Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The chances of Mrs May getting her own way on the Article 50 r

SystemSystem Posts: 11,711
edited October 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The chances of Mrs May getting her own way on the Article 50 revocation date are less than 78%

A massive political battle is brewing on the PM’s declaration at last week’s CON conference that she’ll invoke Article 50 to extract the UK from EU in March. As can be seen from the chart of Betfair betting above punters have moved sharply to the Jan-June 2017 option which reached an 81% chance and is now starting to slip a bit.

Read the full story here


«1345678

Comments

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,632
    edited October 2016
    What a shame for Mrs May.

    We want Parliamentary sovereignty and oversight on the Brexit deal, not to frustrate Brexit, but to ensure it is a good Brexit.
  • Options
    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,211
    Discussion ID! Damn you TSE!
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    One for Scott

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/10/currency-guru-says-pound-slide-liberates-uk-from-malign-grip-of/

    “The UK economy is rebalancing amazingly well. It is a stunning achievement that a once-in-fifty-year event should have gone to smoothly,” he told the Telegraph.

  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    taffys said:

    One for Scott

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/10/currency-guru-says-pound-slide-liberates-uk-from-malign-grip-of/

    “The UK economy is rebalancing amazingly well. It is a stunning achievement that a once-in-fifty-year event should have gone to smoothly,” he told the Telegraph.

    https://twitter.com/lindayueh/status/785826250073837568
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @faisalislam: Mayor @SadiqKhan to CBI on Brexit concerns for London "hard Brexit approach cannot be defended- deeply irresponsible" pic.twitter.com/eQYbkJegUQ

    @faisalislam: "If we were to leave single market, consequences could be disastrous" says @MayorofLondon pic.twitter.com/vJoNcneuMv
  • Options
    What should worry Mrs May is how many Tory MPs who are leavers are recoiling at her plans, I noted it at conference, we're now seeing it spill out into public, Stephen Phillips will be the first of many.
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Minimal - a swing of 1.3% would have had it the other way.

  • Options
    If EURef were an FPTP style election, LEAVE would have won 263 "MPs", and REMAIN only 119 "MPs".
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    What should worry Mrs May is how many Tory MPs who are leavers are recoiling at her plans, I noted it at conference, we're now seeing it spill out into public, Stephen Phillips will be the first of many.

    See also Janan Ganesh article in the FT.

    Hard Brexit is an idea that must be tested (to destruction), but remainers don't need to join in.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,436

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Minimal - a swing of 1.3% would have had it the other way.

    If you win a seat by 50 votes in fifty thousand, you still get 100% of the representation.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,634

    What should worry Mrs May is how many Tory MPs who are leavers are recoiling at her plans, I noted it at conference, we're now seeing it spill out into public, Stephen Phillips will be the first of many.

    In her rush to hug UKIP voters she forgot about Tory voters. She won't fall over this, but there will be a rethinking of the plan, back to basics EEA plus some fig leaf on free movement and copying Germany's new law to bar EU migrants from claiming any benefits, maybe a time limit on EEA membership.
  • Options

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Minimal - a swing of 1.3% would have had it the other way.

    Mike Smithson is a pound-shop Lord Ashdown :lol:
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,730

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Yeah, less than 4% in it, close.
  • Options
    From Mike's article: I thought that May made a mistake by being so specific in her conference speech. If the March 2017 date isn’t met it will be seen as a big personal defeat for her.

    The huge decline in the value of pound and the threats of some US firms to leave the City of London are adding to the pressure.


    I'm rather baffled by this statement, although quite a few people seem to be thinking that way. Surely the damaging uncertainty is a conclusive argument for getting on with it, rather than delaying it?
  • Options
    If only some us had warned about this, oh wait we did

    @faisalislam: Sense in City/business is Government not prioritising financial passport that underpinned their EU HQ activity- starting to act accordingly
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,436
    May will have no problem invoking Article 50. There is no meaningful legal case to be made and the Commons certainly isn't going to stop her. The public backlash if it tried would be immense.

    There may be a debate on the terms of exit but that's a different process. I think the govt has made a mistake in ruling that out too but if Labour force a debate and a vote - and they can - it still won't change the fact of, or the timetable for, leaving.
  • Options

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Yeah, less than 4% in it, close.
    For "close", how about I raise you a Quebec, 1995?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum,_1995
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    Mr. Smithson, and if Hamilton rather than Rosberg had suffered a reliability failure at the 2014 Abu Dhabi then Rosberg would've won that year's title, and my 17 tip would've come off.

    But he didn't.

    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/f1-2014-second-and-third-tests.html
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,894
    Scott_P said:

    taffys said:

    One for Scott

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/10/currency-guru-says-pound-slide-liberates-uk-from-malign-grip-of/

    “The UK economy is rebalancing amazingly well. It is a stunning achievement that a once-in-fifty-year event should have gone to smoothly,” he told the Telegraph.

    https://twitter.com/lindayueh/status/785826250073837568
    With large parts of Europe looking at debt deflation, a rise in prices of 4% over 3 years is hardly the stuff of nightmares.
    I voted remain, and have serious concerns about risks to the economy; this isn't one of them.

  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    If only some us had warned about this, oh wait we did

    @faisalislam: Sense in City/business is Government not prioritising financial passport that underpinned their EU HQ activity- starting to act accordingly

    The smart play would be to shift nameplates to Edinburgh.

    I may or may not have shares in Scottish brass nameplate suppliers.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,971
    Given that the courts don't disagree that the referendum result was reported to the Government, rather than to Parliament, then the date of the A50 declaration is up to the PM. So why shouldn't it happen to her timetable?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Yeah, less than 4% in it, close.

    @jonathancoe: David Davis now says Brexit has an 'overwhelming' mandate. If 51.9% means overwhelming, I'm 51.9% certain that he's an idiot.
  • Options
    JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Minimal - a swing of 1.3% would have had it the other way.

    Mike Smithson is a pound-shop Lord Ashdown :lol:
    You are a pound-shop troll. Repeating the result over and over again won't make the gap any larger, I'm afraid.
  • Options
    How many times has a footy team won a penalty shoot-out by a single goal only to have the losing side MOAN about the result?
  • Options
    Jobabob said:

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Minimal - a swing of 1.3% would have had it the other way.

    Mike Smithson is a pound-shop Lord Ashdown :lol:
    You are a pound-shop troll. Repeating the result over and over again won't make the gap any larger, I'm afraid.
    The gap was large enough for victory, I'm afraid.

    No amount of REMOANING will alter the result.
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,008
    edited October 2016

    If EURef were an FPTP style election, LEAVE would have won 263 "MPs", and REMAIN only 119 "MPs".

    If the referendum was restricted to those who understood the issues it would have been:

    LEAVE 7,410,742
    REMAIN 10,141,241

    Just as silly a comment :-0
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2016/06/europe-how-conservative-mps-break-down-1-over-half-those-backing-remain-are-on-the-payroll.html

    That's a lot of potential Conservative rebels, never mind the Leaver MPs who are true Parliamentarians.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    edited October 2016
    Well given this is a Brexitish thingy - I'm going to watch Jeremy Kyle recorded earlier.

    It's so binary. And that's both - but at least I get to be surprised by the lie detector.
  • Options
    Alistair said:

    If only some us had warned about this, oh wait we did

    @faisalislam: Sense in City/business is Government not prioritising financial passport that underpinned their EU HQ activity- starting to act accordingly

    The smart play would be to shift nameplates to Edinburgh.

    I may or may not have shares in Scottish brass nameplate suppliers.
    Prior to the referendum it was an option we looked at, but we thought the problems of Scottish independence was an insurmountable bar.

    The lack of a lender of last resort, and no automaticity that iScotland would be in the single market made it a no no
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,810

    From Mike's article: I thought that May made a mistake by being so specific in her conference speech. If the March 2017 date isn’t met it will be seen as a big personal defeat for her.

    The huge decline in the value of pound and the threats of some US firms to leave the City of London are adding to the pressure.


    I'm rather baffled by this statement, although quite a few people seem to be thinking that way. Surely the damaging uncertainty is a conclusive argument for getting on with it, rather than delaying it?

    It depends on what the "it" is.

  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956

    What a shame for Mrs May.

    We want Parliamentary sovereignty and oversight on the Brexit deal, not to frustrate Brexit, but to ensure it is a good Brexit.

    And I'd like the moon on a stick, but when we're a) about to negotiate moon-on-a-stick terms with the club we're leaving, b) trying to give the people more power over the moon-on-a-stick than the elites and c) concerned that many MPs, by their own admission, do not want us to get independent sovereign power of the moon-on-a-stick, is it any surprise that the Govt are going to Brexit on their own?
  • Options
    619619 Posts: 1,784
  • Options
    perdixperdix Posts: 1,806

    What a shame for Mrs May.

    We want Parliamentary sovereignty and oversight on the Brexit deal, not to frustrate Brexit, but to ensure it is a good Brexit.

    Who will decide what is a good Brexit? Some Leavers would be happy with merely the full control over immigration and would not worry about economic consequences.

  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956
    Alistair said:

    If only some us had warned about this, oh wait we did

    @faisalislam: Sense in City/business is Government not prioritising financial passport that underpinned their EU HQ activity- starting to act accordingly

    The smart play would be to shift nameplates to Edinburgh.

    I may or may not have shares in Scottish brass nameplate suppliers.
    Smart because SNP?

    Scotland is leaving the EU.
  • Options

    Alistair said:

    If only some us had warned about this, oh wait we did

    @faisalislam: Sense in City/business is Government not prioritising financial passport that underpinned their EU HQ activity- starting to act accordingly

    The smart play would be to shift nameplates to Edinburgh.

    I may or may not have shares in Scottish brass nameplate suppliers.
    Prior to the referendum it was an option we looked at, but we thought the problems of Scottish independence was an insurmountable bar.

    The lack of a lender of last resort, and no automaticity that iScotland would be in the single market made it a no no
    There is zero chance of Scotland remaining in the Single Market if the UK doesn't. It will leave the EU with the UK. To end up in the EU it would then have to vote for independence in a referendum, and wait for independence to be finalised (which would take some time), and then apply to join the EU (which again might take some time).
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,730

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Yeah, less than 4% in it, close.
    For "close", how about I raise you a Quebec, 1995?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum,_1995
    I admit it! That was even closer.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited October 2016
    FF43 said:

    From Mike's article: I thought that May made a mistake by being so specific in her conference speech. If the March 2017 date isn’t met it will be seen as a big personal defeat for her.

    The huge decline in the value of pound and the threats of some US firms to leave the City of London are adding to the pressure.


    I'm rather baffled by this statement, although quite a few people seem to be thinking that way. Surely the damaging uncertainty is a conclusive argument for getting on with it, rather than delaying it?

    It depends on what the "it" is.

    Getting on with Article 50 and the negotiation of a new relationship.
  • Options
    perdix said:

    What a shame for Mrs May.

    We want Parliamentary sovereignty and oversight on the Brexit deal, not to frustrate Brexit, but to ensure it is a good Brexit.

    Who will decide what is a good Brexit? Some Leavers would be happy with merely the full control over immigration and would not worry about economic consequences.

    But Dan Hannan who was on the board of Vote Leave said the referendum had nothing to do with immigration.

    The thing I'm finding interesting is some Leavers are saying there is a mandate to leave the single market, well if that's right, surely there's also a mandate to give the NHS £350m a week.
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,008
    perdix said:

    What a shame for Mrs May.

    We want Parliamentary sovereignty and oversight on the Brexit deal, not to frustrate Brexit, but to ensure it is a good Brexit.

    Who will decide what is a good Brexit? Some Leavers would be happy with merely the full control over immigration and would not worry about economic consequences.

    Our elected representatives in Parliament should decide what is a good Brexit.
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,730

    What a shame for Mrs May.

    We want Parliamentary sovereignty and oversight on the Brexit deal, not to frustrate Brexit, but to ensure it is a good Brexit.

    Yeh!
  • Options
    Chris_AChris_A Posts: 1,237
    edited October 2016

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Leave 17.4m
    Non-Leave 29.1m

    Who's to say how many would now get of their lazy arses now they see the damage wrought by the Brexiteer liars?
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,463
    perdix said:

    What a shame for Mrs May.

    We want Parliamentary sovereignty and oversight on the Brexit deal, not to frustrate Brexit, but to ensure it is a good Brexit.

    Who will decide what is a good Brexit? Some Leavers would be happy with merely the full control over immigration and would not worry about economic consequences.

    Parliament must decide what is a 'good' Brexit, or have we given up on Parliamentary democracy?
  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    Yeah, less than 4% in it, close.

    @jonathancoe: David Davis now says Brexit has an 'overwhelming' mandate. If 51.9% means overwhelming, I'm 51.9% certain that he's an idiot.
    How you used to mock the 45%ers. Sad to see you make such a fool of yourself.
  • Options
    OllyTOllyT Posts: 4,924

    How many times has a footy team won a penalty shoot-out by a single goal only to have the losing side MOAN about the result?

    There is a world of difference between accepting the result and accepting that a bunch of abject political failures like IDS, Fox and Davis have the right to dictate the terms of the Brexit.

  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956

    perdix said:

    What a shame for Mrs May.

    We want Parliamentary sovereignty and oversight on the Brexit deal, not to frustrate Brexit, but to ensure it is a good Brexit.

    Who will decide what is a good Brexit? Some Leavers would be happy with merely the full control over immigration and would not worry about economic consequences.

    But Dan Hannan who was on the board of Vote Leave said the referendum had nothing to do with immigration.

    The thing I'm finding interesting is some Leavers are saying there is a mandate to leave the single market, well if that's right, surely there's also a mandate to give the NHS £350m a week.
    You do understand the difference between a mandate and a requirement, right?
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    May will have no problem invoking Article 50. There is no meaningful legal case to be made and the Commons certainly isn't going to stop her. The public backlash if it tried would be immense.

    There may be a debate on the terms of exit but that's a different process. I think the govt has made a mistake in ruling that out too but if Labour force a debate and a vote - and they can - it still won't change the fact of, or the timetable for, leaving.

    "Article 50

    1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."

    I assume that the interpretation of the Treaty is a matter for the ECJ. That being so, is there any reason why the disaffected should not apply *to the ECJ* for a ruling on what the constitutional requirements of the UK are, as well as or instead of applying to the court here? That would be fun, and would take years.

    Bear in mind that Giuliano Amato who drafted Article 50 has admitted that the sole purpose of the Article is to troll the UK (I paraphrase, but only slightly).
  • Options
    Chris_A said:

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Leave 17.4m
    Non-Leave 29.1m

    Who's to say now many would now get of their lazy arses now they see the damage wrought by the Brexiteer liars?
    Surely Non-Remain 30.4 million?
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,157
    Watch out for the different values of the betting token when translating these odds into probabilities. Hard Brexit Pounds are worth much less than Soft Brexit Pounds, which are in turn worth substantially less than No Brexit Pounds.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,971

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Yeah, less than 4% in it, close.
    For "close", how about I raise you a Quebec, 1995?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum,_1995
    Or a Wales, 1997.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welsh_devolution_referendum,_1997
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,451
    MaxPB said:

    What should worry Mrs May is how many Tory MPs who are leavers are recoiling at her plans, I noted it at conference, we're now seeing it spill out into public, Stephen Phillips will be the first of many.

    In her rush to hug UKIP voters she forgot about Tory voters. She won't fall over this, but there will be a rethinking of the plan, back to basics EEA plus some fig leaf on free movement and copying Germany's new law to bar EU migrants from claiming any benefits, maybe a time limit on EEA membership.
    Thinking the many many voters (not to say David Davis) who cared and voted because of it will be fobbed off by a "figleaf" on immigration is I think wishful thinking not to say a touch patronising (which latter is of course the prerogative of bien pensant Remoaning liberals).
  • Options
    JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    Reading the innumerate bilge on the last thread from the usual quarters, I think it's high time TSE or OGH did a thread explaining why polls are weighted towards Democratic identifiers in the United States.

    Clue to the hard of learning: Democratic identifiers are not necessarily the same as Democratic voters.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Yeah, less than 4% in it, close.
    For "close", how about I raise you a Quebec, 1995?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum,_1995
    Or a Wales, 1997.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welsh_devolution_referendum,_1997
    OMG! I forgot about that one! And a UK-related-ish referendum too!
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Who's to say now many would now get of their lazy arses now they see the damage wrought by the Brexiteer liars?

    I hate to break it to you, but most remainers are now claiming this 'damage' is being delayed. It hasn't happened yet, but we're running on empty I believe, is the current stance.

    You remainers really should co-ordinate your doom mongering.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Mortimer said:

    What a shame for Mrs May.

    We want Parliamentary sovereignty and oversight on the Brexit deal, not to frustrate Brexit, but to ensure it is a good Brexit.

    And I'd like the moon on a stick, but when we're a) about to negotiate moon-on-a-stick terms with the club we're leaving, b) trying to give the people more power over the moon-on-a-stick than the elites and c) concerned that many MPs, by their own admission, do not want us to get independent sovereign power of the moon-on-a-stick, is it any surprise that the Govt are going to Brexit on their own?
    Well, quite. The point of making a show about being content with so-called "hard Brexit" is to negotiate a better deal which isn't as "hard". Legal challenges and Parliamentary attempts to circumscribe our actions only serve to make our position weaker. It's almost as if some people would rather be proved right than get the best outcome.

    Clearly Parliament ought to get a say on the eventual deal. And they will, though rejecting it would be very awkward indeed.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,157
    Ishmael_X said:

    Bear in mind that Giuliano Amato who drafted Article 50 has admitted that the sole purpose of the Article is to troll the UK (I paraphrase, but only slightly).

    Citation needed.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    How you used to mock the 45%ers.

    Hey !

    I continue to mock the 45%ers, for the same reason I mock the Brexiteers.

    Petty Nationalism (in any guise) is a cancerous ideology that must be opposed at all times.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    Mr. Price, quite.
  • Options
    PROPER Brexit for PROPER People :)
  • Options

    perdix said:

    What a shame for Mrs May.

    We want Parliamentary sovereignty and oversight on the Brexit deal, not to frustrate Brexit, but to ensure it is a good Brexit.

    Who will decide what is a good Brexit? Some Leavers would be happy with merely the full control over immigration and would not worry about economic consequences.

    Parliament must decide what is a 'good' Brexit, or have we given up on Parliamentary democracy?
    Fully agree - but we must be careful in the process of giving parliament a say on the terms of Brexit not to allow it any possibility of frustrating the fact of Brexit.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    Mr. P, you think those who voted to leave have cancerous views?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,971
    edited October 2016
    Offtopic, but from a discussion yesterday. Samsung kills off Note 7, tries to work out what to do with all the broken ones out there in the wild. Shares down 8% today.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/10/11/samsung-tells-galaxy-note-7-owners-to-turn-off-devices-and-stops/
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    Ishmael_X said:

    Bear in mind that Giuliano Amato who drafted Article 50 has admitted that the sole purpose of the Article is to troll the UK (I paraphrase, but only slightly).

    Citation needed.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-amato-idUSKCN1012Q8

    "I wrote Article 50, so I know it well," Amato told a conference in Rome, saying he had inserted it specifically to prevent the British from complaining that there was no clear cut, official way for them to bail out of the Union.

    "My intention was that it should be a classic safety valve that was there, but never used. It is like having a fire extinguisher that should never have to be used. Instead, the fire happened."
  • Options

    Mr. P, you think those who voted to leave have cancerous views?

    Mr Dancer, that's just REMAINER hyperbole :)
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    Mr. Price, quite.

    Colour me unsurprised if this gets "quite" added to the verboten list.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,139
    Thanks to everybody that replied to my pensions question on last thread.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,632
    edited October 2016
    Jobabob said:

    Reading the innumerate bilge on the last thread from the usual quarters, I think it's high time TSE or OGH did a thread explaining why polls are weighted towards Democratic identifiers in the United States.

    Clue to the hard of learning: Democratic identifiers are not necessarily the same as Democratic voters.

    I'm writing a thread on that as we speak, Democratic identifiers outnumbering Republican identifiers is really surprising when you consider the GOP has lost the popular vote in 5 out of the last six presidential elections :lol:

    I also explore why a poll of 500 likely voters isn't that difference in MOE terms from a 1,000 strong poll, or 2,000 poll.

    I'm sure there'll be a link from Breitbart or 4CHan that people will use to repudiate my piece.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Patrick said:

    Fully agree - but we must be careful in the process of giving parliament a say on the terms of Brexit not to allow it any possibility of frustrating the fact of Brexit.

    This my favourite Brexiteer chant now

    What do we want?

    Parliamentary democracy!

    When do we want it.

    Not now obviously, that could be awkward, but later, for sure, OK?
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    For Leavers, the first rule of Article 50 is: you do not talk about Article 50.

    It's all perilously close to trusting the Government to carry "on an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody to know what it is”.
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Minimal - a swing of 1.3% would have had it the other way.

    But it didn't and just to think remain had everything on they side.
  • Options
    Chris_AChris_A Posts: 1,237
    taffys said:

    Who's to say now many would now get of their lazy arses now they see the damage wrought by the Brexiteer liars?

    I hate to break it to you, but most remainers are now claiming this 'damage' is being delayed. It hasn't happened yet, but we're running on empty I believe, is the current stance.

    You remainers really should co-ordinate your doom mongering.

    It's happening now, and will continue to get worse. Your lot has no plan to deal with it.
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Scott_P said:

    How you used to mock the 45%ers.

    Hey !

    I continue to mock the 45%ers, for the same reason I mock the Brexiteers.

    Petty Nationalism (in any guise) is a cancerous ideology that must be opposed at all times.
    So what did you actually do in the Brexit war, daddy? How did you oppose it, when it mattered?

    On the night before the vote I went to the theatre in Plymouth. On the way in was a large group of people demonstrating in favour of an IN vote, and they were still at it when I came out again. If you put a similar amount of serious effort into campaigning for the result you (and I) wanted, well done and commiserations on the result. But if, as I suspect, the sum total of your contribution to the war effort was to sit at your screen retweating 140-character gobbets of secondhand vapid bilge on PB, I have nothing to offer but howls of derisive laughter, and a musical entertainment consisting of massed choirs singing "suck it up, loser" to the tune of "O come all ye faithful", followed by the world's saddest sonata played on the world's smallest violin.

    And a lifetime's supply of homeopathic butthurt remedies.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,634
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    What should worry Mrs May is how many Tory MPs who are leavers are recoiling at her plans, I noted it at conference, we're now seeing it spill out into public, Stephen Phillips will be the first of many.

    In her rush to hug UKIP voters she forgot about Tory voters. She won't fall over this, but there will be a rethinking of the plan, back to basics EEA plus some fig leaf on free movement and copying Germany's new law to bar EU migrants from claiming any benefits, maybe a time limit on EEA membership.
    Thinking the many many voters (not to say David Davis) who cared and voted because of it will be fobbed off by a "figleaf" on immigration is I think wishful thinking not to say a touch patronising (which latter is of course the prerogative of bien pensant Remoaning liberals).
    Free movement of "labour" instead of people coupled with the new German law on benefits for EU migrants will cut numbers significantly, bringing it in slowly for existing migrants will probably lead to net emigration to the EU for a while.
  • Options

    Jobabob said:

    Reading the innumerate bilge on the last thread from the usual quarters, I think it's high time TSE or OGH did a thread explaining why polls are weighted towards Democratic identifiers in the United States.

    Clue to the hard of learning: Democratic identifiers are not necessarily the same as Democratic voters.

    I'm writing a thread on that as we speak, Democratic identifiers outnumbering Republican identifiers is really surprising when you consider the GOP has lost the popular vote is 5 out of the last six presidential elections :lol:

    I also explore why a poll of 500 likely voters isn't that difference in MOE terms from a 1,000 strong poll, or 2,000 poll.

    I'm sure there'll be a link from Breitbart or 4CHan that people will use to repudiate my piece.
    TSE is a pound-shop Mike Smithson :lol:

    *runs and hides*
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    I don't buy that the referendum was close.

    The weight of establishment was on the side of Remain, it was the status quo, and they mustered a number of heavyweights on their side.

    All Leave had was Nigel and Boris! For Leave to get to a 52:48 win was a phenomenally good result for them.

  • Options
    Also the great repeal bill have major problems too.

    Though I'm going to love seeing John Redwood and Sir Bill Cash voting for that. My irony meter will break.
  • Options


    I don't buy that the referendum was close.

    The weight of establishment was on the side of Remain, it was the status quo, and they mustered a number of heavyweights on their side.

    All Leave had was Nigel and Boris! For Leave to get to a 52:48 win was a phenomenally good result for them.

    Um, excuse me!!!

    It was The Sunil wot won it!
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,324
    edited October 2016

    Jobabob said:

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Minimal - a swing of 1.3% would have had it the other way.

    Mike Smithson is a pound-shop Lord Ashdown :lol:
    You are a pound-shop troll. Repeating the result over and over again won't make the gap any larger, I'm afraid.
    The gap was large enough for victory, I'm afraid.

    No amount of REMOANING will alter the result.
    Strange, it was an almost identical gap to that the devo referendum in '79, in which the winner was accounted to have lost. This time Westminster obviously forgot that you need to alter the result before the event.
  • Options
    JasonJason Posts: 1,614
    You have to hand it to Smithson. He sure does know how to push buttons on this forum.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    For Leavers, the first rule of Article 50 is: you do not talk about Article 50.

    It's all perilously close to trusting the Government to carry "on an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody to know what it is”.

    Like
  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    How you used to mock the 45%ers.

    Petty Nationalism (in any guise) is a cancerous ideology that must be opposed at all times.
    What about big, proud, open, expansive, trade based, internationally engaging nationalism? Your comment seems to suggest anyone who is proud of their country and wishes for it to become a better country but still a country (as opposed to an administrative region of a superstate) is somehow compromised.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    @ScottP It's homeopathic Parliamentary democracy. The memory of the concept is sufficient for Leavers.
  • Options
    JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807

    Jobabob said:

    Reading the innumerate bilge on the last thread from the usual quarters, I think it's high time TSE or OGH did a thread explaining why polls are weighted towards Democratic identifiers in the United States.

    Clue to the hard of learning: Democratic identifiers are not necessarily the same as Democratic voters.

    I'm writing a thread on that as we speak, Democratic identifiers outnumbering Republican identifiers is really surprising when you consider the GOP has lost the popular vote is 5 out of the last six presidential elections :lol:

    I also explore why a poll of 500 likely voters isn't that difference in MOE terms from a 1,000 strong poll, or 2,000 poll.

    I'm sure there'll be a link from Breitbart or 4CHan that people will use to repudiate my piece.
    Thanks TSE. No doubt the pitchfork wielding PB Morning Shift are searching the Breitbart archives in preparation.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,476
    edited October 2016

    Jobabob said:

    LEAVE 17,410,742
    REMAIN 16,141,241

    :innocent:

    Minimal - a swing of 1.3% would have had it the other way.

    Mike Smithson is a pound-shop Lord Ashdown :lol:
    You are a pound-shop troll. Repeating the result over and over again won't make the gap any larger, I'm afraid.
    The gap was large enough for victory, I'm afraid.

    No amount of REMOANING will alter the result.
    Strange, it was an almost identical gap to that the devo referendum in '79, in which the winner was accounted to have lost. This time Westminster obviously forgot that you need to alter the result before the event.
    Uniondivvie, I agree the 40% electorate requirement should NEVER have been inserted as an amendment, and Scotland should have got her Parliament back in 1979-80.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,157
    Ishmael_X said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    Bear in mind that Giuliano Amato who drafted Article 50 has admitted that the sole purpose of the Article is to troll the UK (I paraphrase, but only slightly).

    Citation needed.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-amato-idUSKCN1012Q8

    "I wrote Article 50, so I know it well," Amato told a conference in Rome, saying he had inserted it specifically to prevent the British from complaining that there was no clear cut, official way for them to bail out of the Union.

    "My intention was that it should be a classic safety valve that was there, but never used. It is like having a fire extinguisher that should never have to be used. Instead, the fire happened."
    That's very much not what you said.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    Mr. Price, perish the thought.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Patrick said:

    What about big, proud, open, expansive, trade based, internationally engaging nationalism? Your comment seems to suggest anyone who is proud of their country and wishes for it to become a better country but still a country (as opposed to an administrative region of a superstate) is somehow compromised.

    Anyone who claims the vote was not won by the message "we hate foreigners" is an idiot.

    Like Dan Hannan.
  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    How you used to mock the 45%ers.

    Hey !

    I continue to mock the 45%ers, for the same reason I mock the Brexiteers.

    Petty Nationalism (in any guise) is a cancerous ideology that must be opposed at all times.
    I disagree with your idea that the UK is a " petty " nation.
    The SNP is a misnomer, they aren't nationalists, they're EU stooges and lackeys.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383


    I don't buy that the referendum was close.

    The weight of establishment was on the side of Remain, it was the status quo, and they mustered a number of heavyweights on their side.

    All Leave had was Nigel and Boris! For Leave to get to a 52:48 win was a phenomenally good result for them.

    CLAPS

    And Trump is the same - who will win? I've no idea now.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Jason said:

    You have to hand it to Smithson. He sure does know how to push buttons on this forum.

    Personally I applaud him for stepping up in the absence of a Parliamentary Opposition. The quixotic quest to boost the Lib Dems is charming, too.
  • Options
    Does you agree that "Free Movement" discriminates against Americans, Australians, Chinese, Indians, Africans, Arabs, etc., etc?
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Sandpit said:

    Offtopic, but from a discussion yesterday. Samsung kills off Note 7, tries to work out what to do with all the broken ones out there in the wild. Shares down 8% today.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/10/11/samsung-tells-galaxy-note-7-owners-to-turn-off-devices-and-stops/

    Apple must be laughing fit to bust.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,971
    Ishmael_X said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    Bear in mind that Giuliano Amato who drafted Article 50 has admitted that the sole purpose of the Article is to troll the UK (I paraphrase, but only slightly).

    Citation needed.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-amato-idUSKCN1012Q8

    "I wrote Article 50, so I know it well," Amato told a conference in Rome, saying he had inserted it specifically to prevent the British from complaining that there was no clear cut, official way for them to bail out of the Union.

    "My intention was that it should be a classic safety valve that was there, but never used. It is like having a fire extinguisher that should never have to be used. Instead, the fire happened."
    Ha, that the guy who wrote it, did so with the British in mind. Shame that his comments today only strengthen the idea within the U.K. that a vote to leave, is a vote to leave.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,882
    edited October 2016
    My theory has been for a while that May needs to pivot right (toward hard Brexit) to placate the headbangers and to signal to Europe that she means business.

    The parliamentary maths and internal party politics seem to dictate it.

    Once she has a deal - something along the lines of an EEA deal, she can call an election, win an almighty majority over a demoralised Labour and deflated UKIP, and then ride it out - letting the headbangers froth on the backbenches.

    It's a high wire act, but that's what I'd try to do.

    Of course it assumes EU leaders would sign up to such a deal. Big assumption.

    She has missed a trick by not guaranteeing the rights of resident EU citizens at the outset and declaring that her objective is the closest possible economic relationship with the EU compatible with national sovereignty. Also that while we cannot continue to rely on immigration for growth, we cannot and will not deliver prosperity by closing off from the world.

    This would have set the right tone and settled a few nerves in addition.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956

    Mortimer said:

    What a shame for Mrs May.

    We want Parliamentary sovereignty and oversight on the Brexit deal, not to frustrate Brexit, but to ensure it is a good Brexit.

    And I'd like the moon on a stick, but when we're a) about to negotiate moon-on-a-stick terms with the club we're leaving, b) trying to give the people more power over the moon-on-a-stick than the elites and c) concerned that many MPs, by their own admission, do not want us to get independent sovereign power of the moon-on-a-stick, is it any surprise that the Govt are going to Brexit on their own?
    Well, quite. The point of making a show about being content with so-called "hard Brexit" is to negotiate a better deal which isn't as "hard". Legal challenges and Parliamentary attempts to circumscribe our actions only serve to make our position weaker. It's almost as if some people would rather be proved right than get the best outcome.

    Clearly Parliament ought to get a say on the eventual deal. And they will, though rejecting it would be very awkward indeed.
    Indeed. For fear of sounding like Geoff Boycott, even my mother, who bless her thinks game theory is playing my girlfriend at scrabble, gets that when you're about to negotiate terms, going into the room with one arm tied behind your back by narcissistic MPs who cannot accept the result is not clever.

    May should slap the nay sayers in her own party down by threatening to withdraw the whip (or perhaps speaking to constituency chairmen) from the Tory trouble markers. Unity on this issue, as well as being the right thing, means the opposition can be painted as not accepting the result.

  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Scott_P said:

    Patrick said:

    What about big, proud, open, expansive, trade based, internationally engaging nationalism? Your comment seems to suggest anyone who is proud of their country and wishes for it to become a better country but still a country (as opposed to an administrative region of a superstate) is somehow compromised.

    Anyone who claims the vote was not won by the message "we hate foreigners" is an idiot.

    Like Dan Hannan.
    It must be embarrassing, being you. The retwatting is boring as hell, but when you strike out on your own it is immediately obvious why you are happier playing covers.

    No offence.
  • Options
    not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,341


    I don't buy that the referendum was close.

    The weight of establishment was on the side of Remain, it was the status quo, and they mustered a number of heavyweights on their side.

    All Leave had was Nigel and Boris! For Leave to get to a 52:48 win was a phenomenally good result for them.

    Erm, and the Dacre/Murdoch press stable
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    edited October 2016
    Boiled down, Hillary’s case amounts to: vote for me because Trump said something derogatory to a former Miss Universe in the 1990s. Is that the best she can come up with? Given Hillary’s feminism and identity politics, it wouldn’t take a clairvoyant to know that she would push the sexism card...

    Moreover, for Clinton herself, it’s a problematic line of attack: she likes to espouse the ‘believe all victims’ mantra of the new feminists, yet for decades she has smeared her husband’s accusers...

    Challenged to defend her Wikileaks-revealed comments to Goldman Sachs about having a public and private persona, Clinton tried to claim she was referencing Abraham Lincoln. Trump counterpunched with his best line of the evening: ‘She lied, and now she’s blaming the lie on the late, great Abraham Lincoln.’ In another telling moment, as Clinton argued that she could bring the country together, Trump reminded us that Hillary views a huge swathe of the population as ‘deplorable’ and ‘irredeemable’. Again, a very effective use of turning Clinton’s own weakness – her elitism – against her.

    http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/trump-and-clinton-how-low-can-they-go/18855#.V_zWy_sp0s6.twitter
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Offtopic, but from a discussion yesterday. Samsung kills off Note 7, tries to work out what to do with all the broken ones out there in the wild. Shares down 8% today.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/10/11/samsung-tells-galaxy-note-7-owners-to-turn-off-devices-and-stops/

    It's a shame that 'Fire' was already taken as a name for a media device.
  • Options
    Carolus_RexCarolus_Rex Posts: 1,414


    I don't buy that the referendum was close.

    The weight of establishment was on the side of Remain, it was the status quo, and they mustered a number of heavyweights on their side.

    All Leave had was Nigel and Boris! For Leave to get to a 52:48 win was a phenomenally good result for them.

    Of course the referendum was close. That's not the point. So was Waterloo.

    "It has been a damned nice thing — the nearest run thing you ever saw in your life."

This discussion has been closed.