What happened to the comical Brexiteers we used to get like Paul_Bedfordshire with his food self-sufficiency calculations (which counted Ireland as ours), and the man from Gibraltar posting imprecations against Spain?
I think that sooner or later Remoaners will have to come to terms with the fact that the UK is leaving the EU and that we are leaving not only in name but in reality. All those devious little ways that the Mafia in Brussels tries to exert control over non EU countries will be swept away.
At some point Remoaners will have to make the crossover from attempting to stop Brexit (which would be undemocratic) to campaigning to re-enter one day (which would not).
The first step on the campaign to re-enter would be to capture the main opposition party for re-entry. It will never be of any use to those who wish to re-enter the EU so long as it is led by a Leaver who voted against EVERY EU treaty for 30 years, and who facilitated Leave by failing to campaign for Remain.
I think that sooner or later Remoaners will have to come to terms with the fact that the UK is leaving the EU and that we are leaving not only in name but in reality. All those devious little ways that the Mafia in Brussels tries to exert control over non EU countries will be swept away.
At some point Remoaners will have to make the crossover from attempting to stop Brexit (which would be undemocratic) to campaigning to re-enter one day (which would not).
The first step on the campaign to re-enter would be to capture the main opposition party for re-entry. It will never be of any use to those who wish to re-enter the EU so long as it is led by a Leaver who voted against EVERY EU treaty for 30 years, and who facilitated Leave by failing to campaign for Remain.
Sound strategy but tactically difficult given the size of the Labour Party. The Conservative Party is an easier target, although being less democratically organised it would take longer to get your hands on the right levers.
I think that sooner or later Remoaners will have to come to terms with the fact that the UK is leaving the EU and that we are leaving not only in name but in reality. All those devious little ways that the Mafia in Brussels tries to exert control over non EU countries will be swept away.
At some point Remoaners will have to make the crossover from attempting to stop Brexit (which would be undemocratic) to campaigning to re-enter one day (which would not).
The first step on the campaign to re-enter would be to capture the main opposition party for re-entry. It will never be of any use to those who wish to re-enter the EU so long as it is led by a Leaver who voted against EVERY EU treaty for 30 years, and who facilitated Leave by failing to campaign for Remain.
So if I'm getting this straight, your ideal situation would be for Labour not to have had Jezza as leader and, say, Cooper or Burnham there instead, and then the UK to have voted to stay in the EU?
I think that sooner or later Remoaners will have to come to terms with the fact that the UK is leaving the EU and that we are leaving not only in name but in reality. All those devious little ways that the Mafia in Brussels tries to exert control over non EU countries will be swept away.
At some point Remoaners will have to make the crossover from attempting to stop Brexit (which would be undemocratic) to campaigning to re-enter one day (which would not).
The first step on the campaign to re-enter would be to capture the main opposition party for re-entry. It will never be of any use to those who wish to re-enter the EU so long as it is led by a Leaver who voted against EVERY EU treaty for 30 years, and who facilitated Leave by failing to campaign for Remain.
Sound strategy but tactically difficult given the size of the Labour Party. The Conservative Party is an easier target, although being less democratically organised it would take longer to get your hands on the right levers.
It's certainly true that the Conservative party has most of the right Leavers I would like to get my hands on.
Nails it. From a friend of Brexit and, in the past, of Boris, too.
Yep, that is a very astute deconstruction.
I'm increasingly of the view that Boris is quite simply a ditherer. He seems to see all sides of an argument, he can quite happily argue against himself, and when push comes to shove, he seems to bottle it. That's why he sometimes seems to be about to launch his move against Theresa but always seems to draw back. When it came to deciding which side to back before the referendum, he agonised over it, famously wrote two articles one on each side, and didn't decide until the last moment. That's in contrast to Gove who (according to the account in Tim Shipman's book) was clear in his decision, even if he hated the fact that it meant opposing Cameron.
I think that sooner or later Remoaners will have to come to terms with the fact that the UK is leaving the EU and that we are leaving not only in name but in reality. All those devious little ways that the Mafia in Brussels tries to exert control over non EU countries will be swept away.
At some point Remoaners will have to make the crossover from attempting to stop Brexit (which would be undemocratic) to campaigning to re-enter one day (which would not).
The first step on the campaign to re-enter would be to capture the main opposition party for re-entry. It will never be of any use to those who wish to re-enter the EU so long as it is led by a Leaver who voted against EVERY EU treaty for 30 years, and who facilitated Leave by failing to campaign for Remain.
So if I'm getting this straight, your ideal situation would be for Labour not to have had Jezza as leader and, say, Cooper or Burnham there instead, and then the UK to have voted to stay in the EU?
Is that right?
My ideal situation is for the People to vote in a democratic referendum and for everyone to accept the result -as I would have done if Remain has won.
I dont know about Cooper, but I think if Burnham had been Labour leader -or Chuka Umunna in 2016 and as Leader of the Opposition he had campaigned vigorously for Remain, my side would have lost. There would have been no Brexit. And I would have accepted the result.
On referendum night leavers of all political persuasions toasted Jeremy Corbyn. He had proved a useful idiot to the Leave cause.
I think May will be leading the Conservatives into the 2027 general election.
It seems absurd at first glance, but I think you might be right (and I'm no fan ether).
Unless, of course, health issues get in the way - she'd be 71 then.
My guess is that she will resign after the 2022 election, which, from where we are now, I'd guess will be another hung parlaiment, maybe with a non-Corbyn Labour as the largest party (hence her departure at that point).
Of course, prediction is very difficult, especially about the future.
If Jeremy Corbyn ever became prime minister, it would be the first time in our history that a Leaver would be in charge of the country. May, Cameron, Brown, Blair, Major, Thatcher, Callaghan, Wiloson and Heath were all believers of British membership.
Only Corbyn voted against every EU treaty for 30 years. Only Corbyn voted against the creation of the EU.
Remoaners should be careful what they wish for.............................
I think that sooner or later Remoaners will have to come to terms with the fact that the UK is leaving the EU and that we are leaving not only in name but in reality. All those devious little ways that the Mafia in Brussels tries to exert control over non EU countries will be swept away.
At some point Remoaners will have to make the crossover from attempting to stop Brexit (which would be undemocratic) to campaigning to re-enter one day (which would not).
The first step on the campaign to re-enter would be to capture the main opposition party for re-entry. It will never be of any use to those who wish to re-enter the EU so long as it is led by a Leaver who voted against EVERY EU treaty for 30 years, and who facilitated Leave by failing to campaign for Remain.
So if I'm getting this straight, your ideal situation would be for Labour not to have had Jezza as leader and, say, Cooper or Burnham there instead, and then the UK to have voted to stay in the EU?
Is that right?
My ideal situation is for the People to vote in a democratic referendum and for everyone to accept the result -as I would have done if Remain has won.
I dont know about Cooper, but I think if Burnham had been Labour leader -or Chuka Umunna in 2016 and as Leader of the Opposition he had campaigned vigorously for Remain, my side would have lost. There would have been no Brexit. And I would have accepted the result.
On referendum night leavers of all political persuasions toasted Jeremy Corbyn. He had proved a useful idiot to the Leave cause.
I'm happy to believe that you would have accepted a Remain result Steve but neither Farage and his Kippers nor the Tory europhobes would have accepted it; they would have gone campaiging.
Regarding the actual result, as a devout Remainer I accept it and recognise we sadly have to leave... but there's no reason why we cannot do that with the softest of soft Brexits. We didn't vote to leave the single market or the customs union. Norway are not in the EU but in the single market - a Norwegian solution would have been very sensible but the tory europhobes have pushed the government into a corner that satisfies only the extremists imo.
Define fascist? ... "A fascist is a follower of a political philosophy characterized by authoritarian views and a strong central government — and no tolerance for opposing opinions." That would include Stalin and Mao.
Mr Meeks' definition ... Anyone who votes Leave. At least that has clarity.
I think that sooner or later Remoaners will have to come to terms with the fact that the UK is leaving the EU and that we are leaving not only in name but in reality. All those devious little ways that the Mafia in Brussels tries to exert control over non EU countries will be swept away.
At some point Remoaners will have to make the crossover from attempting to stop Brexit (which would be undemocratic) to campaigning to re-enter one day (which would not).
The first step on the campaign to re-enter would be to capture the main opposition party for re-entry. It will never be of any use to those who wish to re-enter the EU so long as it is led by a Leaver who voted against EVERY EU treaty for 30 years, and who facilitated Leave by failing to campaign for Remain.
Sound strategy but tactically difficult given the size of the Labour Party. The Conservative Party is an easier target, although being less democratically organised it would take longer to get your hands on the right levers.
It's certainly true that the Conservative party has most of the right Leavers I would like to get my hands on.
If Jeremy Corbyn ever became prime minister, it would be the first time in our history that a Leaver would be in charge of the country. May, Cameron, Brown, Blair, Major, Thatcher, Callaghan, Wiloson and Heath were all believers of British membership.
Only Corbyn voted against every EU treaty for 30 years. Only Corbyn voted against the creation of the EU.
Remoaners should be careful what they wish for.............................
I think that sooner or later Remoaners will have to come to terms with the fact that the UK is leaving the EU and that we are leaving not only in name but in reality. All those devious little ways that the Mafia in Brussels tries to exert control over non EU countries will be swept away.
At some point Remoaners will have to make the crossover from attempting to stop Brexit (which would be undemocratic) to campaigning to re-enter one day (which would not).
The first step on the campaign to re-enter would be to capture the main opposition party for re-entry. It will never be of any use to those who wish to re-enter the EU so long as it is led by a Leaver who voted against EVERY EU treaty for 30 years, and who facilitated Leave by failing to campaign for Remain.
So if I'm getting this straight, your ideal situation would be for Labour not to have had Jezza as leader and, say, Cooper or Burnham there instead, and then the UK to have voted to stay in the EU?
Is that right?
My ideal situation is for the People to vote in a democratic referendum and for everyone to accept the result -as I would have done if Remain has won.
I dont know about Cooper, but I think if Burnham had been Labour leader -or Chuka Umunna in 2016 and as Leader of the Opposition he had campaigned vigorously for Remain, my side would have lost. There would have been no Brexit. And I would have accepted the result.
On referendum night leavers of all political persuasions toasted Jeremy Corbyn. He had proved a useful idiot to the Leave cause.
I'm happy to believe that you would have accepted a Remain result Steve but neither Farage and his Kippers nor the Tory europhobes would have accepted it; they would have gone campaiging.
Regarding the actual result, as a devout Remainer I accept it and recognise we sadly have to leave... but there's no reason why we cannot do that with the softest of soft Brexits. We didn't vote to leave the single market or the customs union. Norway are not in the EU but in the single market - a Norwegian solution would have been very sensible but the tory europhobes have pushed the government into a corner that satisfies only the extremists imo.
Hm, let me just grab that clip of both side saying a vote to leave would be to leave the single market.
I think that sooner or later Remoaners will have to come to terms with the fact that the UK is leaving the EU and that we are leaving not only in name but in reality. All those devious little ways that the Mafia in Brussels tries to exert control over non EU countries will be swept away.
At some point Remoaners will have to make the crossover from attempting to stop Brexit (which would be undemocratic) to campaigning to re-enter one day (which would not).
The first step on the campaign to re-enter would be to capture the main opposition party for re-entry. It will never be of any use to those who wish to re-enter the EU so long as it is led by a Leaver who voted against EVERY EU treaty for 30 years, and who facilitated Leave by failing to campaign for Remain.
So if I'm getting this straight, your ideal situation would be for Labour not to have had Jezza as leader and, say, Cooper or Burnham there instead, and then the UK to have voted to stay in the EU?
Is that right?
My ideal situation is for the People to vote in a democratic referendum and for everyone to accept the result -as I would have done if Remain has won.
I dont know about Cooper, but I think if Burnham had been Labour leader -or Chuka Umunna in 2016 and as Leader of the Opposition he had campaigned vigorously for Remain, my side would have lost. There would have been no Brexit. And I would have accepted the result.
On referendum night leavers of all political persuasions toasted Jeremy Corbyn. He had proved a useful idiot to the Leave cause.
I'm happy to believe that you would have accepted a Remain result Steve but neither Farage and his Kippers nor the Tory europhobes would have accepted it; they would have gone campaiging.
Regarding the actual result, as a devout Remainer I accept it and recognise we sadly have to leave... but there's no reason why we cannot do that with the softest of soft Brexits. We didn't vote to leave the single market or the customs union. Norway are not in the EU but in the single market - a Norwegian solution would have been very sensible but the tory europhobes have pushed the government into a corner that satisfies only the extremists imo.
Hm, let me just grab that clip of both side saying a vote to leave would be to leave the single market.
Daniel Hannan said that only "tendentious pro-Europeans" said it would mean that.
I think that sooner or later Remoaners will have to come to terms with the fact that the UK is leaving the EU and that we are leaving not only in name but in reality. All those devious little ways that the Mafia in Brussels tries to exert control over non EU countries will be swept away.
At some point Remoaners will have to make the crossover from attempting to stop Brexit (which would be undemocratic) to campaigning to re-enter one day (which would not).
The first step on the campaign to re-enter would be to capture the main opposition party for re-entry. It will never be of any use to those who wish to re-enter the EU so long as it is led by a Leaver who voted against EVERY EU treaty for 30 years, and who facilitated Leave by failing to campaign for Remain.
So if I'm getting this straight, your ideal situation would be for Labour not to have had Jezza as leader and, say, Cooper or Burnham there instead, and then the UK to have voted to stay in the EU?
Is that right?
My ideal situation is for the People to vote in a democratic referendum and for everyone to accept the result -as I would have done if Remain has won.
I dont know about Cooper, but I think if Burnham had been Labour leader -or Chuka Umunna in 2016 and as Leader of the Opposition he had campaigned vigorously for Remain, my side would have lost. There would have been no Brexit. And I would have accepted the result.
On referendum night leavers of all political persuasions toasted Jeremy Corbyn. He had proved a useful idiot to the Leave cause.
I'm happy to believe that you would have accepted a Remain result Steve but neither Farage and his Kippers nor the Tory europhobes would have accepted it; they would have gone campaiging.
Regarding the actual result, as a devout Remainer I accept it and recognise we sadly have to leave... but there's no reason why we cannot do that with the softest of soft Brexits. We didn't vote to leave the single market or the customs union. Norway are not in the EU but in the single market - a Norwegian solution would have been very sensible but the tory europhobes have pushed the government into a corner that satisfies only the extremists imo.
Hm, let me just grab that clip of both side saying a vote to leave would be to leave the single market.
We speak a lot of Remain and Leave voters but I wonder if we should have a third category for those in between...
Those can be Reliefers. Looking for relief from it all?
Perhaps the second referendum question should be "Are you sick of hearing about Brexit?" Vote Remain for "yes, make it stop", and Leave for "no, gimme more".
I think May will stay at least until April 2019 and Brexit terms are concluded and any transition agreed.
I think Boris is then more likely than JRM to succeed her as Tory leader and PM but JRM has a good chance of being the next Tory leader of the opposition if Boris loses the next general election and Corbyn becomes PM
I think May will be leading the Conservatives into the 2027 general election.
Certainly possible. Mrs Thatcher was very unpopular about two years into her premiership when the Brixton riots were taking place and the SDP had just been launched.
But Mrs Thatcher had never lost a majority.
At every general election she fought as leader the Tories were always better off in seats than when she became leader.
Merkel of course failed to get a majority in 2005 when she was expected to win comfortably and had to form a coalition with the SPD, yet in 2009 she won enough to govern alone with her FDP allies and never looked back
And?
The debates are here to stay, Mrs May is crap at debates, and no leader will be able to chicken out of them again.
That alone will require a new leader before the next general election.
Mrs May doesn’t like campaigning and engaging with hoi pollio, which is kinda of important in a general election campaign
Sure but May to stay on and then lose the next election is implied at around 50-1 if you compare the Mogg next PM and next Tory leader prices. How would you price that ?
I can’t reconcile it.
I tried to work out the scenarios where Corbyn becomes PM without an election and struggled.
Maybe arbitrage it instead.
It is impossible for Corbyn to become PM without an election unless the Tories deliberately (as in 1905) decided to resign and step down as the government. It isnt going to happen.
What if JRM became leader and a group of MPs resigned the Tory whip en masse and backed Corbyn as PM?
More chance of Elvis riding Shergar into the HoC chamber.
Define fascist? ... "A fascist is a follower of a political philosophy characterized by authoritarian views and a strong central government — and no tolerance for opposing opinions." That would include Stalin and Mao.
Mr Meeks' definition ... Anyone who votes Leave. At least that has clarity.
Well that is simply not what I said. I even gave a clear rationale for my use of the word fascist, complete with illustrative quotation.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
I think May will stay at least until April 2019 and Brexit terms are concluded and any transition agreed.
I think Boris is then more likely than JRM to succeed her as Tory leader and PM but JRM has a good chance of being the next Tory leader of the opposition if Boris loses the next general election and Corbyn becomes PM
I think May will be leading the Conservatives into the 2027 general election.
Certainly possible. Mrs Thatcher was very unpopular about two years into her premiership when the Brixton riots were taking place and the SDP had just been launched.
But Mrs Thatcher had never lost a majority.
At every general election she fought as leader the Tories were always better off in seats than when she became leader.
Merkel of course failed to get a majority in 2005 when she was expected to win comfortably and had to form a coalition with the SPD, yet in 2009 she won enough to govern alone with her FDP allies and never looked back
And?
The debates are here to stay, Mrs May is crap at debates, and no leader will be able to chicken out of them again.
That alone will require a new leader before the next general election.
Mrs May doesn’t like campaigning and engaging with hoi pollio, which is kinda of important in a general election campaign
Sure but May to stay on and then lose the next election is implied at around 50-1 if you compare the Mogg next PM and next Tory leader prices. How would you price that ?
I can’t reconcile it.
I tried to work out the scenarios where Corbyn becomes PM without an election and struggled.
Maybe arbitrage it instead.
It is impossible for Corbyn to become PM without an election unless the Tories deliberately (as in 1905) decided to resign and step down as the government. It isnt going to happen.
What if JRM became leader and a group of MPs resigned the Tory whip en masse and backed Corbyn as PM?
More chance of Elvis riding Shergar into the HoC chamber.
More to the point, JRM leader and next PM have already both paid out at that point.
I think May will stay at least until April 2019 and Brexit terms are concluded and any transition agreed.
I think Boris is then more likely than JRM to succeed her as Tory leader and PM but JRM has a good chance of being the next Tory leader of the opposition if Boris loses the next general election and Corbyn becomes PM
I think May will be leading the Conservatives into the 2027 general election.
Certainly possible. Mrs Thatcher was very unpopular about two years into her premiership when the Brixton riots were taking place and the SDP had just been launched.
But Mrs Thatcher had never lost a majority.
At every general election she fought as leader the Tories were always better off in seats than when she became leader.
Merkel of course failed to get a majority in 2005 when she was expected to win comfortably and had to form a coalition with the SPD, yet in 2009 she won enough to govern alone with her FDP allies and never looked back
And?
The debates are here to stay, Mrs May is crap at debates, and no leader will be able to chicken out of them again.
That alone will require a new leader before the next general election.
Mrs May doesn’t like campaigning and engaging with hoi pollio, which is kinda of important in a general election campaign
Sure but May to stay on and then lose the next election is implied at around 50-1 if you compare the Mogg next PM and next Tory leader prices. How would you price that ?
I can’t reconcile it.
I tried to work out the scenarios where Corbyn becomes PM without an election and struggled.
Maybe arbitrage it instead.
It is impossible for Corbyn to become PM without an election unless the Tories deliberately (as in 1905) decided to resign and step down as the government. It isnt going to happen.
What if JRM became leader and a group of MPs resigned the Tory whip en masse and backed Corbyn as PM?
More chance of Elvis riding Shergar into the HoC chamber.
What if Marilyn Monroe was discovered living in sin with Elvis Presley on the Moon?
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
There are two broad scenarios for the period between now and summer 2020.
1. The economy is strong, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a success. In this scenario, Mrs May is likely to prove tenacious. This doesn't mean JRM isn't the next Conservative leader, but it does mean that you'll be waiting a while for your money.
2. The economy is weak, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a failure. In which case, I can't see the next Conservative leader being a Hard Brexiteer.
More plausible May caves in to BINO. 20 or so irreconcilables resign the whip and no confidence her. Under the FTPA, Corbyn becomes PM and has 2 weeks to fail to form a govt. before an election is called AIUI. Unlikely? Maybe. But not entirely impossible.
He doesn't become PM unless he can put together a majority first, or appear to be in a position to do so.
Surely he would be entitled to at least try under such an admittedly unlikely scenario?
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
There are two broad scenarios for the period between now and summer 2020.
1. The economy is strong, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a success. In this scenario, Mrs May is likely to prove tenacious. This doesn't mean JRM isn't the next Conservative leader, but it does mean that you'll be waiting a while for your money.
2. The economy is weak, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a failure. In which case, I can't see the next Conservative leader being a Hard Brexiteer.
His only chance is if May backtracks on Brexit and tries to serve up roasted Brino.
There are two broad scenarios for the period between now and summer 2020.
1. The economy is strong, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a success. In this scenario, Mrs May is likely to prove tenacious. This doesn't mean JRM isn't the next Conservative leader, but it does mean that you'll be waiting a while for your money.
2. The economy is weak, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a failure. In which case, I can't see the next Conservative leader being a Hard Brexiteer.
His only chance is if May backtracks on Brexit and tries to serve up roasted Brino.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
Probably wouldn't satisfy the many people who voted to end freedom of movement.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
Probably wouldn't satisfy the many people who voted to end freedom of movement.
Oh, was that on the other side of the ballot paper?
Dammit - I never turned it over. What other questions were there?
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
I think leavers are worrying slightly unnecessarily about Brexit initially leaving us a little more aligned with the EU than they would have preferred.
The ratchet will only turn one way and with each passing GE there will be a move away rather than towards, especially if economically we are outperforming the EU.
It may take the annihilation of the first party to offer re-joining in a GE manifesto to prove the point.
My ideal situation is for the People to vote in a democratic referendum and for everyone to accept the result -as I would have done if Remain has won.
I dont know about Cooper, but I think if Burnham had been Labour leader -or Chuka Umunna in 2016 and as Leader of the Opposition he had campaigned vigorously for Remain, my side would have lost. There would have been no Brexit. And I would have accepted the result.
On referendum night leavers of all political persuasions toasted Jeremy Corbyn. He had proved a useful idiot to the Leave cause.
I'm happy to believe that you would have accepted a Remain result Steve but neither Farage and his Kippers nor the Tory europhobes would have accepted it; they would have gone campaiging.
Regarding the actual result, as a devout Remainer I accept it and recognise we sadly have to leave... but there's no reason why we cannot do that with the softest of soft Brexits. We didn't vote to leave the single market or the customs union. Norway are not in the EU but in the single market - a Norwegian solution would have been very sensible but the tory europhobes have pushed the government into a corner that satisfies only the extremists imo.
Hm, let me just grab that clip of both side saying a vote to leave would be to leave the single market.
Isn't this the point though? You can find a clip of a leaver saying anything you like, frequently contradictory. (sometimes even with what the same person said to a different audience.) Cameron needs to take all the blame for allowing us to get the referendum with so little pinned down about what leave would mean - if he'd been savvier he'd have got them to write a white paper and have the arguments before the vote.
So that's why I've no time for people talking about the Will Of THe PeoPle, or that Leave means Leave. Leave meant various contradictory things before the vote, the cabinet still are too split to come up with any vision now. When you only have 52% to start with, the idea that anyone can claim they know what the vote really meant or was really about is for the birds - and normally indicates someone who can't argue for their favoured outcome on its merits.
There are two broad scenarios for the period between now and summer 2020.
1. The economy is strong, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a success. In this scenario, Mrs May is likely to prove tenacious. This doesn't mean JRM isn't the next Conservative leader, but it does mean that you'll be waiting a while for your money.
2. The economy is weak, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a failure. In which case, I can't see the next Conservative leader being a Hard Brexiteer.
His only chance is if May backtracks on Brexit and tries to serve up roasted Brino.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
Probably wouldn't satisfy the many people who voted to LEAVE THE EU.
There are two broad scenarios for the period between now and summer 2020.
1. The economy is strong, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a success. In this scenario, Mrs May is likely to prove tenacious. This doesn't mean JRM isn't the next Conservative leader, but it does mean that you'll be waiting a while for your money.
2. The economy is weak, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a failure. In which case, I can't see the next Conservative leader being a Hard Brexiteer.
His only chance is if May backtracks on Brexit and tries to serve up roasted Brino.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
Probably wouldn't satisfy the many people who voted to end freedom of movement.
Oh, was that on the other side of the ballot paper?
Dammit - I never turned it over. What other questions were there?
People don't make decisions in a vacuum. There have been many polls suggesting this was the main reason for a fair chunk of voters.
My ideal situation is for the People to vote in a democratic referendum and for everyone to accept the result -as I would have done if Remain has won.
I dont know about Cooper, but I think if Burnham had been Labour leader -or Chuka Umunna in 2016 and as Leader of the Opposition he had campaigned vigorously for Remain, my side would have lost. There would have been no Brexit. And I would have accepted the result.
On referendum night leavers of all political persuasions toasted Jeremy Corbyn. He had proved a useful idiot to the Leave cause.
I'm happy to believe that you would have accepted a Remain result Steve but neither Farage and his Kippers nor the Tory europhobes would have accepted it; they would have gone campaiging.
Regarding the actual result, as a devout Remainer I accept it and recognise we sadly have to leave... but there's no reason why we cannot do that with the softest of soft Brexits. We didn't vote to leave the single market or the customs union. Norway are not in the EU but in the single market - a Norwegian solution would have been very sensible but the tory europhobes have pushed the government into a corner that satisfies only the extremists imo.
Hm, let me just grab that clip of both side saying a vote to leave would be to leave the single market.
Isn't this the point though? You can find a clip of a leaver saying anything you like, frequently contradictory. (sometimes even with what the same person said to a different audience.) Cameron needs to take all the blame for allowing us to get the referendum with so little pinned down about what leave would mean - if he'd been savvier he'd have got them to write a white paper and have the arguments before the vote.
So that's why I've no time for people talking about the Will Of THe PeoPle, or that Leave means Leave. Leave meant various contradictory things before the vote, the cabinet still are too split to come up with any vision now. When you only have 52% to start with, the idea that anyone can claim they know what the vote really meant or was really about is for the birds - and normally indicates someone who can't argue for their favoured outcome on its merits.
Leave was clearly presented as taking back control of our borders and laws. People did not vote for change so that things could stay the same, people did not vote to end EU control only for it to continue.
There are two broad scenarios for the period between now and summer 2020.
1. The economy is strong, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a success. In this scenario, Mrs May is likely to prove tenacious. This doesn't mean JRM isn't the next Conservative leader, but it does mean that you'll be waiting a while for your money.
2. The economy is weak, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a failure. In which case, I can't see the next Conservative leader being a Hard Brexiteer.
His only chance is if May backtracks on Brexit and tries to serve up roasted Brino.
I'd add - as well as May serving up roasted Brino, it needs other prominent leavers like Johnson and Gove to go along with it.
Otherwise they would run and justifiably be top of the ticket given their cabinet experience and in the case of Johnson, greater name recognition and winning track record.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
Except that we need access to the hotel room to stop the economy crashing.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
Except that we need access to the hotel room to stop the economy crashing.
Its Jeremy Corbyn, who would be the first Leaver to be PM in our history who would crash the economy.
But there is no hard evidence other than pure speculation that Brexit will crash the economy.
New elections then? And in the meantime, the British govt is saving a billion that they promised to NI in order to get the Ulstermen on side last June.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
While we're at it let's get out of the WTO as well. Controlling bastards.
I dont know about Cooper, but I think if Burnham had been Labour leader -or Chuka Umunna in 2016 and as Leader of the Opposition he had campaigned vigorously for Remain, my side would have lost. There would have been no Brexit. And I would have accepted the result.
On referendum night leavers of all political persuasions toasted Jeremy Corbyn. He had proved a useful idiot to the Leave cause.
I'm happy to believe that you would have accepted a Remain result Steve but neither Farage and his Kippers nor the Tory europhobes would have accepted it; they would have gone campaiging.
Regarding the actual result, as a devout Remainer I accept it and recognise we sadly have to leave... but there's no reason why we cannot do that with the softest of soft Brexits. We didn't vote to leave the single market or the customs union. Norway are not in the EU but in the single market - a Norwegian solution would have been very sensible but the tory europhobes have pushed the government into a corner that satisfies only the extremists imo.
Hm, let me just grab that clip of both side saying a vote to leave would be to leave the single market.
Isn't this the point though? You can find a clip of a leaver saying anything you like, frequently contradictory. (sometimes even with what the same person said to a different audience.) Cameron needs to take all the blame for allowing us to get the referendum with so little pinned down about what leave would mean - if he'd been savvier he'd have got them to write a white paper and have the arguments before the vote.
So that's why I've no time for people talking about the Will Of THe PeoPle, or that Leave means Leave. Leave meant various contradictory things before the vote, the cabinet still are too split to come up with any vision now. When you only have 52% to start with, the idea that anyone can claim they know what the vote really meant or was really about is for the birds - and normally indicates someone who can't argue for their favoured outcome on its merits.
Leave was clearly presented as taking back control of our borders and laws. People did not vote for change so that things could stay the same, people did not vote to end EU control only for it to continue.
I can see you are a passionate advocate - but I'm afraid this is exactly what I'm referring to when I have a healthy distrust of anyone who tries to lecture on what the vote meant.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
Except that we need access to the hotel room to stop the economy crashing.
Its Jeremy Corbyn, who would be the first Leaver to be PM in our history who would crash the economy.
But there is no hard evidence other than pure speculation that Brexit will crash the economy.
For the hard-as-fuck Brexit you keep banging on about, there is more than speculation; there is basic economics.
You want to raise trade barriers with our largest and most integrated market.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
Except that we need access to the hotel room to stop the economy crashing.
Its Jeremy Corbyn, who would be the first Leaver to be PM in our history who would crash the economy.
But there is no hard evidence other than pure speculation that Brexit will crash the economy.
Ok, forget speculation about the effect on the economy. Do you think imposing new customs processes on UK businesses trading with the rest of Europe is a good thing?
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
Except that we need access to the hotel room to stop the economy crashing.
Its Jeremy Corbyn, who would be the first Leaver to be PM in our history who would crash the economy.
But there is no hard evidence other than pure speculation that Brexit will crash the economy.
It's all a bit academic anyway because we're going to end up with BINO... just saying.
"Today’s cult of youth terrifies me. You see it in the Corbynista movement, too: the callous celebration of the fact that the Corbyn outlook is more popular among the young than the Tories are, as if that alone proves its moral worth. Time and again we are given the distinct impression that if a political worldview is backed by the young, then it must be good, it must be dynamic, it must be worth pursuing."
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
Except that we need access to the hotel room to stop the economy crashing.
Its Jeremy Corbyn, who would be the first Leaver to be PM in our history who would crash the economy.
But there is no hard evidence other than pure speculation that Brexit will crash the economy.
Don't the governments own figures say that Brexit will hit the economy?
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
Except that we need access to the hotel room to stop the economy crashing.
Its Jeremy Corbyn, who would be the first Leaver to be PM in our history who would crash the economy.
But there is no hard evidence other than pure speculation that Brexit will crash the economy.
It's all a bit academic anyway because we're going to end up with BINO... just saying.
I still can't see it. When was the last time a backbencher with no ministerial experience became PM?
Two out of our last four PMs had no ministerial experience before they became PM.
Between them they are the only Lab and Con leaders to have won a majority for their parties in a total of 70 years.
No PM has come straight from the backbenches, they all have either been in the Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet or been Leader of the Opposition
Arthur Wellesley says hello.
That was pre Reform Act and he was Commander in Chief of the British Army, Master of the Ordinance and Constable of the Tower of London before he became PM so had plenty of executive experience
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
Except that we need access to the hotel room to stop the economy crashing.
Its Jeremy Corbyn, who would be the first Leaver to be PM in our history who would crash the economy.
But there is no hard evidence other than pure speculation that Brexit will crash the economy.
Don't the governments own figures say that Brexit will hit the economy?
I think not but who believes government figures anyway?
I think leavers are worrying slightly unnecessarily about Brexit initially leaving us a little more aligned with the EU than they would have preferred.
The ratchet will only turn one way and with each passing GE there will be a move away rather than towards, especially if economically we are outperforming the EU.
It may take the annihilation of the first party to offer re-joining in a GE manifesto to prove the point.
I must admit that I broadly share your opinion. The fact is that - whatever happens - we will have left the political structure of the EU, and therefore overtime our relationship with the EU will change.
When we entered the EU, we organised a seven year transition period, during which Commonwealth preference was slowly dismantled, in return for a gradual move to the CET. We were not, therefore, complete members of the EU until 1980.
Now, as a man with extensive business interests in the UK, perhaps I'm biased. But I don't think any of my businesses would be improved by a Unplanned Hard Brexit, especially as there is essentially zero chance that the EU's existing trade deals are likely to be replicated in the near term.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
Except that we need access to the hotel room to stop the economy crashing.
Its Jeremy Corbyn, who would be the first Leaver to be PM in our history who would crash the economy.
But there is no hard evidence other than pure speculation that Brexit will crash the economy.
It's all a bit academic anyway because we're going to end up with BINO... just saying.
"I even gave a clear rationale for my use of the word fascist, complete with illustrative quotation."
I gave you a sort of compliment (clarity) and now you're thrown it back in my face. Some people are never satisfied.
There was a court case in my area of law where the judge commented on advice given by a lawyer: "it did not even have the merit of ambiguity".
My clear rationale for calling you a Remoaner is that you dont accept a democratic referendum, and you imagine disingenuously that 17 million people voted to leave the EU so that things could stay exactly the same with the EU continuing to control us via the Single Market and Customs Union. Thats a bit like saying that 40% voted Labour but they didnt vote to end tuition fees.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
Except that we need access to the hotel room to stop the economy crashing.
Its Jeremy Corbyn, who would be the first Leaver to be PM in our history who would crash the economy.
But there is no hard evidence other than pure speculation that Brexit will crash the economy.
It's all a bit academic anyway because we're going to end up with BINO... just saying.
The regular reminder to those Leavers who inhale the vapours of the referendum vote and believe that Brexit requires all kinds of specific features to honour the vote:
I think not but who believes government figures anyway?
I think, and have always thought, that the biggest threat to Brexit is an economic downturn.
Now, it doesn't matter what the fundamental cause of that downturn is, it would be blamed on Brexit. And yes, I know the polls show that people are sanguine. But it's easy to be sanguine when you're feeling secure in your job. It's a lot harder when you've lost it, and you're worrying about paying your mortgage.
A major downturn, with rising unemployment, imperils Brexit far more than a gradual disentanglement from the bloc.
"I even gave a clear rationale for my use of the word fascist, complete with illustrative quotation."
I gave you a sort of compliment (clarity) and now you're thrown it back in my face. Some people are never satisfied.
There was a court case in my area of law where the judge commented on advice given by a lawyer: "it did not even have the merit of ambiguity".
My clear rationale for calling you a Remoaner is that you dont accept a democratic referendum, and you imagine disingenuously that 17 million people voted to leave the EU so that things could stay exactly the same with the EU continuing to control us via the Single Market and Customs Union. Thats a bit like saying that 40% voted Labour but they didnt vote to end tuition fees.
I refer you to my more recent post, showing that you are fascistically interpreting the referendum vote to require features that you want and which are completely unwarranted by any evidence outside your own imaginings.
Boris is Boris and enthuses as many as he upsets but nothing he said today compromises TM who is meeting Merkel on Friday before making a big speech in Munich on Saturday.
There follows other speeches before TM puts the Government's position on the table in a couple of weeks.
It is that speech that will define Brexit.
Boris is colourful but not my choice of next leader.
Indeed the way things are going and the rise of the sisterhood I am more convinced than ever that the next leader will be female again.
If we stayed in the Single Market as Remoaners wish (the so called "Soft Brexit), then nothing would change as a result of the UK leaving. We would still be under EU control regarding our borders and laws. It would be as if Remain had won after all.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
Is Norway in the EU?
Norwegians did not vote to leave the EU. We did,
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
Er... well, we'd no longer be in the EU - we'd have left, in fact.
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
We would have left in name only but still be under the control of the EU exactly the same as before.
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
Except that we need access to the hotel room to stop the economy crashing.
Its Jeremy Corbyn, who would be the first Leaver to be PM in our history who would crash the economy.
But there is no hard evidence other than pure speculation that Brexit will crash the economy.
It's all a bit academic anyway because we're going to end up with BINO... just saying.
Agreed with a possible near permanent transition.
You hope it will be a BRINO.
To be honest Steve , I struggled to make my mind up ,and only voted remain in the end, because of concerns over the economy.Nevertheless IMO opinion May will end up in transition , which will go on a long time.
Comments
At some point Remoaners will have to make the crossover from attempting to stop Brexit (which would be undemocratic) to campaigning to re-enter one day (which would not).
The first step on the campaign to re-enter would be to capture the main opposition party for re-entry. It will never be of any use to those who wish to re-enter the EU so long as it is led by a Leaver who voted against EVERY EU treaty for 30 years, and who facilitated Leave by failing to campaign for Remain.
Tories are blue
Kippers are violet
Brexit means PB will operate
For the next ten years on automatic pilot.
Violets are blue,
Here's a link to a tweet,
To say how much I love you
By ScottP
PS...Its not a retweet, don't call it a retweet...
They are called : Democrats.
McDonnell is too.
If you think they're Remain,
I've a bridge to sell you.
and Brexiteers are blue,
Why for 30 years did Corbyn
Vote against the EU?
Is that right?
Theresa May blue,
Uncle Vince said
Please think of me too.
I'm increasingly of the view that Boris is quite simply a ditherer. He seems to see all sides of an argument, he can quite happily argue against himself, and when push comes to shove, he seems to bottle it. That's why he sometimes seems to be about to launch his move against Theresa but always seems to draw back. When it came to deciding which side to back before the referendum, he agonised over it, famously wrote two articles one on each side, and didn't decide until the last moment. That's in contrast to Gove who (according to the account in Tim Shipman's book) was clear in his decision, even if he hated the fact that it meant opposing Cameron.
I dont know about Cooper, but I think if Burnham had been Labour leader -or Chuka Umunna in 2016 and as Leader of the Opposition he had campaigned vigorously for Remain, my side would have lost. There would have been no Brexit. And I would have accepted the result.
On referendum night leavers of all political persuasions toasted Jeremy Corbyn. He had proved a useful idiot to the Leave cause.
Of course, prediction is very difficult, especially about the future.
Only Corbyn voted against every EU treaty for 30 years. Only Corbyn voted against the creation of the EU.
Remoaners should be careful what they wish for.............................
Regarding the actual result, as a devout Remainer I accept it and recognise we sadly have to leave... but there's no reason why we cannot do that with the softest of soft Brexits. We didn't vote to leave the single market or the customs union. Norway are not in the EU but in the single market - a Norwegian solution would have been very sensible but the tory europhobes have pushed the government into a corner that satisfies only the extremists imo.
Define fascist? ... "A fascist is a follower of a political philosophy characterized by authoritarian views and a strong central government — and no tolerance for opposing opinions." That would include Stalin and Mao.
Mr Meeks' definition ... Anyone who votes Leave. At least that has clarity.
And everyone else said, 'WHO'?
http://www.open-britain.co.uk/boris_johnson_id_vote_to_stay_in_the_single_market
Evidently voting Leave destroys reading comprehension skills.
the Tories are blue,
Henry Bolton wed
Russian wife two.
The whole premise of the referendum was whether we should "take back control". Both sides acknowledged that leaving the EU in more than just name would require us to leave the Single Market. My copy of the Remain campaign booklet stated it.
There are two broad scenarios for the period between now and summer 2020.
1. The economy is strong, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a success. In this scenario, Mrs May is likely to prove tenacious. This doesn't mean JRM isn't the next Conservative leader, but it does mean that you'll be waiting a while for your money.
2. The economy is weak, and therefore Brexit is perceived to be a failure. In which case, I can't see the next Conservative leader being a Hard Brexiteer.
Norway is under the control of the EU. Norway has to accept EU laws and Freedom of Movement.
How would that satisfy those who voted Leave?
No prospect of Stormont deal, says DUP
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-politics-43064009
EDIT: I accept it wouldn't satisfy the true-believers - the zealots. But wnat proportion of the 52% do you think they constitute?
https://twitter.com/theWPTformula/status/963803435287089154
Dammit - I never turned it over. What other questions were there?
How would anyone -zealot or not -who voted leave be satisfied by things staying as they were before?
What proportion of remainers are zealots who want a federal Europe and want the EU to control our borders and laws.
The great mass of the people are moderates, but they do want the UK to be able to control its own laws and borders and when they vote for something they dont expect nothing to change. if they voted to "take back control" they dont expect the EU to still be in control.
If I check out of a hotel room I dont expect to still be billed for it.
The ratchet will only turn one way and with each passing GE there will be a move away rather than towards, especially if economically we are outperforming the EU.
It may take the annihilation of the first party to offer re-joining in a GE manifesto to prove the point.
Cameron needs to take all the blame for allowing us to get the referendum with so little pinned down about what leave would mean - if he'd been savvier he'd have got them to write a white paper and have the arguments before the vote.
So that's why I've no time for people talking about the Will Of THe PeoPle, or that Leave means Leave. Leave meant various contradictory things before the vote, the cabinet still are too split to come up with any vision now. When you only have 52% to start with, the idea that anyone can claim they know what the vote really meant or was really about is for the birds - and normally indicates someone who can't argue for their favoured outcome on its merits.
Nats are Tartan
The quality of PB's Brexit debate
Has become somewhat spartan
Otherwise they would run and justifiably be top of the ticket given their cabinet experience and in the case of Johnson, greater name recognition and winning track record.
But there is no hard evidence other than pure speculation that Brexit will crash the economy.
Corbyns a Red
I'm not a Blue
Labour is dead
877 times I've told you
You want to raise trade barriers with our largest and most integrated market.
It’s the economics of Kim Jong-un.
May is still blue
But Brexit is coming
Regardless of hue.....
Roses are red
Roses are blue
Stop assuming our colour
Or we will report you
"I even gave a clear rationale for my use of the word fascist, complete with illustrative quotation."
I gave you a sort of compliment (clarity) and now you're thrown it back in my face. Some people are never satisfied.
"Today’s cult of youth terrifies me. You see it in the Corbynista movement, too: the callous celebration of the fact that the Corbyn outlook is more popular among the young than the Tories are, as if that alone proves its moral worth. Time and again we are given the distinct impression that if a political worldview is backed by the young, then it must be good, it must be dynamic, it must be worth pursuing."
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/02/the-cult-of-youth-undermines-democracy/
Lan Mercado told the BBC the cases took place in the Philippines, Bangladesh and Nepal before she started as regional director two years ago.
When we entered the EU, we organised a seven year transition period, during which Commonwealth preference was slowly dismantled, in return for a gradual move to the CET. We were not, therefore, complete members of the EU until 1980.
Now, as a man with extensive business interests in the UK, perhaps I'm biased. But I don't think any of my businesses would be improved by a Unplanned Hard Brexit, especially as there is essentially zero chance that the EU's existing trade deals are likely to be replicated in the near term.
https://twitter.com/AndrewCooper__/status/961908728801976320
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/963824625787506688
Violets are blue,
Disagree with Corbynistas
And they will threaten to lynch you.
Now, it doesn't matter what the fundamental cause of that downturn is, it would be blamed on Brexit. And yes, I know the polls show that people are sanguine. But it's easy to be sanguine when you're feeling secure in your job. It's a lot harder when you've lost it, and you're worrying about paying your mortgage.
A major downturn, with rising unemployment, imperils Brexit far more than a gradual disentanglement from the bloc.
There follows other speeches before TM puts the Government's position on the table in a couple of weeks.
It is that speech that will define Brexit.
Boris is colourful but not my choice of next leader.
Indeed the way things are going and the rise of the sisterhood I am more convinced than ever that the next leader will be female again.