Johnson has got himself into a situation where delivering Brexit on 31st October is not enough. It has to be a No Deal Brexit. If this is an example of the genius of Dominic Cummings it may be that he is not quite the genius we’ve been led to believe he is.
Opinium yesterday had No Deal now the public's most favoured option.
45% of voters back No Deal, 28% of voters want to revoke Article 50 and stay in the EU and just 13% of voters want to extend Article 50 past October until a Brexit Deal is done
45% of people say "Go ahead with Brexit on October 31st even if it means leaving with ‘no deal’".
"Even if it means No Deal" != "No Deal is my preferred option"
Indeed - a few pages on the poll makes clear what the preferred options are. And it's not No Deal. But Johnson has got himself into a place where he has to deliver one or he and the Tories will be done for. But then what happens? It is very, very hard to see how things end well for the.
Boris is heading for a 4th consecutive Tory government, something achieved only once in the last 100 years.
The Tories are fine thanks
Yep - your team is winning, of that there is absolutely no doubt at all. Whether that is good for the country and whether it is sustainable are very different issues. But I suspect that like all fans you do not really care about that right now. It's just one game at a time.
Your side applauded the defeats of the WA. It’s not so clever now. A coalition of erg nutters and a Labour Party opposing something that largely did what they wanted within the confines of accepting the referendum result voted against the only compromise on the table.
There's an entire Establishment massively invested in Boris having to fail. Because otherwise, history will show they have just spent three years wanking into their sock...
The prize for Boris if he gets movement is enormous though. They are building him up to fail massively. That could backfire.
Who get's the most damage if No Deal occurs?
Who is able to ameliorate the effects on their members better if No Deal occurs?
Who values the integrity of the SM higher than a trade relationship with an ex member?
Johnson has got himself into a situation where delivering Brexit on 31st October is not enough. It has to be a No Deal Brexit. If this is an example of the genius of Dominic Cummings it may be that he is not quite the genius we’ve been led to believe he is.
Opinium yesterday had No Deal now the public's most favoured option.
45% of voters back No Deal, 28% of voters want to revoke Article 50 and stay in the EU and just 13% of voters want to extend Article 50 past October until a Brexit Deal is done
They don't know what they are talking about and they will forget they ever were in favour when there are food shortages and huge job losses.
Yup that will bring back the Leavers on board let's call them thickos again - worked really well in 2016.
It's just a political fact: people do not blame themselves or their votes for things that go wrong, they blame the people in charge.
Quite a lot has gone wrong since 2016 yet Leavers have if anything got more extreme. Maybe because of the way they are still being demonised by people who ought to know better and have respect for democracy.
I am afraid I just do not recognise what you are describing. I struggle to see anyone anywhere demonising Leave voters. Plenty are demonising the political leaders who advocated Brexit, but that is very different.
My intitial response was to rotten Borough's comment 'they don't know what they're talking about'. Continually insulting the intelligence of voters may well be factually accurate [ not for me to judge] but it sure ain't a good way to change their minds. I have struggled to be polite to friends who voted to leave - I now accept that most genuinely believe in their choice and I respect them for it, while thinking they are wrong.
Edit: Try reading some of Roger's posts about Hartlepool for example - countless examples on here.
If people don't know what they are talking about, what is the polite way of saying it? "They're out of there depth?" "This is not, at this time, their area of expertise?"
Did you see the Mars Bar thread on twitter the other day? Literally the PM says leaving with No Deal won't mean you can't have Mars Bars, and someone from Mars came out and said "well, it means maybe you won't, because all of these things". That's just for Mars Bars. Nobody knows what they're talking about, except to say "it will be worse than staying".
Who will parliament appoint PM for a day to revoke A50 though ?
Strictly speaking I don't think they have to be an MP? In which case, how about John Major? He's impeccably Tory, and I'm sure he'd enjoy sticking it to the Bastards.
Did you really fall for that article? You bought into the incredibly tortured logic required to pretend that supporting a woman's right the wear the niqab is somehow inconsistent with criticise a woman for anything she does while wearing one?
The issue is that people are not prepared to address the fact that there are those within Islam who are fostering the sort of bigotry that this individual has chosen to accept. It is not all of Islam - but if you look at the research, the level of anti-LGBT+ sentiment within Islam in Europe is high, within Europe in other parts of the world it stratospherically high.
People are free to choose whatever religion/faith they wish. But they are not free to spread hate using their faith as a shield for their bigotry.
You choose your religion, you do not choose your sexuality. So we have to challenge any religion that tries to deny my right to live and love.
And too many of our political leaders are not prepared to challenge on this subject for fear of being accused of being -phobic. And by remaining silent, they are allowing homophobia to increase.
This needs to stop.
This is what I feel is the real virtue signalling.
Most people born pre noughties grew up in a world that was super homophobic (post noughties is only less homophobic relatively). You may think "well, not me guv" but I remember when gay and f** were common slurs used at anyone. I remember people I know not wanting to walk down the road holding hands. I remember having conversations with family members and friends' parents about equal marriage and they hated the idea.
LGBTQ+ rights are not a stick to beat Muslims with. What about LGBTQ+ Muslims themselves? What about the Catholic church? What about the increase in homophobic violence across Europe which isn't coming from the immigrant community but from the far right? What about all the trans panic stuff?
Churches and Mosques should not have gay marriage forced upon them but neither should they spread homophobia either
So as long as they keep their homophobia to themselves then that is OK?
Did you really fall for that article? You bought into the incredibly tortured logic required to pretend that supporting a woman's right the wear the niqab is somehow inconsistent with criticise a woman for anything she does while wearing one?
The issue is that people are not prepared to address the fact that there are those within Islam who are fostering the sort of bigotry that this individual has chosen to accept. It is not all of Islam - but if you look at the research, the level of anti-LGBT+ sentiment within Islam in Europe is high, within Europe in other parts of the world it stratospherically high.
People are free to choose whatever religion/faith they wish. But they are not free to spread hate using their faith as a shield for their bigotry.
You choose your religion, you do not choose your sexuality. So we have to challenge any religion that tries to deny my right to live and love.
And too many of our political leaders are not prepared to challenge on this subject for fear of being accused of being -phobic. And by remaining silent, they are allowing homophobia to increase.
This needs to stop.
This is what I feel is the real virtue signalling.
Most people born pre noughties grew up in a world that was super homophobic (post noughties is only less homophobic relatively). You may think "well, not me guv" but I remember when gay and f** were common slurs used at anyone. I remember people I know not wanting to walk down the road holding hands. I remember having conversations with family members and friends' parents about equal marriage and they hated the idea.
LGBTQ+ rights are not a stick to beat Muslims with. What about LGBTQ+ Muslims themselves? What about the Catholic church? What about the increase in homophobic violence across Europe which isn't coming from the immigrant community but from the far right? What about all the trans panic stuff?
Churches and Mosques should not have gay marriage forced upon them but neither should they spread homophobia either
So as long as they keep their homophobia to themselves then that is OK?
There's an entire Establishment massively invested in Boris having to fail. Because otherwise, history will show they have just spent three years wanking into their sock...
I don't see what he is offering the EU to reopen the deal...
Reality. We're both going to hurt.... The UK is also offering an end to the rubbish that the EU is being jolly decent, you know, offering us what they have. The EU has tied itself to a lead balloon of a "deal", that May and Collins thought they could sell.
The couldn't. Their careers ended in ignominy as result of their miscalculation. But it was also a miscalculation by the EU that it would do the job. It won't. So get real - start again. Or within 100 days, the slide to recession begins....
One point which perhaps hasn't been fully picked up on by commentators is that all this 'do or die' rhetoric and issuing what sounds like ultimatums* to Brussels provides plenty of cover, as well as a very strong reason, for sane MPs to take an equally 'do or die' approach. So Boris and the ERGers who temporarily think they run the country can hardly complain if sensible MPs do 'whatever it takes' to prevent this suicidal course, and that might justifiably include some measures which are a constitutional novelty.
* (admittedly threatening to damage ourselves very badly, which is an odd kind of diplomatic ultimatum)
Well quite. If the government is going to lose a vote of confidence (and we have Jacob Rees-Mogg's confirmation that he thinks they would), what's to stop MPs seizing control of the Parliamentary agenda in the 14 day period?
Who will parliament appoint PM for a day to revoke A50 though ?
Ken Clarke or Starmer. Not easy, but entirely within the bounds of possibility.
You may find it hard to believe but yes, all Scots
I have been close to Scotland since primary school, have lived there, was married there 55 years ago to my dear Scottish wife and have a large family in NE Scotland.
If I had to choose between a Scotsman and an Englishman like Francois, Baker or the Spartans, I am 100% pro Scots and Scotland
Well that choice is a no-brainer. With you there.
But I bet you prefer Theresa May to Gordon Brown.
And Barry Gardiner - you DEFINITELY don't like him.
I know this went around the other day, but people are aware the backstop was the UKs idea. That they saw the Irish border problem, and managed to pry many juicy cherries from the EU, to allow the possibility of staying in the CU whilst refusing to do other things like FOM and whatnot? Stuff other EU countries would kill for? I understand that Brexit has nothing to do with economics or policy, and is purely the right wing id to own the libs and give two fingers up to jonny foreigner, but the backstop was good for the Conservatives, actually, and May was just awful at selling it (and anything else) to the public.
Ken Clarke or Starmer. Not easy, but entirely within the bounds of possibility.
If I was Jeremy Corbyn I'd be reluctant to back Starmer or any other substantial Labour figure for fear that they ran away with the ball. Better to go with a non-threatening Tory grandee.
There's an entire Establishment massively invested in Boris having to fail. Because otherwise, history will show they have just spent three years wanking into their sock...
I don't see what he is offering the EU to reopen the deal...
Reality. We're both going to hurt.... The UK is also offering an end to the rubbish that the EU is being jolly decent, you know, offering us what they have. The EU has tied itself to a lead balloon of a "deal", that May and Collins thought they could sell.
The couldn't. Their careers ended in ignominy as result of their miscalculation. But it was also a miscalculation by the EU that it would do the job. It won't. So get real - start again. Or within 100 days, the slide to recession begins....
Johnson has got himself into a situation where delivering Brexit on 31st October is not enough. It has to be a No Deal Brexit. If this is an example of the genius of Dominic Cummings it may be that he is not quite the genius we’ve been led to believe he is.
Opinium yesterday had No Deal now the public's most favoured option.
45% of voters back No Deal, 28% of voters want to revoke Article 50 and stay in the EU and just 13% of voters want to extend Article 50 past October until a Brexit Deal is done
45% of people say "Go ahead with Brexit on October 31st even if it means leaving with ‘no deal’".
"Even if it means No Deal" != "No Deal is my preferred option"
Indeed - a few pages on the poll makes clear what the preferred options are. And it's not No Deal. But Johnson has got himself into a place where he has to deliver one or he and the Tories will be done for. But then what happens? It is very, very hard to see how things end well for the.
Boris is heading for a 4th consecutive Tory government, something achieved only once in the last 100 years.
The Tories are fine thanks
Yep - your team is winning, of that there is absolutely no doubt at all. Whether that is good for the country and whether it is sustainable are very different issues. But I suspect that like all fans you do not really care about that right now. It's just one game at a time.
Your side applauded the defeats of the WA. It’s not so clever now. A coalition of erg nutters and a Labour Party opposing something that largely did what they wanted within the confines of accepting the referendum result voted against the only compromise on the table.
This is parliaments “no deal”.
I don’t have a side. I - very reluctantly - supported May’s WA.
Ken Clarke or Starmer. Not easy, but entirely within the bounds of possibility.
If I was Jeremy Corbyn I'd be reluctant to back Starmer or any other substantial Labour figure for fear that they ran away with the ball. Better to go with a non-threatening Tory grandee.
Well yes. But Labour MPs might not see it that way. They may view that prospect rather more positively.
Did you really fall for that article? You bought into the incredibly tortured logic required to pretend that supporting a woman's right the wear the niqab is somehow inconsistent with criticise a woman for anything she does while wearing one?
The issue is that people are not prepared to address the fact that there are those within Islam who are fostering the sort of bigotry that this individual has chosen to accept. It is not all of Islam - but if you look at the research, the level of anti-LGBT+ sentiment within Islam in Europe is high, within Europe in other parts of the world it stratospherically high.
People are free to choose whatever religion/faith they wish. But they are not free to spread hate using their faith as a shield for their bigotry.
You choose your religion, you do not choose your sexuality. So we have to challenge any religion that tries to deny my right to live and love.
And too many of our political leaders are not prepared to challenge on this subject for fear of being accused of being -phobic. And by remaining silent, they are allowing homophobia to increase.
This needs to stop.
This is what I feel is the real virtue signalling.
Most people born pre noughties grew up in a world that was super homophobic (post noughties is only less homophobic relatively). You may think "well, not me guv" but I remember when gay and f** were common slurs used at anyone. I remember people I know not wanting to walk down the road holding hands. I remember having conversations with family members and friends' parents about equal marriage and they hated the idea.
LGBTQ+ rights are not a stick to beat Muslims with. What about LGBTQ+ Muslims themselves? What about the Catholic church? What about the increase in homophobic violence across Europe which isn't coming from the immigrant community but from the far right? What about all the trans panic stuff?
Churches and Mosques should not have gay marriage forced upon them but neither should they spread homophobia either
So as long as they keep their homophobia to themselves then that is OK?
Of course. Why wouldn’t it be?
So religious institutions should be a 'Safe Space' for homophobes. Should we also have safe spaces for racists?
There's an entire Establishment massively invested in Boris having to fail. Because otherwise, history will show they have just spent three years wanking into their sock...
I don't see what he is offering the EU to reopen the deal...
Reality. We're both going to hurt.... The UK is also offering an end to the rubbish that the EU is being jolly decent, you know, offering us what they have. The EU has tied itself to a lead balloon of a "deal", that May and Collins thought they could sell.
The couldn't. Their careers ended in ignominy as result of their miscalculation. But it was also a miscalculation by the EU that it would do the job. It won't. So get real - start again. Or within 100 days, the slide to recession begins....
Gibberish
A catastrophic UK recession, and relatively circumscribed EU damage..
There's an entire Establishment massively invested in Boris having to fail. Because otherwise, history will show they have just spent three years wanking into their sock...
I don't see what he is offering the EU to reopen the deal...
That is true. The fact that it will be seen as the UK strong-arming the EU successfully at this stage is a point against a breakthrough being made. What is required is some creative thought - a third way. 'Peace with honour' as Disraeli said after the Treaty of San Stefano (?) for all. Who knows whether this will happen.
There's an entire Establishment massively invested in Boris having to fail. Because otherwise, history will show they have just spent three years wanking into their sock...
I don't see what he is offering the EU to reopen the deal...
That is true. The fact that it will be seen as the UK strong-arming the EU successfully at this stage is a point against a breakthrough being made. What is required is some creative thought - a third way. 'Peace with honour' as Disraeli said after the Treaty of San Stefano (?) for all. Who knows whether this will happen.
Free movement of labour would open that door pretty quickly.
Did you really fall for that article? You bought into the incredibly tortured logic required to pretend that supporting a woman's right the wear the niqab is somehow inconsistent with criticise a woman for anything she does while wearing one?
The issue is that people are not prepared to address the fact that there are those within Islam who are fostering the sort of bigotry that this individual has chosen to accept. It is not all of Islam - but if you look at the research, the level of anti-LGBT+ sentiment within Islam in Europe is high, within Europe in other parts of the world it stratospherically high.
People are free to choose whatever religion/faith they wish. But they are not free to spread hate using their faith as a shield for their bigotry.
You choose your religion, you do not choose your sexuality. So we have to challenge any religion that tries to deny my right to live and love.
And too many of our political leaders are not prepared to challenge on this subject for fear of being accused of being -phobic. And by remaining silent, they are allowing homophobia to increase.
This needs to stop.
This is what I feel is the real virtue signalling.
Most people born pre noughtiesd at anyone. I remember people I know not wanting to walk down the road holding hands. I remember having conversations with family members and friends' parents about equal marriage and they hated the idea.
LGBTQ+ rights are not a stick to beat Muslims with. What about LGBTQ+ Muslims themselves? What about the Catholic church? What about the increase in homophobic violence across Europe which isn't coming from the immigrant community but from the far right? What about all the trans panic stuff?
Churches and Mosques should not have gay marriage forced upon them but neither should they spread homophobia either
So as long as they keep their homophobia to themselves then that is OK?
Of course. Why wouldn’t it be?
So religious institutions should be a 'Safe Space' for homophobes. Should we also have safe spaces for racists?
Absolutely. Of course. Why shouldn’t they be? What a bizarre notion that people shouldn’t be allowed to freely associate with people who share their views.
Johnson has got himself into a situation where delivering Brexit on 31st October is not enough. It has to be a No Deal Brexit. If this is an example of the genius of Dominic Cummings it may be that he is not quite the genius we’ve been led to believe he is.
Opinium yesterday had No Deal now the public's most favoured option.
45% of voters back No Deal, 28% of voters want to revoke Article 50 and stay in the EU and just 13% of voters want to extend Article 50 past October until a Brexit Deal is done
45% of people say "Go ahead with Brexit on October 31st even if it means leaving with ‘no deal’".
"Even if it means No Deal" != "No Deal is my preferred option"
Indeed - a few pages on the poll makes clear what the preferred options are. And it's not No Deal. But Johnson has got himself into a place where he has to deliver one or he and the Tories will be done for. But then what happens? It is very, very hard to see how things end well for the.
Boris is heading for a 4th consecutive Tory government, something achieved only once in the last 100 years.
The Tories are fine thanks
Yep - your team is winning, of that there is absolutely no doubt at all. Whether that is good for the country and whether it is sustainable are very different issues. But I suspect that like all fans you do not really care about that right now. It's just one game at a time.
Your side applauded the defeats of the WA. It’s not so clever now. A coalition of erg nutters and a Labour Party opposing something that largely did what they wanted within the confines of accepting the referendum result voted against the only compromise on the table.
This is parliaments “no deal”.
I don’t have a side. I - very reluctantly - supported May’s WA.
Please accept my apology. It’s so easy to fall into a for or against mentality.
They really think the EU is going to blink don't they?
The supposed logic of ramping up preparations for a no-deal outcome is that this will induce the EU to blink and drop the repeated insistence of its leaders that the agreement can’t be reopened. They will then buckle and give him concessions that they wouldn’t offer to Mrs May. Now ask yourself this: how likely are Europe’s leaders to make themselves look very stupid in order to make Boris Johnson look very clever?
There's an entire Establishment massively invested in Boris having to fail. Because otherwise, history will show they have just spent three years wanking into their sock...
I don't see what he is offering the EU to reopen the deal...
That is true. The fact that it will be seen as the UK strong-arming the EU successfully at this stage is a point against a breakthrough being made. What is required is some creative thought - a third way. 'Peace with honour' as Disraeli said after the Treaty of San Stefano (?) for all. Who knows whether this will happen.
Free movement of labour would open that door pretty quickly.
There's an entire Establishment massively invested in Boris having to fail. Because otherwise, history will show they have just spent three years wanking into their sock...
I don't see what he is offering the EU to reopen the deal...
That is true. The fact that it will be seen as the UK strong-arming the EU successfully at this stage is a point against a breakthrough being made. What is required is some creative thought - a third way. 'Peace with honour' as Disraeli said after the Treaty of San Stefano (?) for all. Who knows whether this will happen.
Free movement of labour would open that door pretty quickly.
I can't think how that could break the deadlock, but oddly that's exactly what popped into my head too.
So religious institutions should be a 'Safe Space' for homophobes. Should we also have safe spaces for racists?
Yeah, so this leads to the Mormonism in the 70s question. If your religion states that black people are fallen and therefore shouldn't be allowed in the church, does a church have that right?
Edit: seriously can anyone give a simple guide as how to keep blockquotes looking correct once I hit the character limit?
Did you really fall for that article? You bought into the incredibly tortured logic required to pretend that supporting a woman's right the wear the niqab is somehow inconsistent with criticise a woman for anything she does while wearing one?
The issue is that people are not prepared to address the fact that there are those within Islam who are fostering the sort of bigotry that this individual has chosen to accept. It is not all of Islam - but if you look at the research, the level of anti-LGBT+ sentiment within Islam in Europe is high, within Europe in other parts of the world it stratospherically high.
People are free to choose whatever religion/faith they wish. But they are not free to spread hate using their faith as a shield for their bigotry.
You choose your religion, you do not choose your sexuality. So we have to challenge any religion that tries to deny my right to live and love.
And too many of our political leaders are not prepared to challenge on this subject for fear of being accused of being -phobic. And by remaining silent, they are allowing homophobia to increase.
This needs to stop.
This is what I feel is the real virtue signalling.
Most people born pre noughties grew up in a world that was super homophobic (post noughties is only less homophobic relatively). You may think "well, not me guv" but I remember when gay and f** were common slurs used at anyone. I remember people I know not wanting to walk down the road holding hands. I remember having conversations with family members and friends' parents about equal marriage and they hated the idea.
LGBTQ+ rights are not a stick to beat Muslims with. What about LGBTQ+ Muslims themselves? What about the Catholic church? What about the increase in homophobic violence across Europe which isn't coming from the immigrant community but from the far right? What about all the trans panic stuff?
Churches and Mosques should not have gay marriage forced upon them but neither should they spread homophobia either
So as long as they keep their homophobia to themselves then that is OK?
Of course. Why wouldn’t it be?
So religious institutions should be a 'Safe Space' for homophobes. Should we also have safe spaces for racists?
It is ridiculous to confuse moral conviction with hatred of those who think or act differently.
I can't see why they are wasting all this money on a no-deal information campaign. It would be much cheaper, and go down better with the key demographic, just to re-run existing films:
Did you really fall for that article? You bought into the incredibly tortured logic required to pretend that supporting a woman's right the wear the niqab is somehow inconsistent with criticise a woman for anything she does while wearing one?
The issue is that people are not prepared to address the fact that there are those within Islam who are fostering the sort of bigotry that this individual has chosen to accept. It is not all of Islam - but if you look at the research, the level of anti-LGBT+ sentiment within Islam in Europe is high, within Europe in other parts of the world it stratospherically high.
People are free to choose whatever religion/faith they wish. But they are not free to spread hate using their faith as a shield for their bigotry.
You choose your religion, you do not choose your sexuality. So we have to challenge any religion that tries to deny my right to live and love.
And too many of our political leaders are not prepared to challenge on this subject for fear of being accused of being -phobic. And by remaining silent, they are allowing homophobia to increase.
This needs to stop.
Really? Stella Creasy apparently had no trouble calling it out in this instance. Could you give me some examples of the left defending homophobia when it's religiously-motivated?
It is not about defending, it is refusing to say anything at all that is the real issue.
Creasy's tweet is in no way a strong enough condemnation of what happened. It is a start - but not enough.
Too many on the left won't say anything for upsetting a key demographic of their supporters. Too many on the right won't say anything because they have sympathy for the bigotry. Too many just won't engage for fear of being accused of being racist.
Silence is what I am calling out. And it is giving the bigots space in which to spread their hate
This is what I feel is the real virtue signalling.
Most people born pre noughtiesd at anyone. I remember people I know not wanting to walk down the road holding hands. I remember having conversations with family members and friends' parents about equal marriage and they hated the idea.
LGBTQ+ rights are not a stick to beat Muslims with. What about LGBTQ+ Muslims themselves? What about the Catholic church? What about the increase in homophobic violence across Europe which isn't coming from the immigrant community but from the far right? What about all the trans panic stuff?
Churches and Mosques should not have gay marriage forced upon them but neither should they spread homophobia either
So as long as they keep their homophobia to themselves then that is OK?
Of course. Why wouldn’t it be?
So religious institutions should be a 'Safe Space' for homophobes. Should we also have safe spaces for racists?
Absolutely. Of course. Why shouldn’t they be? What a bizarre notion that people shouldn’t be allowed to freely associate with people who share their views.
Well apart from the views being expressed being illegal. Or are you supportive of chat groups for paedophiles, too?
So religious institutions should be a 'Safe Space' for homophobes. Should we also have safe spaces for racists?
Yeah, so this leads to the Mormonism in the 70s question. If your religion states that black people are fallen and therefore shouldn't be allowed in the church, does a church have that right?
Edit: seriously can anyone give a simple guide as how to keep blockquotes looking correct once I hit the character limit?
There's an entire Establishment massively invested in Boris having to fail. Because otherwise, history will show they have just spent three years wanking into their sock...
The prize for Boris if he gets movement is enormous though. They are building him up to fail massively. That could backfire.
He's not going to get movement. What he is doing, in these few weeks while MPs, the EU, and hacks are on holiday, is moving the narrative. As if the EU wasn't demonised enough (hence the referendum result) he thinks turning them into the Devil will create such a mood in the public that Parliament will have to let him have a No Deal exit, lest he calls a GE that he wins (with Farage's help). Will MPs hold their nerve?
Johnson has got himself into a situation where delivering Brexit on 31st October is not enough. It has to be a No Deal Brexit. If this is an example of the genius of Dominic Cummings it may be that he is not quite the genius we’ve been led to believe he is.
Opinium yesterday had No Deal now the public's most favoured option.
45% of voters back No Deal, 28% of voters want to revoke Article 50 and stay in the EU and just 13% of voters want to extend Article 50 past October until a Brexit Deal is done
45% of people say "Go ahead with Brexit on October 31st even if it means leaving with ‘no deal’".
"Even if it means No Deal" != "No Deal is my preferred option"
Indeed - a few pages on the poll makes clear what the preferred options are. And it's not No Deal. But Johnson has got himself into a place where he has to deliver one or he and the Tories will be done for. But then what happens? It is very, very hard to see how things end well for the.
Boris is heading for a 4th consecutive Tory government, something achieved only once in the last 100 years.
The Tories are fine thanks
Yep - your team is winning, of that there is absolutely no doubt at all. Whether that is good for the country and whether it is sustainable are very different issues. But I suspect that like all fans you do not really care about that right now. It's just one game at a time.
Your side applauded the defeats of the WA. It’s not so clever now. A coalition of erg nutters and a Labour Party opposing something that largely did what they wanted within the confines of accepting the referendum result voted against the only compromise on the table.
This is parliaments “no deal”.
I don’t have a side. I - very reluctantly - supported May’s WA.
Please accept my apology. It’s so easy to fall into a for or against mentality.
This is what I feel is the real virtue signalling.
Most people born pre noughtiesd at anyone. I remember people I know not wanting to walk down the road holding hands. I remember having conversations with family members and friends' parents about equal marriage and they hated the idea.
LGBTQ+ rights are not a stick to beat Muslims with. What about LGBTQ+ Muslims themselves? What about the Catholic church? What about the increase in homophobic violence across Europe which isn't coming from the immigrant community but from the far right? What about all the trans panic stuff?
Churches and Mosques should not have gay marriage forced upon them but neither should they spread homophobia either
So as long as they keep their homophobia to themselves then that is OK?
Of course. Why wouldn’t it be?
So religious institutions should be a 'Safe Space' for homophobes. Should we also have safe spaces for racists?
Absolutely. Of course. Why shouldn’t they be? What a bizarre notion that people shouldn’t be allowed to freely associate with people who share their views.
Well apart from the views being expressed being illegal. Or are you supportive of chat groups for paedophiles, too?
I can't see why they are wasting all this money on a no-deal information campaign. It would be much cheaper, and go down better with the key demographic, just to re-run existing films:
Who here now thinks Boris means it now when it comes to NoDeal? He might not desire it but the current state of limbo must end. If we really do end up pushed out and punished for desiring self determination. Let’s do anything and everything we can to damage the integrity of their single market. They want a border in Northern Ireland let them put it there. If no border (which neither the uk or republic will construct) let’s use it as an officially endorsed by uk means of importing and exporting goods.
You want to beat the crap out of us? That’s fine but don’t be surprised when you get shanked in the kidneys. We may have been only one of twenty seven but our economy is larger than twenty of those put together.
Could be quite profitable for the RoI, as well. They invite people to tranship through them. A fixed rate for any items that won't be opened until over the border. No standards checks, no customs fee, no checks for legality.
They get paid, the shipments cross into Northern Ireland with no checks, and from there into the rest of the UK (again with no checks- "No border down the Irish Sea")
We have regained control (Is this right? - Ed) and Ireland gets to make a decent profit out of us.
I don't particularly how anyone or business can prepare for a "No deal" exit and any attempt at mitigation could become a self fulfilling prophecy.
Just what are these public information films going to say - buy your travel money now for next year or it'll become dearer ?
"If you can, move your business to one of EU27 countries, we recommend Ireland as the easiest. If you farm sheep, talk to a financial adviser about early retirement as you won't have a livelihood soon. If you're a dumb blonde looking for a rich husband, go for a lawyer, he'll have plenty of work for years."
Thanks to ralphmalph and nico67. In the words of the lawyer I shall be none the wiser. But much better informed.
You’re welcome . The thing is as Ralph said those bills aren’t critical for no deal but would be needed immediately post October 31st .
I think the thing to look out for is the emergency debate route . Bercow can effectively ignore the advice of his clerks and do whatever he likes .
Question about a VoNC.
If Corbyn is too disinterested to do one, and let's be honest I think Corbyn will never VoNC, then what is the route to a VoNC?
The Leader of the Opposition won't table one. The Prime Minister won't either.
After that, am I right in suspecting it is the SNP, and a VERY helpful Bercow to get one tabled? Perhaps a joint SNP/LD motion, with an appeal to Bercow that this is a joint VoNC coming from the third largest party, and the (second?) oldest party in Parliament and must be heard? Perhaps tack on CUK, Green and PC support too?
And if Bercow did allow the debate, I wonder if enough Labour MPs would support it (I suspect not), as it wasn't tabled by the Jezziah himself.
Those two statements are in no way contradictory. Please at least check your retweets before blindly posting them.
Mods, may I suggest that we could encourage people to post Tweets accompanied by some commentary explaining why they find this particular Tweet to be valuable or insightful? I wouldn't just quote a book, poll, or other PBer without offering something additional.
This is what I feel is the real virtue signalling.
Most people born pre noughtiesd at anyone. I remember people I know not wanting to walk down the road holding hands. I remember having conversations with family members and friends' parents about equal marriage and they hated the idea.
LGBTQ+ rights are not a stick to beat Muslims with. What about LGBTQ+ Muslims themselves? What about the Catholic church? What about the increase in homophobic violence across Europe which isn't coming from the immigrant community but from the far right? What about all the trans panic stuff?
Churches and Mosques should not have gay marriage forced upon them but neither should they spread homophobia either
So as long as they keep their homophobia to themselves then that is OK?
Of course. Why wouldn’t it be?
So religious institutions should be a 'Safe Space' for homophobes. Should we also have safe spaces for racists?
Absolutely. Of course. Why shouldn’t they be? What a bizarre notion that people shouldn’t be allowed to freely associate with people who share their views.
Well apart from the views being expressed being illegal. Or are you supportive of chat groups for paedophiles, too?
Neither racism or homophobia are illegal.
It absolutely becomes illegal when you shout homophobic language at Pride attendees on a street in London as happened this weekend.
And that would be the same if an individual was shouting similarly racist language at people on a street.
I can't see why they are wasting all this money on a no-deal information campaign. It would be much cheaper, and go down better with the key demographic, just to re-run existing films:
Thanks to ralphmalph and nico67. In the words of the lawyer I shall be none the wiser. But much better informed.
You’re welcome . The thing is as Ralph said those bills aren’t critical for no deal but would be needed immediately post October 31st .
I think the thing to look out for is the emergency debate route . Bercow can effectively ignore the advice of his clerks and do whatever he likes .
Question about a VoNC.
If Corbyn is too disinterested to do one, and let's be honest I think Corbyn will never VoNC, then what is the route to a VoNC?
The Leader of the Opposition won't table one. The Prime Minister won't either.
After that, am I right in suspecting it is the SNP, and a VERY helpful Bercow to get one tabled? Perhaps a joint SNP/LD motion, with an appeal to Bercow that this is a joint VoNC coming from the third largest party, and the (second?) oldest party in Parliament and must be heard? Perhaps tack on CUK, Green and PC support too?
And if Bercow did allow the debate, I wonder if enough Labour MPs would support it (I suspect not), as it wasn't tabled by the Jezziah himself.
Corbyn will table one. He was right not to table one last week - Tories haven't made up their minds on Boris. In September we'll find out what Boris is planning and how many Tory rebels there are.
Those two statements are in no way contradictory. Please at least check your retweets before blindly posting them.
Mods, may I suggest that we could encourage people to post Tweets accompanied by some commentary explaining why they find this particular Tweet to be valuable or insightful? I wouldn't just quote a book, poll, or other PBer without offering something additional.
The PM does not share the working assumption of his government. Hmmm.
Did you really fall for that article? You bought into the incredibly tortured logic required to pretend that supporting a woman's right the wear the niqab is somehow inconsistent with criticise a woman for anything she does while wearing one?
The issue is that people are not prepared to address the fact that there are those within Islam who are fostering the sort of bigotry that this individual has chosen to accept. It is not all of Islam - but if you look at the research, the level of anti-LGBT+ sentiment within Islam in Europe is high, within Europe in other parts of the world it stratospherically high.
People are free to choose whatever religion/faith they wish. But they are not free to spread hate using their faith as a shield for their bigotry.
You choose your religion, you do not choose your sexuality. So we have to challenge any religion that tries to deny my right to live and love.
And too many of our political leaders are not prepared to challenge on this subject for fear of being accused of being -phobic. And by remaining silent, they are allowing homophobia to increase.
This needs to stop.
This is what I feel is the real virtue signalling.
Most people born pre noughties grew up in a world that was super homophobic (post noughties is only less homophobic relatively). You may think "well, not me guv" but I remember when gay and f** were common slurs used at anyone. I remember people I know not wanting to walk down the road holding hands. I remember having conversations with family members and friends' parents about equal marriage and they hated the idea.
LGBTQ+ rights are not a stick to beat Muslims with. What about LGBTQ+ Muslims themselves? What about the Catholic church? What about the increase in homophobic violence across Europe which isn't coming from the immigrant community but from the far right? What about all the trans panic stuff?
Churches and Mosques should not have gay marriage forced upon them but neither should they spread homophobia either
So as long as they keep their homophobia to themselves then that is OK?
Of course. Why wouldn’t it be?
So religious institutions should be a 'Safe Space' for homophobes. Should we also have safe spaces for racists?
The only safe space allowed should be inside people's heads.
Edit: seriously can anyone give a simple guide as how to keep blockquotes looking correct once I hit the character limit?
Edit so only the first opening blockquote is present together with the (matching) last closing blockquote. Remove the stuff in the middle from previous messages.
Opening quote is: <blockquote class="Quote" rel="SOMEONE">
Who here now thinks Boris means it now when it comes to NoDeal? He might not desire it but the current state of limbo must end. If we really do end up pushed out and punished for desiring self determination. Let’s do anything and everything we can to damage the integrity of their single market. They want a border in Northern Ireland let them put it there. If no border (which neither the uk or republic will construct) let’s use it as an officially endorsed by uk means of importing and exporting goods.
You want to beat the crap out of us? That’s fine but don’t be surprised when you get shanked in the kidneys. We may have been only one of twenty seven but our economy is larger than twenty of those put together.
Could be quite profitable for the RoI, as well. They invite people to tranship through them. A fixed rate for any items that won't be opened until over the border. No standards checks, no customs fee, no checks for legality.
They get paid, the shipments cross into Northern Ireland with no checks, and from there into the rest of the UK (again with no checks- "No border down the Irish Sea")
We have regained control (Is this right? - Ed) and Ireland gets to make a decent profit out of us.
Ireland does not have the port capacity to do this and the NI ports also do not have the capacity. Very early on in the brexit process the issue of container port capacity in RoI was raised. A lot of RoW goods for Ireland come into UK ports and then put onto HGVs to get to Ireland. RoI has over the past three years been trying to address this.
Ken Clarke or Starmer. Not easy, but entirely within the bounds of possibility.
If I was Jeremy Corbyn I'd be reluctant to back Starmer or any other substantial Labour figure for fear that they ran away with the ball. Better to go with a non-threatening Tory grandee.
Well yes. But Labour MPs might not see it that way. They may view that prospect rather more positively.
I honestly think, with everything we know about Corbyn, that he will see it in terms of an opportunity to push the left's succession and we will have some element of a stand off in which Long-Bailey is pushed as the alternative.
Also, FTPA would be the same for the temporary government as for Boris. It might suit either or both Labour and Boris to procrastinate a little and make mischief before any VoNC or dissolution request comes before parliament, and frankly, even if LDs withdraw support after day 1, their mechanisms to force the issue are weak.
Those two statements are in no way contradictory. Please at least check your retweets before blindly posting them.
Mods, may I suggest that we could encourage people to post Tweets accompanied by some commentary explaining why they find this particular Tweet to be valuable or insightful? I wouldn't just quote a book, poll, or other PBer without offering something additional.
The PM does not share the working assumption of his government. Hmmm.
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
Not really - in any sane organisation you have someone doing disaster planning.
Gove is doing the disaster and contingency planning, Johnson is above that trying to prevent / facilitate it depending on your point of view..
There are plenty of risk managers. They do not say publicly that they are actively preparing for the worst case scenario because they think it is the most likely outcome unless they believe it is the most likely outcome. If the CEO does not agree something has gone wrong.
Who here now thinks Boris means it now when it comes to NoDeal? He might not desire it but the current state of limbo must end. If we really do end up pushed out and punished for desiring self determination. Let’s do anything and everything we can to damage the integrity of their single market. They want a border in Northern Ireland let them put it there. If no border (which neither the uk or republic will construct) let’s use it as an officially endorsed by uk means of importing and exporting goods.
You want to beat the crap out of us? That’s fine but don’t be surprised when you get shanked in the kidneys. We may have been only one of twenty seven but our economy is larger than twenty of those put together.
Could be quite profitable for the RoI, as well. They invite people to tranship through them. A fixed rate for any items that won't be opened until over the border. No standards checks, no customs fee, no checks for legality.
They get paid, the shipments cross into Northern Ireland with no checks, and from there into the rest of the UK (again with no checks- "No border down the Irish Sea")
We have regained control (Is this right? - Ed) and Ireland gets to make a decent profit out of us.
Ireland does not have the port capacity to do this and the NI ports also do not have the capacity. Very early on in the brexit process the issue of container port capacity in RoI was raised. A lot of RoW goods for Ireland come into UK ports and then put onto HGVs to get to Ireland. RoI has over the past three years been trying to address this.
Re port capacity, I don't think that's true. I posted a link to Irish container ports the other day, and none of them were running anywhere near capacity.
I think there are 100 reasons why transshipment won't happen to any great extent, but Irish port capacity isn't one of them.
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
Neither the PM not the man in charge of preparedness agree with their own government?
I can't see why they are wasting all this money on a no-deal information campaign. It would be much cheaper, and go down better with the key demographic, just to re-run existing films:
Those two statements are in no way contradictory. Please at least check your retweets before blindly posting them.
Mods, may I suggest that we could encourage people to post Tweets accompanied by some commentary explaining why they find this particular Tweet to be valuable or insightful? I wouldn't just quote a book, poll, or other PBer without offering something additional.
The PM does not share the working assumption of his government. Hmmm.
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
The PM does not agree with his government. Who should businesses believe?
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
Neither the PM not the man in charge of preparedness agree with their own government?
Sound contradictory to me...
It is not a case of not agreeing. The working assumption of Trident is that there will be a nuclear attack from a hostile state. That does not mean the PM assumes that there will be such an attack, which is what he was asked with reference to no deal. The clue is in the extra word. It is a simple matter of comprehension, which I appreciate there isn't time for when blindly retweeting everything.
Those two statements are in no way contradictory. Please at least check your retweets before blindly posting them.
Mods, may I suggest that we could encourage people to post Tweets accompanied by some commentary explaining why they find this particular Tweet to be valuable or insightful? I wouldn't just quote a book, poll, or other PBer without offering something additional.
The PM does not share the working assumption of his government. Hmmm.
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
Really ? "A million to one chance" of a No Deal - Johnson
This is what I feel is the real virtue signalling.
Most people born pre noughtiesd at anyone. I remember people I know not wanting to walk down the road holding hands. I remember having conversations with family members and friends' parents about equal marriage and they hated the idea.
LGBTQ+ rights are not a stick to beat Muslims with. What about LGBTQ+ Muslims themselves? What about the Catholic church? What about the increase in homophobic violence across Europe which isn't coming from the immigrant community but from the far right? What about all the trans panic stuff?
Churches and Mosques should not have gay marriage forced upon them but neither should they spread homophobia either
So as long as they keep their homophobia to themselves then that is OK?
Of course. Why wouldn’t it be?
So religious institutions should be a 'Safe Space' for homophobes. Should we also have safe spaces for racists?
Absolutely. Of course. Why shouldn’t they be? What a bizarre notion that people shouldn’t be allowed to freely associate with people who share their views.
Well apart from the views being expressed being illegal. Or are you supportive of chat groups for paedophiles, too?
Neither racism or homophobia are illegal.
It absolutely becomes illegal when you shout homophobic language at Pride attendees on a street in London as happened this weekend.
And that would be the same if an individual was shouting similarly racist language at people on a street.
The crime was the public order offence. Not that it was racist or homophobic.
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
Neither the PM not the man in charge of preparedness agree with their own government?
Sound contradictory to me...
It is not a case of not agreeing. The working assumption of Trident is that there will be a nuclear attack from a hostile state. That does not mean the PM assumes that there will be such an attack, which is what he was asked with reference to no deal. The clue is in the extra word. It is a simple matter of comprehension, which I appreciate there isn't time for when blindly retweeting everything.
It's not often I support you, but you are right on this. Boris could however have been clearer on the distinction (and perhaps in the interview he went on to be clearer, I've only seen the tweet).
Who here now thinks Boris means it now when it comes to NoDeal? He might not desire it but the current state of limbo must end. If we really do end up pushed out and punished for desiring self determination. Let’s do anything and everything we can to damage the integrity of their single market. They want a border in Northern Ireland let them put it there. If no border (which neither the uk or republic will construct) let’s use it as an officially endorsed by uk means of importing and exporting goods.
You want to beat the crap out of us? That’s fine but don’t be surprised when you get shanked in the kidneys. We may have been only one of twenty seven but our economy is larger than twenty of those put together.
Could be quite profitable for the RoI, as well. They invite people to tranship through them. A fixed rate for any items that won't be opened until over the border. No standards checks, no customs fee, no checks for legality.
They get paid, the shipments cross into Northern Ireland with no checks, and from there into the rest of the UK (again with no checks- "No border down the Irish Sea")
We have regained control (Is this right? - Ed) and Ireland gets to make a decent profit out of us.
Ireland does not have the port capacity to do this and the NI ports also do not have the capacity. Very early on in the brexit process the issue of container port capacity in RoI was raised. A lot of RoW goods for Ireland come into UK ports and then put onto HGVs to get to Ireland. RoI has over the past three years been trying to address this.
Re port capacity, I don't think that's true. I posted a link to Irish container ports the other day, and none of them were running anywhere near capacity.
I think there are 100 reasons why transshipment won't happen to any great extent, but Irish port capacity isn't one of them.
The main reason [ for food items ] is the time taken. Through the UK land bridge it takes about 18 hours. The quickest way to reach the same places [ like Calais or Ostend ] will be about 36 hours. Remember, first they have to land in Cherbourg and then take the long route. Of course, in the future very large refrigerated ships probably is the answer.
I think I can see a way out for Boris here. Get another extension, but say it's an extension of the process of departure rather the act of staying in. That way Boris can claim he's met his 31 October pledge. It would be audacious, but maybe Boris with all his aplomb and loquacity could pull it off.
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
Neither the PM not the man in charge of preparedness agree with their own government?
Sound contradictory to me...
It is not a case of not agreeing. The working assumption of Trident is that there will be a nuclear attack from a hostile state. That does not mean the PM assumes that there will be such an attack, which is what he was asked with reference to no deal. The clue is in the extra word. It is a simple matter of comprehension, which I appreciate there isn't time for when blindly retweeting everything.
It's not often I support you, but you are right on this. Boris could however have been clearer on the distinction (and perhaps in the interview he went on to be clearer, I've only seen the tweet).
Your support is gratefully received, and I agree, it is a subtle distinction, but important nonetheless.
Just back from a cruise in the Baltic including Hamburg, Copenhagen, Visby, Tallinn, St Petersburg, Kiel, and Gothenburg ( and no patriotic boozing.) What was impressive was how well kept were the streets and friendly the locals(even the Russians). We are just about to throw all that under the Boris bus.
Those two statements are in no way contradictory. Please at least check your retweets before blindly posting them.
Mods, may I suggest that we could encourage people to post Tweets accompanied by some commentary explaining why they find this particular Tweet to be valuable or insightful? I wouldn't just quote a book, poll, or other PBer without offering something additional.
The PM does not share the working assumption of his government. Hmmm.
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
Really ? "A million to one chance" of a No Deal - Johnson
The chances of anything coming from Mars is a million to one
Who here now thinks Boris means it now when it comes to NoDeal? He might not desire it but the current state of limbo must end. If we really do end up pushed out and punished for desiring self determination. Let’s do anything and everything we can to damage the integrity of their single market. They want a border in Northern Ireland let them put it there. If no border (which neither the uk or republic will construct) let’s use it as an officially endorsed by uk means of importing and exporting goods.
You want to beat the crap out of us? That’s fine but don’t be surprised when you get shanked in the kidneys. We may have been only one of twenty seven but our economy is larger than twenty of those put together.
Could be quite profitable for the RoI, as well. They invite people to tranship through them. A fixed rate for any items that won't be opened until over the border. No standards checks, no customs fee, no checks for legality.
They get paid, the shipments cross into Northern Ireland with no checks, and from there into the rest of the UK (again with no checks- "No border down the Irish Sea")
We have regained control (Is this right? - Ed) and Ireland gets to make a decent profit out of us.
Ireland does not have the port capacity to do this and the NI ports also do not have the capacity. Very early on in the brexit process the issue of container port capacity in RoI was raised. A lot of RoW goods for Ireland come into UK ports and then put onto HGVs to get to Ireland. RoI has over the past three years been trying to address this.
They must have some capacity as when I was in Dublin in January they were just finishing off a brand new ferry ready for the Dublin-Rotterdam route.
Those two statements are in no way contradictory. Please at least check your retweets before blindly posting them.
Mods, may I suggest that we could encourage people to post Tweets accompanied by some commentary explaining why they find this particular Tweet to be valuable or insightful? I wouldn't just quote a book, poll, or other PBer without offering something additional.
The PM does not share the working assumption of his government. Hmmm.
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
The PM does not agree with his government. Who should businesses believe?
The working assumption of Trident is that there will be a nuclear attack from a hostile state. That does not mean the PM assumes that there will be such an attack, which is what he was asked with reference to no deal.
Wrong, on both counts.
The working assumption of Trident is that having it lessens the likelyhood of an attack. The PM agrees with that assumption, or he would cancel it.
As a thought process it isn't - but once you act on those thoughts, it is absolutely illegal
But none of this is relevant
What happened on Saturday was a hate crime. End of.
Not end of. Borderline. 1) was her behaviour beaming the law irrelevant of who the target was. If it was Nigel Farage standing there and she behaved in a similar way ? 2) only then can hate be an aggravating factor.
Hate is not a crime. Challenging people who hold different views is not a crime.
I think I can see a way out for Boris here. Get another extension, but say it's an extension of the process of departure rather the act of staying in. That way Boris can claim he's met his 31 October pledge. It would be audacious, but maybe Boris with all his aplomb and loquacity could pull it off.
No ifs, no buts.
Do or die.
Boris will be eaten alive by Farage and the ERG if he asks for an extension in any shape or form.
Those two statements are in no way contradictory. Please at least check your retweets before blindly posting them.
Mods, may I suggest that we could encourage people to post Tweets accompanied by some commentary explaining why they find this particular Tweet to be valuable or insightful? I wouldn't just quote a book, poll, or other PBer without offering something additional.
The PM does not share the working assumption of his government. Hmmm.
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
Really ? "A million to one chance" of a No Deal - Johnson
But still, they come...
It seems totally incredible to me now that everyone spent that summer as though it were just like any other.
Those two statements are in no way contradictory. Please at least check your retweets before blindly posting them.
Mods, may I suggest that we could encourage people to post Tweets accompanied by some commentary explaining why they find this particular Tweet to be valuable or insightful? I wouldn't just quote a book, poll, or other PBer without offering something additional.
The PM does not share the working assumption of his government. Hmmm.
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
Really ? "A million to one chance" of a No Deal - Johnson
But still, they come...
It seems totally incredible to me now that everyone spent that summer as though it were just like any other.
Just back from a cruise in the Baltic including Hamburg, Copenhagen, Visby, Tallinn, St Petersburg, Kiel, and Gothenburg ( and no patriotic boozing.) What was impressive was how well kept were the streets and friendly the locals(even the Russians). We are just about to throw all that under the Boris bus.
Hyperbole at Warp Factor 9.
How will Boris's election alter how clean the streets are in Europe?
The working assumption of Trident is that there will be a nuclear attack from a hostile state. That does not mean the PM assumes that there will be such an attack, which is what he was asked with reference to no deal.
Wrong, on both counts.
The working assumption of Trident is that having it lessens the likelyhood of an attack. The PM agrees with that assumption, or he would cancel it.
Isn't Trident a good example. The working assumption of the submarine commanders is that they could receive an order to fire at any moment, and they must be ready to respond to that order.
Those two statements are in no way contradictory. Please at least check your retweets before blindly posting them.
Mods, may I suggest that we could encourage people to post Tweets accompanied by some commentary explaining why they find this particular Tweet to be valuable or insightful? I wouldn't just quote a book, poll, or other PBer without offering something additional.
The PM does not share the working assumption of his government. Hmmm.
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
Really ? "A million to one chance" of a No Deal - Johnson
But still, they come...
It seems totally incredible to me now that everyone spent that summer as though it were just like any other.
Excuse me. He said that last week. Not 3 years ago.
Just back from a cruise in the Baltic including Hamburg, Copenhagen, Visby, Tallinn, St Petersburg, Kiel, and Gothenburg ( and no patriotic boozing.) What was impressive was how well kept were the streets and friendly the locals(even the Russians). We are just about to throw all that under the Boris bus.
Hyperbole at Warp Factor 9.
How will Boris's election alter how clean the streets are in Europe?
How it will affect the friendliness in St Petersburg is another head scratcher.
Just back from a cruise in the Baltic including Hamburg, Copenhagen, Visby, Tallinn, St Petersburg, Kiel, and Gothenburg ( and no patriotic boozing.) What was impressive was how well kept were the streets and friendly the locals(even the Russians). We are just about to throw all that under the Boris bus.
We had members of our Scots family on that cruise
My wife and I did that cruise some years ago. Tallinn is delightful and it was our second visit to St Petersburg but it is an extraordinary city to explore at anytime
I find Gove's comment to be uninformative. The meaning of 'working assumption' is the assumption underlying the work. Where the 'work' is planning for No Deal the working assumption de facto is that there will be No Deal. Since if it were otherwise one would not do the work.
Those two statements are in no way contradictory. Please at least check your retweets before blindly posting them.
Mods, may I suggest that we could encourage people to post Tweets accompanied by some commentary explaining why they find this particular Tweet to be valuable or insightful? I wouldn't just quote a book, poll, or other PBer without offering something additional.
The PM does not share the working assumption of his government. Hmmm.
Boris does not assume that there will be no deal, as he has stated before. Nor, I am sure, does Michael Gove. However, the working assumption of the Government is that there will be a no deal. Where is the contradiction here?
Really ? "A million to one chance" of a No Deal - Johnson
But still, they come...
It seems totally incredible to me now that everyone spent that summer as though it were just like any other.
Excuse me. He said that last week. Not 3 years ago.
Comments
This is parliaments “no deal”.
Who is able to ameliorate the effects on their members better if No Deal occurs?
Who values the integrity of the SM higher than a trade relationship with an ex member?
Did you see the Mars Bar thread on twitter the other day? Literally the PM says leaving with No Deal won't mean you can't have Mars Bars, and someone from Mars came out and said "well, it means maybe you won't, because all of these things". That's just for Mars Bars. Nobody knows what they're talking about, except to say "it will be worse than staying".
The couldn't. Their careers ended in ignominy as result of their miscalculation. But it was also a miscalculation by the EU that it would do the job. It won't. So get real - start again. Or within 100 days, the slide to recession begins....
But I bet you prefer Theresa May to Gordon Brown.
And Barry Gardiner - you DEFINITELY don't like him.
Of course. Why wouldn’t it be?
So religious institutions should be a 'Safe Space' for homophobes. Should we also have safe spaces for racists?
Yeah, so this leads to the Mormonism in the 70s question. If your religion states that black people are fallen and therefore shouldn't be allowed in the church, does a church have that right?
Edit: seriously can anyone give a simple guide as how to keep blockquotes looking correct once I hit the character limit?
https://www.britishpathe.com/workspaces/643fc304416d8911bc930b39b2c12f43/wwii-public-information-films
Creasy's tweet is in no way a strong enough condemnation of what happened. It is a start - but not enough.
Too many on the left won't say anything for upsetting a key demographic of their supporters. Too many on the right won't say anything because they have sympathy for the bigotry. Too many just won't engage for fear of being accused of being racist.
Silence is what I am calling out. And it is giving the bigots space in which to spread their hate
So religious institutions should be a 'Safe Space' for homophobes. Should we also have safe spaces for racists?
Yeah, so this leads to the Mormonism in the 70s question. If your religion states that black people are fallen and therefore shouldn't be allowed in the church, does a church have that right?
Edit: seriously can anyone give a simple guide as how to keep blockquotes looking correct once I hit the character limit?
@algarkirk
Just what are these public information films going to say - buy your travel money now for next year or it'll become dearer ?
One aspect of panic buying that always amuses me is the shear quantity of bread that always gets cleared off the shelves.
They invite people to tranship through them. A fixed rate for any items that won't be opened until over the border. No standards checks, no customs fee, no checks for legality.
They get paid, the shipments cross into Northern Ireland with no checks, and from there into the rest of the UK (again with no checks- "No border down the Irish Sea")
We have regained control (Is this right? - Ed) and Ireland gets to make a decent profit out of us.
If Corbyn is too disinterested to do one, and let's be honest I think Corbyn will never VoNC, then what is the route to a VoNC?
The Leader of the Opposition won't table one.
The Prime Minister won't either.
After that, am I right in suspecting it is the SNP, and a VERY helpful Bercow to get one tabled? Perhaps a joint SNP/LD motion, with an appeal to Bercow that this is a joint VoNC coming from the third largest party, and the (second?) oldest party in Parliament and must be heard? Perhaps tack on CUK, Green and PC support too?
And if Bercow did allow the debate, I wonder if enough Labour MPs would support it (I suspect not), as it wasn't tabled by the Jezziah himself.
Mods, may I suggest that we could encourage people to post Tweets accompanied by some commentary explaining why they find this particular Tweet to be valuable or insightful? I wouldn't just quote a book, poll, or other PBer without offering something additional.
And that would be the same if an individual was shouting similarly racist language at people on a street.
https://www.britishpathe.com/video/a-welcome-visitor
Edit so only the first opening blockquote is present together with the (matching) last closing blockquote. Remove the stuff in the middle from previous messages.
Opening quote is: <blockquote class="Quote" rel="SOMEONE">
Closing quote has a slash: </blockquote>
Gove is doing the disaster and contingency planning, Johnson is above that trying to prevent / facilitate it depending on your point of view..
Also, FTPA would be the same for the temporary government as for Boris. It might suit either or both Labour and Boris to procrastinate a little and make mischief before any VoNC or dissolution request comes before parliament, and frankly, even if LDs withdraw support after day 1, their mechanisms to force the issue are weak.
I think there are 100 reasons why transshipment won't happen to any great extent, but Irish port capacity isn't one of them.
Sound contradictory to me...
Did PM Boris say the deal would be done in 90 days?
But none of this is relevant
What happened on Saturday was a hate crime. End of.
Of course, in the future very large refrigerated ships probably is the answer.
but still they come..
meanwhile...
https://twitter.com/EuroGuido/status/1155830122626387969
I'll get my coat.
Wrong, on both counts.
The working assumption of Trident is that having it lessens the likelyhood of an attack. The PM agrees with that assumption, or he would cancel it.
1) was her behaviour beaming the law irrelevant of who the target was. If it was Nigel Farage standing there and she behaved in a similar way ?
2) only then can hate be an aggravating factor.
Hate is not a crime. Challenging people who hold different views is not a crime.
Do or die.
Boris will be eaten alive by Farage and the ERG if he asks for an extension in any shape or form.
It seems totally incredible to me now that everyone spent that summer as
though it were just like any other.
How will Boris's election alter how clean the streets are in Europe?
Does the PM expect to give that order?
When you think of it this way it really shows the lunacy that’s over taken the country .
My wife and I did that cruise some years ago. Tallinn is delightful and it was our second visit to St Petersburg but it is an extraordinary city to explore at anytime