us. *And* we get internnational mediation if we think they aren't keeping up with their treaty obligations to implement a technical solution.
Also: you've spoken on the board about having voted Remain. And yet today you've said you voted Leave. Which one is it?
In part due to this forum. It was some excellent arguments from @Richard_Tyndall and @Casino_Royale plus a very persuasive article I read at the start of the campaign by Michael Gove that made me reconsider my reasons for supporting Remain. I know not many people actually change their minds on any site like this, but I did.
Hope that clears that up, I wouldn't want you to think I'm being disingenuous.
Oh, and welcome back iSam.
Edit: and with hindsight, subsequent events have only firmed up my view. I darsay you feel the same way ...0 -
What medicines do you use that are dependent on manufacturing or ingredients from abroad..Dura_Ace said:
1. No DealPulpstar said:So how would everyone fill out their indicitive ballots ?
6 options I can see that have some sort of support in the house:
Revoke
{2nd referendum/People's vote/May's deal subject to ratification by the public} <- All essentially identical
Common Market 2.0
May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
May's deal
No Deal
I'd possibly go
1) Common Market 2.0
2) May's deal
3) May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
4) 2nd Ref
5) No deal
6) Revocation
There's a clear enough dividing line between the top 3 and bottom 3 options for me.</p>
2. No Deal
3. No Deal
4. No Deal
5. No Deal
6. No Deal
No other option has any deontological, teleological or dialogic moral authority.0 -
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-michael-goves-full-statement-on-why-he-is-backing-brexit-a6886221.htmlwilliamglenn said:
Gove didn't really want to leave. For him it was just a power game, and he thought voting to leave would force the EU to bow down to our demands.Philip_Thompson said:In part due to this forum. It was some excellent arguments from @Richard_Tyndall and @Casino_Royale plus a very persuasive article I read at the start of the campaign by Michael Gove that made me reconsider my reasons for supporting Remain.
This is the article to which I refer which I just re-read and I still strongly agree with. This is why I am passionate about 'taking back control' which for me is the whole raison d'etre of Brexit unlike Faragists who just cared about immigration. Its why I laugh at AlastairMeeks for suggesting it was just racism and immigration. This was a positive, optimistic and thought-provoking piece and it still works.0 -
1) May's DealPulpstar said:So how would everyone fill out their indicitive ballots ?
6 options I can see that have some sort of support in the house:
Revoke
{2nd referendum/People's vote/May's deal subject to ratification by the public} <- All essentially identical
Common Market 2.0
May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
May's deal
No Deal
I'd possibly go
1) Common Market 2.0
2) May's deal
3) May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
4) 2nd Ref
5) No deal
6) Revocation
There's a clear enough dividing line between the top 3 and bottom 3 options for me.</p>
2) May's Deal + CU
3) Common Market 2.0
4) No Deal
5) Revoke
6) 2nd Ref
0 -
So we potentially get lumped with both May's Crap Deal and Corbyn at the same time? Egads that's the worst case scenario.tlg86 said:
It's a shame that May's deal (WA) followed by a GE isn't on the list as that seems the most sensible option to me.Pulpstar said:I really didn't like the way 2nd reffers were angling to get their option outside of the indicitive ballots. It's of the utmost substance and not simply a process issue, most dishonest. Sure, include May's deal subject to a 2nd vote in the indicitive votes but you can't just take whatever option emerges and produce another "subject to ratification by the public" hurdle for it.
If it is Common Market 2.0, it is Common Market 2.0.0 -
Every MP has 1/650th of a veto in every vote, always has and always will.TudorRose said:
But MPs who don't participate in the indicative votes can still effectively veto legislation that they don't like later on in the process.Benpointer said:
What did we do about those people who decided not to participate in the EU Ref?TudorRose said:
I don't see this at all. I genuinely don't believe this system can work. First, what about those who decide not to participate (I can see that 'no dealers' may well decide to do this)? Second, even having established some sort of 'pecking order' you can't force an MP to vote for the collective first choice to become legislation. For example, would the SNP be willing to vote for any collectively-agreed form of Brexit given their stated support for revocation? I just don't see it working (and that's before Corbyn/May get the whips to work).Pulpstar said:
Nonsense. If someone sticks up 1) No Deal for instance then you simply discard the ballot after the first round if it loses. Any voting system rewards those who make more preferences anyway.Stereotomy said:If Letwin does go with some form of preference voting, it should be a requirement that a ballot ranks all of the available options, otherwise it is entirely invalidated. That would force everyone to either put it all on the public record or count themselves out of the process altogether.
I suspect May would choose the latter0 -
https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1110477916775821312
Jacob's waivering. The replies to his tweet might stiffen his resolve though.0 -
For me:Pulpstar said:So how would everyone fill out their indicitive ballots ?
6 options I can see that have some sort of support in the house:
Revoke
{2nd referendum/People's vote/May's deal subject to ratification by the public} <- All essentially identical
Common Market 2.0
May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
May's deal
No Deal
I'd possibly go
1) Common Market 2.0
2) May's deal
3) May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
4) 2nd Ref
5) No deal
6) Revocation
There's a clear enough dividing line between the top 3 and bottom 3 options for me.</p>
1 - Common Market 2.0
2 - 2nd Ref
3 - May's Deal + CU
4 - May's Deal
5 - Revocation
6 - No Deal
3,4,5 may swap about depending on how I feel at the moment.
6 is a long way down at the bottom0 -
HowdyJosiasJessop said:
I made exactly the opposite movement during the campaign, in part because of the 'arguments' of the people you mention!Philip_Thompson said:FPT @rcs1000
I missed you asking me this question yesterday so just to set the record straight I have spoken about having previously supported Remain. Which I did, until Cameron finished his renegotiations. I argued pro-Remain for years on this site getting into a number of disagreements with @iSam and @Richard_Tyndall in particular. I switched from Remain to Leave during the campaign and I was one of the few people on this forum to really struggle determining how to vote during the early part of the campaign and I ended up deciding Leave and said on this forum that I had switched from Remain to Leave before voting.rcs1000 said:
It leaves the UK in broadly the same position as Switzerland, only without the fees or the freedom of movement.Philip_Thompson said:Bah humbug, it leaves us permanently tied into the CU unless or until the EU decides its happy for us to leave.
How long before Switzerland and Norway start demanding that they pay our level of fees? Or that they can leave FoM?
The backstop is at least as uncomfortable for the EU as for us. *And* we get internnational mediation if we think they aren't keeping up with their treaty obligations to implement a technical solution.
Also: you've spoken on the board about having voted Remain. And yet today you've said you voted Leave. Which one is it?
In part due to this forum. It was some excellent arguments from @Richard_Tyndall and @Casino_Royale plus a very persuasive article I read at the start of the campaign by Michael Gove that made me reconsider my reasons for supporting Remain. I know not many people actually change their minds on any site like this, but I did.
Hope that clears that up, I wouldn't want you to think I'm being disingenuous.
Oh, and welcome back iSam.
Edit: and with hindsight, subsequent events have only firmed up my view. I darsay you feel the same way ...0 -
The ship might have sailed for the ERG .
The DUP still won’t back the deal , the pro EU wing of the Tory party will now push for a softer Brexit so combined there’s not enough Labour MPs to cover that .
The ERG deserve total humiliation.0 -
I suspect they're lucky that UKIP has been eviscerated. But I agree many are likely to sit on their hands.TGOHF said:
I have to admire your optimism.Big_G_NorthWales said:On the assumption most of ERG will vote for TM deal tomorrow plus the conservatives who have backed it previously and some labour mps her deal may emerge tomorrow as the way forward.
If Brexit is blocked there is going to be a bloodbath at the local elections for the Conservatives. Particularly this year's batch.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_local_elections
Suspect the next discussions will be who takes the blame - but for the Con party does it really matter - the seats will be lost.0 -
1/325th?Pulpstar said:
Every MP has 1/650th of a veto in every vote, always has and always will.TudorRose said:
But MPs who don't participate in the indicative votes can still effectively veto legislation that they don't like later on in the process.Benpointer said:
What did we do about those people who decided not to participate in the EU Ref?TudorRose said:
I don't see this at all. I genuinely don't believe this system can work. First, what about those who decide not to participate (I can see that 'no dealers' may well decide to do this)? Second, even having established some sort of 'pecking order' you can't force an MP to vote for the collective first choice to become legislation. For example, would the SNP be willing to vote for any collectively-agreed form of Brexit given their stated support for revocation? I just don't see it working (and that's before Corbyn/May get the whips to work).Pulpstar said:
Nonsense. If someone sticks up 1) No Deal for instance then you simply discard the ballot after the first round if it loses. Any voting system rewards those who make more preferences anyway.Stereotomy said:If Letwin does go with some form of preference voting, it should be a requirement that a ballot ranks all of the available options, otherwise it is entirely invalidated. That would force everyone to either put it all on the public record or count themselves out of the process altogether.
I suspect May would choose the latter0 -
You certainly cant accuse them of not working for it.nico67 said:The ship might have sailed for the ERG .
The DUP still won’t back the deal , the pro EU wing of the Tory party will now push for a softer Brexit so combined there’s not enough Labour MPs to cover that .
The ERG deserve total humiliation.0 -
I am not optimistic. How can anyone be in this climate but it not impossibleTGOHF said:
I have to admire your optimism.Big_G_NorthWales said:On the assumption most of ERG will vote for TM deal tomorrow plus the conservatives who have backed it previously and some labour mps her deal may emerge tomorrow as the way forward.
If Brexit is blocked there is going to be a bloodbath at the local elections for the Conservatives. Particularly this year's batch.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_local_elections
Suspect the next discussions will be who takes the blame - but for the Con party does it really matter - the seats will be lost.0 -
1/318th I suppose once we've discounted tellers, speakers and Sinn Fein..Benpointer said:
1/325th?Pulpstar said:
Every MP has 1/650th of a veto in every vote, always has and always will.TudorRose said:
But MPs who don't participate in the indicative votes can still effectively veto legislation that they don't like later on in the process.Benpointer said:
What did we do about those people who decided not to participate in the EU Ref?TudorRose said:
I don't see this at all. I genuinely don't believe this system can work. First, what about those who decide not to participate (I can see that 'no dealers' may well decide to do this)? Second, even having established some sort of 'pecking order' you can't force an MP to vote for the collective first choice to become legislation. For example, would the SNP be willing to vote for any collectively-agreed form of Brexit given their stated support for revocation? I just don't see it working (and that's before Corbyn/May get the whips to work).Pulpstar said:
Nonsense. If someone sticks up 1) No Deal for instance then you simply discard the ballot after the first round if it loses. Any voting system rewards those who make more preferences anyway.Stereotomy said:If Letwin does go with some form of preference voting, it should be a requirement that a ballot ranks all of the available options, otherwise it is entirely invalidated. That would force everyone to either put it all on the public record or count themselves out of the process altogether.
I suspect May would choose the latter0 -
I'd vote for May's deal, it most captures the tone of the leave campaign and I'm still not exactly sure why Labour and the ERG have voted against it. I know May has been stubborn in not moving from her position but all the other options really are unworkable. Common Market 2.0 (freedom of movement, massive delay), Customs Union (all the main benefits of Brexit ignored), Referendum (Void without a no deal option), No Deal (MPs won't allow it), Revoke (Massive backlash, despite what some people think)0
-
My preferred option of May's Deal minus the backstop is not an option anymore. So from where we are now and with deep regret as I don't actually like ANY of these options.
1) No deal
2) Common Market 2.0
3) 2nd Ref
4) May's deal
5) May's deal + custom union
6) Revocation*
* I'd prefer revocation to May's deal but not without another referendum first hence that's #30 -
Can anyone tell me why the DUP are still holding out against May's Deal, given they are making Remain more likely?0
-
Too little too late. This was obvious by the time of MV2 at the very least and since then nothing has changed.Benpointer said:https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1110477916775821312
Jacob's waivering. The replies to his tweet might stiffen his resolve though.0 -
For me:
1 - 2nd Ref
2 - Revocation
3 - Common Market 2.0
4 -May's Deal + CU
5 -May's Deal
6 - No Deal
1 and 2 are tough, because revocation delivers the right answer quickly, provides people and business with certainty, makes a painful political process simply stop and avoids the grief of another divisive referendum. But the argument that it needs a referendum to set aside a referendum is strong.0 -
1/320th. You still need tellers, even though their presence isn't counted.Pulpstar said:
1/318th I suppose once we've discounted tellers, speakers and Sinn Fein..Benpointer said:
1/325th?Pulpstar said:
Every MP has 1/650th of a veto in every vote, always has and always will.TudorRose said:
But MPs who don't participate in the indicative votes can still effectively veto legislation that they don't like later on in the process.Benpointer said:
What did we do about those people who decided not to participate in the EU Ref?TudorRose said:
I don't see this at all. I genuinely don't believe this system can work. First, what about those who decide not to participate (I can see that 'no dealers' may well decide to do this)? Second, even having established some sort of 'pecking order' you can't force an MP to vote for the collective first choice to become legislation. For example, would the SNP be willing to vote for any collectively-agreed form of Brexit given their stated support for revocation? I just don't see it working (and that's before Corbyn/May get the whips to work).Pulpstar said:
Nonsense. If someone sticks up 1) No Deal for instance then you simply discard the ballot after the first round if it loses. Any voting system rewards those who make more preferences anyway.Stereotomy said:If Letwin does go with some form of preference voting, it should be a requirement that a ballot ranks all of the available options, otherwise it is entirely invalidated. That would force everyone to either put it all on the public record or count themselves out of the process altogether.
I suspect May would choose the latter0 -
The austerity is entirely in the public finances. As many people on here are keen to point out, the private economy is doing rather nicely, with many incomes rising in real terms.another_richard said:In austerity news I see that UK residents managed to spend nearly £46bn on overseas travel and tourism in 2018:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/leisureandtourism/bulletins/overseastravelandtourism/novemberanddecember2018provisionalresults#trends-in-overseas-visits-by-uk-residents-non-seasonally-adjusted
Which was more than double what foreign visitors to the UK spent.
The two are not mutually exclusive, I'd say - and there will be many small statists who see it as a feature not a bug. But it's not much comfort if you're waiting till 9pm for a care worker to give you your tea.0 -
Bear in mind Phil that if we do end up with Norway it will be exactly the kind of Leave that I was arguing for all that time in the years prior to the referendum. Like Robert I genuinely believe the Deal is good for us as it gives us almost everything we wanted out of the Brexit process and then allows us to negotiate the future relationship - whether that is my preference of Norway or something that ends FoM. But this process is not the end state. It is merely the key that allows us to open the door to the negotiations.Philip_Thompson said:FPT @rcs1000
I missed you asking me this question yesterday so just to set the record straight I have spoken about having previously supported Remain. Which I did, until Cameron finished his renegotiations. I argued pro-Remain for years on this site getting into a number of disagreements with @iSam and @Richard_Tyndall in particular. I switched from Remain to Leave during the campaign and I was one of the few people on this forum to really struggle determining how to vote during the early part of the campaign and I ended up deciding Leave and said on this forum that I had switched from Remain to Leave before voting.rcs1000 said:
It leaves the UK in broadly the same position as Switzerland, only without the fees or the freedom of movement.Philip_Thompson said:Bah humbug, it leaves us permanently tied into the CU unless or until the EU decides its happy for us to leave.
How long before Switzerland and Norway start demanding that they pay our level of fees? Or that they can leave FoM?
The backstop is at least as uncomfortable for the EU as for us. *And* we get internnational mediation if we think they aren't keeping up with their treaty obligations to implement a technical solution.
Also: you've spoken on the board about having voted Remain. And yet today you've said you voted Leave. Which one is it?
In part due to this forum. It was some excellent arguments from @Richard_Tyndall and @Casino_Royale plus a very persuasive article I read at the start of the campaign by Michael Gove that made me reconsider my reasons for supporting Remain. I know not many people actually change their minds on any site like this, but I did.
Hope that clears that up, I wouldn't want you to think I'm being disingenuous.
What it does do is get us out of the EU. That in itself is a thing of great worth.0 -
I would vote for: May's Deal; May's Deal + CU; 2nd Ref (no particular order, they're all crap but they all offer an acceptable resolution)
I would abstain on Common Market 2.0 (it does not meet the mandate obtained by the campaign)
I would vote against No Deal; Revoke (both would be utterly disastrous in different ways)0 -
If you believe that you really are in la la land. If there is a GE it will be fully owned by the ERG. If there is a Corbyn government it will be the fault of those like you that have sacrificed the Conservatives reputation for a strong economy and good government of the swivel-eyed altar of European obsessiveness.TGOHF said:
Indeed - any Conservative MP voting for any of the options bar no deal is voting for a GE...Pulpstar said:
Very fair chance of a GE following any variant of leave (Except No deal) to be honest as they all must include the backstop so the DUP will probably stop supporting the Gov't.tlg86 said:
It's a shame that May's deal (WA) followed by a GE isn't on the list as that seems the most sensible option to me.Pulpstar said:I really didn't like the way 2nd reffers were angling to get their option outside of the indicitive ballots. It's of the utmost substance and not simply a process issue, most dishonest. Sure, include May's deal subject to a 2nd vote in the indicitive votes but you can't just take whatever option emerges and produce another "subject to ratification by the public" hurdle for it.
If it is Common Market 2.0, it is Common Market 2.0.0 -
He's taking something for repetititus. It's not very effective though.eek said:
What medicines do you use that are dependent on manufacturing or ingredients from abroad..Dura_Ace said:
1. No DealPulpstar said:So how would everyone fill out their indicitive ballots ?
6 options I can see that have some sort of support in the house:
Revoke
{2nd referendum/People's vote/May's deal subject to ratification by the public} <- All essentially identical
Common Market 2.0
May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
May's deal
No Deal
I'd possibly go
1) Common Market 2.0
2) May's deal
3) May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
4) 2nd Ref
5) No deal
6) Revocation
There's a clear enough dividing line between the top 3 and bottom 3 options for me.</p>
2. No Deal
3. No Deal
4. No Deal
5. No Deal
6. No Deal
No other option has any deontological, teleological or dialogic moral authority.0 -
The backstop is an existential threat to them.Benpointer said:Can anyone tell me why the DUP are still holding out against May's Deal, given they are making Remain more likely?
They'll all sign their indicative votes
1) No Deal.
But any variant of May's deal is worse than revocation for them.0 -
The replies to his tweet should terrify anyone rational.Benpointer said:https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1110477916775821312
Jacob's waivering. The replies to his tweet might stiffen his resolve though.
Why would anyone want to be on twatter if those are the people you attract.0 -
Yep, I think the vote MV2 was the nail in the coffin of Brexit (as we know it). That was the point that the EU shut down the shop (rightly so), and things spiralled out of control.Philip_Thompson said:
Too little too late. This was obvious by the time of MV2 at the very least and since then nothing has changed.Benpointer said:https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1110477916775821312
Jacob's waivering. The replies to his tweet might stiffen his resolve though.0 -
Remain for which somebody else cops the shit is perfect outcome for the drum bashers. No economic or social disruption in the 6 counties and their hands are clean.Benpointer said:Can anyone tell me why the DUP are still holding out against May's Deal, given they are making Remain more likely?
0 -
True.TudorRose said:
But MPs who don't participate in the indicative votes can still effectively veto legislation that they don't like later on in the process.Benpointer said:
What did we do about those people who decided not to participate in the EU Ref?TudorRose said:
I don't see this at all. I genuinely don't believe this system can work. First, what about those who decide not to participate (I can see that 'no dealers' may well decide to do this)? Second, even having established some sort of 'pecking order' you can't force an MP to vote for the collective first choice to become legislation. For example, would the SNP be willing to vote for any collectively-agreed form of Brexit given their stated support for revocation? I just don't see it working (and that's before Corbyn/May get the whips to work).Pulpstar said:
Nonsense. If someone sticks up 1) No Deal for instance then you simply discard the ballot after the first round if it loses. Any voting system rewards those who make more preferences anyway.Stereotomy said:If Letwin does go with some form of preference voting, it should be a requirement that a ballot ranks all of the available options, otherwise it is entirely invalidated. That would force everyone to either put it all on the public record or count themselves out of the process altogether.
I suspect May would choose the latter
Also - and this is fairly relevant given the Brexit experience so far - even if MPs can agree on a single Brexit concept that is acceptable to the EU (and this is a fairly big 'if'), there would still be enormous scope to fall out over the details.
But mixing up Phase 1 outcomes, Phase 2 outcomes and process questions is stupid anyway, as I said at the weekend.0 -
And no legal need for negotiations or discussions on how to leave or any future relationships. You just serve notice and 12 months later you leave.Andy_Cooke said:
Nope.MarqueeMark said:
So as I expected, no "Article 50" equivalent. We can't just walk away from it when the voters wake up and go "You f*cking WHAT????"Nigelb said:
By negotiation. It wouldn't be easy, that's for sure, though that's a feature rather than a bug.MarqueeMark said:
I'll ask again - what is the mechanism for leaving Norway?Nigelb said:
There isn’t - and that is the direct consequence of May presenting a hung Parliament with a fait accompli, with barely the time to rubber stamp it, let alone make another choice.SouthamObserver said:
From here surely the DUP would want a softer, UK-wide Brexit that essentially takes the possibility of a separate status for Northern Ireland off the table - or no Brexit at all.IanB2 said:
The two scenarios that seem to be rising in probability are May's deal, on the basis that the ERG and DUP finally smell the coffee, or a GE, on the basis that the clash between Parliament's preference and Government preference can't otherwise be resolved.DavidL said:So what is the next stage in this farce? Presumably the Commons will vote for a second referendum or, at the least, a confirmatory referendum seeking approval of any deal that is done with an alternative of remain before departure? What will May do then?
Have the ERG worked out they've lost yet or is that still much for them to grasp? Idiots doesn't come close.
Problem with May's deal is that just as she wins over her extremists she is losing Labour and Tory remainer support. They now have alternatives to root for.
That said, I am now totally lost. There is no logic to any of this. All I do know is that I cannot think of another PM who has been so humiliated and emasculated, and remained in office.
I’ve said before that the only way out of this I can see is Norway, as it is the option which takes away the least from those who voted against Brexit, while still complying with the terms of the referendum vote.
And it is a stable solution, which retains the potential for future movement in either direction, without requiring it.
That said, it's a treaty arrangement, and not a constitutional one, so simpler than our current predicament.
Norway is a horror show waiting to open.
There is an Article 50 equivalent: Article 127.
Twelve months notice.
The EEA Agreement is here: https://www.efta.int/sites/default/files/documents/legal-texts/eea/the-eea-agreement/Main Text of the Agreement/EEAagreement.pdf0 -
Ken Clarke wants Norway plus0
-
The risk for any revolutionary is that however extreme you are there are always followers ready to go a step further.another_richard said:
The replies to his tweet should terrify anyone rational.Benpointer said:https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1110477916775821312
Jacob's waivering. The replies to his tweet might stiffen his resolve though.
Why would anyone want to be on twatter if those are the people you attract.0 -
Don't think they thought through the risks Leave would actually mean to their status. Let's be honest, if May didn't need their votes for a majority she would have sold them down the river long ago.Benpointer said:Can anyone tell me why the DUP are still holding out against May's Deal, given they are making Remain more likely?
0 -
The wrong flight plan was lodged, but it was a wet lease operator for BA so they wouldn't have thought it odd that they were going to EDI rather than DUS as the whole point is that they are filling in for when BA don't have enough planes.DavidL said:Given that we have experts on here can anyone explain how a plane destined for Germany managed to end up in Edinburgh? Would they not have had to lodge the wrong flight plan as well, otherwise they would presumably have been notified that they were off course at an early stage? How on earth could that not be noticed? How did they manage to get a landing slot at Edinburgh? It just seems really, really strange.
0 -
Blimey - that's exactly the sort of thing I saw with some MPs round my way when they switched to deal the other week.. and illustrates the problem the Tories now have: enable No Brexit ("traitor") or vote for the deal (still "traitor").Benpointer said:https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1110477916775821312
Jacob's waivering. The replies to his tweet might stiffen his resolve though.0 -
Hopefully then after the next election, assuming it is not a hung Parliament, whoever is in Government will decide it is time for a vote on a united Ireland as per the GFA.Dura_Ace said:
Remain for which somebody else cops the shit is perfect outcome for the drum bashers. No economic or social disruption in the 6 counties and their hands are clean.Benpointer said:Can anyone tell me why the DUP are still holding out against May's Deal, given they are making Remain more likely?
0 -
My point is that if the ERG/DUP will only vote for 'no deal' and the SNP will only vote for 'revocation' then you're about 150/320ths towards ensuring nothing gets passed. And that's before we get to deciding where you're going to put the E in your preferred acronym.david_herdson said:
1/320th. You still need tellers, even though their presence isn't counted.Pulpstar said:
1/318th I suppose once we've discounted tellers, speakers and Sinn Fein..Benpointer said:
1/325th?Pulpstar said:
Every MP has 1/650th of a veto in every vote, always has and always will.TudorRose said:
But MPs who don't participate in the indicative votes can still effectively veto legislation that they don't like later on in the process.Benpointer said:
What did we do about those people who decided not to participate in the EU Ref?TudorRose said:
I don't see this at all. I genuinely don't believe this system can work. First, what about those who decide not to participate (I can see that 'no dealers' may well decide to do this)? Second, even having established some sort of 'pecking order' you can't force an MP to vote for the collective first choice to become legislation. For example, would the SNP be willing to vote for any collectively-agreed form of Brexit given their stated support for revocation? I just don't see it working (and that's before Corbyn/May get the whips to work).Pulpstar said:
Nonsense. If someone sticks up 1) No Deal for instance then you simply discard the ballot after the first round if it loses. Any voting system rewards those who make more preferences anyway.Stereotomy said:If Letwin does go with some form of preference voting, it should be a requirement that a ballot ranks all of the available options, otherwise it is entirely invalidated. That would force everyone to either put it all on the public record or count themselves out of the process altogether.
I suspect May would choose the latter
0 -
Morning all
As I have to work for a living, I'm left trying to play catch up with the previous night's political nonsense.
When I hear Matt Hancock say the Government "can't pre-commit to following that they (the Commons) vote for" I'm left to wonder if any of last night's events have a scintilla of significance or real importance.
Once again the May loyalists are out and about claiming the WA is going to pass "this time" as it seems the ERG are "about to swing behind it". We heard all this last time only to see the WA come up 140+ votes short and as long as the DUP and a few diehards retain their opposition, it won't clear the Commons so it's just all talk.
As always, nothing has changed. There's the WA, leaving without the WA or revoking. In essence, a long extension would be the same as revoking - if we asked for two years we might as well reset the clock to March 2017 and start again.
There's also the fact changing the date to April 12th has to clear the Commons this week - that may be interesting. It will of course pass but I fail to see any relevance to this series of indicative votes tomorrow night apart from trying to push BBC Parliament as the new entertainment channel. The Government may "take heed" but it doesn't have to do what Parliament instructs despite all the sound and fury.0 -
Or you do it properly, and negotiate before serving notice - again, unlike the present debacle.Richard_Tyndall said:
And no legal need for negotiations or discussions on how to leave or any future relationships. You just serve notice and 12 months later you leave.Andy_Cooke said:
Nope.MarqueeMark said:
So as I expected, no "Article 50" equivalent. We can't just walk away from it when the voters wake up and go "You f*cking WHAT????"Nigelb said:
By negotiation. It wouldn't be easy, that's for sure, though that's a feature rather than a bug.MarqueeMark said:
I'll ask again - what is the mechanism for leaving Norway?Nigelb said:
There isn’t - and that is the direct consequence of May presenting a hung Parliament with a fait accompli, with barely the time to rubber stamp it, let alone make another choice.SouthamObserver said:
From here surely the DUP would want a softer, UK-wide Brexit that essentially takes the possibility of a separate status for Northern Ireland off the table - or no Brexit at all.IanB2 said:DavidL said:So what is the next stage in this farce? Presumably the Commons will vote for a second referendum or, at the least, a confirmatory referendum seeking approval of any deal that is done with an alternative of remain before departure? What will May do then?
Have the ERG worked out they've lost yet or is that still much for them to grasp? Idiots doesn't come close.
Problem with May's deal is that just as she wins over her extremists she is losing Labour and Tory remainer support. They now have alternatives to root for.
That said, I am now totally lost. There is no logic to any of this. All I do know is that I cannot think of another PM who has been so humiliated and emasculated, and remained in office.
I’ve said before that the only way out of this I can see is Norway, as it is the option which takes away the least from those who voted against Brexit, while still complying with the terms of the referendum vote.
And it is a stable solution, which retains the potential for future movement in either direction, without requiring it.
That said, it's a treaty arrangement, and not a constitutional one, so simpler than our current predicament.
Norway is a horror show waiting to open.
There is an Article 50 equivalent: Article 127.
Twelve months notice.
The EEA Agreement is here: https://www.efta.int/sites/default/files/documents/legal-texts/eea/the-eea-agreement/Main Text of the Agreement/EEAagreement.pdf0 -
I understand that and would prefer Norway to May's Deal. I'm fully OK with Norway.Richard_Tyndall said:Bear in mind Phil that if we do end up with Norway it will be exactly the kind of Leave that I was arguing for all that time in the years prior to the referendum. Like Robert I genuinely believe the Deal is good for us as it gives us almost everything we wanted out of the Brexit process and then allows us to negotiate the future relationship - whether that is my preference of Norway or something that ends FoM. But this process is not the end state. It is merely the key that allows us to open the door to the negotiations.
What it does do is get us out of the EU. That in itself is a thing of great worth.
Norway to May's Deal is advantageous for 3 reasons that I can see
1: We have a right to unilaterally exit the EEA if a future government chooses to. This may seem arcane but to me this is a matter of deep principle. No Parliament should bind its successors.
2: From what you've said the EEA have certain protections on new regulations being developed that don't necessarily exist if we're in the backstop and being compelled to adopt regulations without a say.
3: We'd be out of the Customs Union and able to develop our own trade deals.
The downsides of Norway to May's Deal are:
1: FoM continues - I don't really care about this at all.
2: Have to make payments - If we're in the Market we should make our fair share of payments [in the EU we pay more than our fair share].0 -
Ken Clarke thinks TM staying in place is desirable0
-
As a further thought, perhaps revoke first, and have a referendum second. This time with a proper plan and asking whether people want to go through it again or forget the whole idea.eristdoof said:
Almost the same as my list:IanB2 said:For me:
1 - 2nd Ref
2 - Revocation
3 - Common Market 2.0
4 -May's Deal + CU
5 -May's Deal
6 - No Deal
1 - 2nd Ref
2 - Revocation
4 - Common Market 2.0
10 -May's Deal + CU
50 -May's Deal
666 - No Deal0 -
The public finances which has seen nearly a trillion quid borrowed during the last decade ?Harris_Tweed said:
The austerity is entirely in the public finances. As many people on here are keen to point out, the private economy is doing rather nicely, with many incomes rising in real terms.another_richard said:In austerity news I see that UK residents managed to spend nearly £46bn on overseas travel and tourism in 2018:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/leisureandtourism/bulletins/overseastravelandtourism/novemberanddecember2018provisionalresults#trends-in-overseas-visits-by-uk-residents-non-seasonally-adjusted
Which was more than double what foreign visitors to the UK spent.
The two are not mutually exclusive, I'd say - and there will be many small statists who see it as a feature not a bug. But it's not much comfort if you're waiting till 9pm for a care worker to give you your tea.
You can argue that the spending priorities have been wrong but there's been no shortage of overall government spending.0 -
As Tom Lehrer said:another_richard said:
The replies to his tweet should terrify anyone rational.Benpointer said:https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1110477916775821312
Jacob's waivering. The replies to his tweet might stiffen his resolve though.
Why would anyone want to be on twatter if those are the people you attract.
"I should like to consider the folk song, and expound briefly on a theory I have held for some time, to the effect that the reason most folk songs are so atrocious is that they were written by the people."0 -
Didn't the BBC have seven options?0
-
To be fair the EU refused to negotiate before Article 50 was invoked.Nigelb said:Or you do it properly, and negotiate before serving notice - again, unlike the present debacle.
So what we should have done was identify all No Deal risks, develop a plan to mitigate them, say we're ready for No Deal in 2 years if it happens and then invoke. We could then negotiate on fair terms with No Deal as the fallback in case it becomes necessary - and it would have been less likely to be necessary had the EU been acting as an honest partner and not trying to subjugate us.0 -
Blimey. One thing's clear in the responses to Pulpstar's 6 options* question - we're all over the place here on PB.
If we're at all representative I can see an awful lot of confusion ahead tomorrow and following days in the HoC.
* 6 options:
Revoke
2nd ref
Common Market 2.0
May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
May's deal
No Deal0 -
OrSean_F said:
It should have read "Diana's Assassins Have Stolen What's Left of Brexit."AlastairMeeks said:The Express headline has gone full fruitcake.
"Summer Scorcher Has Stolen Whats left of Brexit"
or
"Siberian Blast Steals whats left of Brexit"
Or
"New hope for Arthritis Sufferers Steals whats left of Brexit"0 -
Yes I think that's right. He genuinely believed that we held all the cards and the EU would offer us a better deal to stay.williamglenn said:
Gove didn't really want to leave. For him it was just a power game, and he thought voting to leave would force the EU to bow down to our demands.Philip_Thompson said:In part due to this forum. It was some excellent arguments from @Richard_Tyndall and @Casino_Royale plus a very persuasive article I read at the start of the campaign by Michael Gove that made me reconsider my reasons for supporting Remain.
Gove's outlook is quintessentially Anglo-centric (although he is actually a scot of course) - he knows little about foreigners, rarely travels abroad (does not like flying) and cannot see why others might not share his own strongly-held but sometimes naive belief in the rightness of his own convictions. This makes it hard for him to anticipate the reactions of his opponents, such as the teachers and the EU, and he seems surprised and even hurt to discover that they disagree with him.0 -
As usual, Roger, you like to project your own prejudices onto those who you politically disagree with.Roger said:
You obviously belong to a different Conservative Party to the obsessive flapping white coats most of us have been watching for years. Casino Royale perhaps being the archetype.blueblue said:
I'm sorry, but this kind of rubbish makes me really quite angry. I've been a Eurosceptic for decades, and the passage of time has only deepened that view. But if any Conservatives care so much about leaving an irritating, bureaucratic but ultimately harmless bloc that they're prepared to let the UK be Corbynized, then I have to ask ... are they really Conservatives at all?MarqueeMark said:
We will have to make do with an anti-semite taking us to the promised land of Venezeula.kjohnw said:
That is what such a betrayal will create the perfect storm for a trumpesque leader to emergeisam said:
Who will be the British Trump I wonder? The opportunity is now huuuuuuugekjohnw said:
My son works for network rail and everyone he works with say they will never vote again if brexit is betrayed . The contempt for politicians has fallen to rock bottomisam said:
The only upside from this betrayal is we know there is circa 50% of the nations voters who will be fired up to wreak revenge at the next GE... this has to be the end of one of the main parties, why would any leave voter ever back one of them again?CD13 said:Mr B2,
"Which is why there will probably be a referendum at the end, to confirm the voters' preference."
The result of that referendum is irrelevant. It's the simple five-letter word that will endure. That is TRUST.
They cannot be trusted to keep their word, and once that is gone, we may as well have dictatorship. Manifestos are just words, solemn promises are only hot air. They knowingly lie and they make no apology for it. We can carry on voting but if you don't know who they represent, they may as well be cardboard cut-outs.
The high-pitched whining from well to-do Remainers as their world crashes and burns will only be audible to dogs and dolphins.
That’s a total misrepresentation of me and my position, as even a cursory reading of my posts would reveal to you.
It’s projection like this that leads to you being always wrong, and the worst tipster on this site.0 -
Why isn't he May's Willie?Big_G_NorthWales said:Ken Clarke thinks TM staying in place is desirable
0 -
They've dug their own graves.....Harris_Tweed said:
the problem the Tories now have: enable No Brexit ("traitor") or vote for the deal (still "traitor").Benpointer said:https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1110477916775821312
Jacob's waivering. The replies to his tweet might stiffen his resolve though.0 -
Ah - I see you have started already. Bit like the post referendum landscape - you are trying to blame backbenchers for the failure of the government. You can try - but it really won't matter as the ballot box result is the same either way.Nigel_Foremain said:
If you believe that you really are in la la land. If there is a GE it will be fully owned by the ERG. If there is a Corbyn government it will be the fault of those like you that have sacrificed the Conservatives reputation for a strong economy and good government of the swivel-eyed altar of European obsessiveness.TGOHF said:
Indeed - any Conservative MP voting for any of the options bar no deal is voting for a GE...Pulpstar said:
Very fair chance of a GE following any variant of leave (Except No deal) to be honest as they all must include the backstop so the DUP will probably stop supporting the Gov't.tlg86 said:
It's a shame that May's deal (WA) followed by a GE isn't on the list as that seems the most sensible option to me.Pulpstar said:I really didn't like the way 2nd reffers were angling to get their option outside of the indicitive ballots. It's of the utmost substance and not simply a process issue, most dishonest. Sure, include May's deal subject to a 2nd vote in the indicitive votes but you can't just take whatever option emerges and produce another "subject to ratification by the public" hurdle for it.
If it is Common Market 2.0, it is Common Market 2.0.
A big problem for the Conservative party - perhaps it's time to move beyond it.0 -
Ken Clarke thinks the EU could quickly change their treaty to exempt the UK from taking part in the EU in two weeks
I really respect Ken but that suggestion is most implausable0 -
The voting system is key.Benpointer said:Blimey. One thing's clear in the responses to Pulpstar's 6 options* question - we're all over the place here on PB.
If we're at all representative I can see an awful lot of confusion ahead tomorrow and following days in the HoC.
* 6 options:
Revoke
2nd ref
Common Market 2.0
May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
May's deal
No Deal
For example if they used the quasi AV the Tory party uses to elect its leaders could produce a different outcome to say STV and FPTP.0 -
What is Common Market 2.0 ?AlastairMeeks said:I would vote for: May's Deal; May's Deal + CU; 2nd Ref (no particular order, they're all crap but they all offer an acceptable resolution)
I would abstain on Common Market 2.0 (it does not meet the mandate obtained by the campaign)
I would vote against No Deal; Revoke (both would be utterly disastrous in different ways)0 -
🦄🦄🦄🦄🦄🦄🦄Nigelb said:
What is Common Market 2.0 ?AlastairMeeks said:I would vote for: May's Deal; May's Deal + CU; 2nd Ref (no particular order, they're all crap but they all offer an acceptable resolution)
I would abstain on Common Market 2.0 (it does not meet the mandate obtained by the campaign)
I would vote against No Deal; Revoke (both would be utterly disastrous in different ways)0 -
http://betterbrexit.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Common-Market-2.0.pdfNigelb said:
What is Common Market 2.0 ?AlastairMeeks said:I would vote for: May's Deal; May's Deal + CU; 2nd Ref (no particular order, they're all crap but they all offer an acceptable resolution)
I would abstain on Common Market 2.0 (it does not meet the mandate obtained by the campaign)
I would vote against No Deal; Revoke (both would be utterly disastrous in different ways)0 -
I don't think he does. He merely said there was no realistic alternative, for the time being.Big_G_NorthWales said:Ken Clarke thinks TM staying in place is desirable
0 -
Well if we aren't in the EU elections we are out of the EU.Big_G_NorthWales said:Ken Clarke thinks the EU could quickly change their treaty to exempt the UK from taking part in the EU in two weeks
I really respect Ken but that suggestion is most implausable
It's a theory but meh..0 -
No, it isn't a unicorn.TheScreamingEagles said:
🦄🦄🦄🦄🦄🦄🦄Nigelb said:
What is Common Market 2.0 ?AlastairMeeks said:I would vote for: May's Deal; May's Deal + CU; 2nd Ref (no particular order, they're all crap but they all offer an acceptable resolution)
I would abstain on Common Market 2.0 (it does not meet the mandate obtained by the campaign)
I would vote against No Deal; Revoke (both would be utterly disastrous in different ways)0 -
Admittedly Widmerpool was a thoroughly sinister figure, and JRMs business dealings do fit that narrative. The problem is that Widmerpool, like Roderick Spode, was a thickset man, JRM well...Ishmael_Z said:
Kenneth Widmerpool to the life, even down to the weird overcoat.DecrepitJohnL said:
The pre-lunch vodka intake of hairdressers in the Windsor and Eton area? Even if nanny cut JRM's hair, how on earth does he end up with a fringe two inches lower on one side?WhisperingOracle said:
That haunted and distanced photo of Rees-Mogg suddenly makes me feel as if I understand something a bit better.Dura_Ace said:
L: Young Rees-Mogg about to flagellate himself before vespers.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Absolutely agree on 1 and 2Cyclefree said:There are, though, three good things about Brexit.
1. It has shown us in vivid Technicolour how utterly stupid and pig-ignorant many of our MPs are.
2. Katya Adler.
3. All those pictures of Donald Tusk when younger showing what a hottie he was.
Cannot comment on Tusk
R: Young Tusk protesting against Soviet totalitarianism on the streets of Gdansk.
https://www.shortlist.com/news/the-beano-jacob-rees-mogg-walter-bash-street-kids/352112
He's a weed.0 -
Because she hates successful Tory Chancellors.Scrapheap_as_was said:
Why isn't he May's Willie?Big_G_NorthWales said:Ken Clarke thinks TM staying in place is desirable
0 -
Yes - that would be my preference.IanB2 said:
As a further thought, perhaps revoke first, and have a referendum second. This time with a proper plan and asking whether people want to go through it again or forget the whole idea.eristdoof said:
Almost the same as my list:IanB2 said:For me:
1 - 2nd Ref
2 - Revocation
3 - Common Market 2.0
4 -May's Deal + CU
5 -May's Deal
6 - No Deal
1 - 2nd Ref
2 - Revocation
4 - Common Market 2.0
10 -May's Deal + CU
50 -May's Deal
666 - No Deal
1. Revoke.
2. Work out a Brexit plan.
3. Agree a Brexit plan - not just the WA but the future relationship (Norway / Common Market 2.0, Canada, whatever) which the EU will agree to.
3. 2nd referendum on choice between that Brexit plan and Remain.
On no account - No Deal.0 -
Except again the EU will refuse to negotiate outside Article 50 so how do you get around that?Cyclefree said:
Yes - that would be my preference.IanB2 said:
As a further thought, perhaps revoke first, and have a referendum second. This time with a proper plan and asking whether people want to go through it again or forget the whole idea.eristdoof said:
Almost the same as my list:IanB2 said:For me:
1 - 2nd Ref
2 - Revocation
3 - Common Market 2.0
4 -May's Deal + CU
5 -May's Deal
6 - No Deal
1 - 2nd Ref
2 - Revocation
4 - Common Market 2.0
10 -May's Deal + CU
50 -May's Deal
666 - No Deal
1. Revoke.
2. Work out a Brexit plan.
3. Agree a Brexit plan - not just the WA but the future relationship (Norway / Common Market 2.0, Canada, whatever) which the EU will agree to.
3. 2nd referendum on choice between that Brexit plan and Remain.
On no account - No Deal.0 -
Too late.Benpointer said:https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1110477916775821312
Jacob's waivering. The replies to his tweet might stiffen his resolve though.
He should have led his fan club not incited and then pandered to their worst prejudices.0 -
And whether the votes are secret will also make a big difference I would suggest.TheScreamingEagles said:
The voting system is key.Benpointer said:Blimey. One thing's clear in the responses to Pulpstar's 6 options* question - we're all over the place here on PB.
If we're at all representative I can see an awful lot of confusion ahead tomorrow and following days in the HoC.
* 6 options:
Revoke
2nd ref
Common Market 2.0
May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
May's deal
No Deal
For example if they used the quasi AV the Tory party uses to elect its leaders could produce a different outcome to say STV and FPTP.
0 -
Adds upto the same thing reallyNigelb said:
I don't think he does. He merely said there was no realistic alternative, for the time being.Big_G_NorthWales said:Ken Clarke thinks TM staying in place is desirable
0 -
I don’t think that’s true. I know Gove wrote an article several years ago, which is the evidence for Williams assertion, but his desire to Leave the EU was sincere and has been for a very long time.anothernick said:
Yes I think that's right. He genuinely believed that we held all the cards and the EU would offer us a better deal to stay.williamglenn said:
Gove didn't really want to leave. For him it was just a power game, and he thought voting to leave would force the EU to bow down to our demands.Philip_Thompson said:In part due to this forum. It was some excellent arguments from @Richard_Tyndall and @Casino_Royale plus a very persuasive article I read at the start of the campaign by Michael Gove that made me reconsider my reasons for supporting Remain.
Gove's outlook is quintessentially Anglo-centric (although he is actually a scot of course) - he knows little about foreigners, rarely travels abroad (does not like flying) and cannot see why others might not share his own strongly-held but sometimes naive belief in the rightness of his own convictions. This makes it hard for him to anticipate the reactions of his opponents, such as the teachers and the EU, and he seems surprised and even hurt to discover that they disagree with him.0 -
Watching Sky this morning there is an absence of ERG members - maybe they are in panic mode0
-
Maybe someone could do us a thread header on it?TheScreamingEagles said:
The voting system is key.Benpointer said:Blimey. One thing's clear in the responses to Pulpstar's 6 options* question - we're all over the place here on PB.
If we're at all representative I can see an awful lot of confusion ahead tomorrow and following days in the HoC.
* 6 options:
Revoke
2nd ref
Common Market 2.0
May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
May's deal
No Deal
For example if they used the quasi AV the Tory party uses to elect its leaders could produce a different outcome to say STV and FPTP.0 -
Is there a clashing grand wizard meeting somewhere?Big_G_NorthWales said:Watching Sky this morning there is an absence of ERG members - maybe they are in panic mode
0 -
Perhaps they won't bother voting ....Big_G_NorthWales said:Watching Sky this morning there is an absence of ERG members - maybe they are in panic mode
0 -
Everyone on the payroll will have May's Deal #1 I expect.TudorRose said:
And whether the votes are secret will also make a big difference I would suggest.TheScreamingEagles said:
The voting system is key.Benpointer said:Blimey. One thing's clear in the responses to Pulpstar's 6 options* question - we're all over the place here on PB.
If we're at all representative I can see an awful lot of confusion ahead tomorrow and following days in the HoC.
* 6 options:
Revoke
2nd ref
Common Market 2.0
May's deal + Corbyn's customs union
May's deal
No Deal
For example if they used the quasi AV the Tory party uses to elect its leaders could produce a different outcome to say STV and FPTP.0 -
I think that is very unlikelyTGOHF said:
Perhaps they won't bother voting ....Big_G_NorthWales said:Watching Sky this morning there is an absence of ERG members - maybe they are in panic mode
0 -
If he switches to backing May's deal I will be glad not to be on the same side of this issue as himCasino_Royale said:
Too late.Benpointer said:https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1110477916775821312
Jacob's waivering. The replies to his tweet might stiffen his resolve though.
He should have led his fan club not incited and then pandered to their worst prejudices. 0
