Philosophically, it’s bankrupt. Many of its erstwhile backers have gone quiet or publicly disowned the project. The public are bored it with it, or associate it with calamity.
Only Rees Mogg and the ERG seem to care anymore but they have already lost the main arguments. Corbyn remains privately loyal of course, but cannot bring himself to say it out loud.
I’m not even sure David David believes in it intellectually, although he remains committed to seeing it through for career reasons.
Like a house with rotten timbers and worm eaten joists, it still appears solid, but is one strong gust away from complete collapse.
Ironically, an exit to EEA might be the only way to keep Brexit alive, as it at least coherent. But perhaps only Gove or Johnson are capable of of leading that pivot.
Brexit is dying? Gold Standard Survation had 50% of voters still backing Leave only yesterday
73% think Brexit is going badly yet badly anyone has changed their minds on it. Interesting.
Cognitive dissonance. People accept Brexit is going badly but deny the logical inference that Brexit itself is bad. It must be because the leadership is incompetent or the other lot are behaving in an unfathomable way.
F1: just had a lazy look at third practice. Four driver and three teams at the top separated by a tenth. If accurate, would make qualifying quite competitive.
Now that the “ideologues” begins Brexit are pretty much all saying Brexit is crap it can only be a matter of time before the public follow suit.
I'll laugh like a drain if Brexit leads to the UK ultimately rejoining the EU and signing up to the Euro.
Speaking personally this would be ideal for emigres like myself. However it seems highly unlikley.
The most unlikely aspect of that scenario is the idea that the UK would rejoin. The UK will be dismembered and the constituent parts will adopt the Euro.
If there were a border poll during the transition deal, Northern Ireland would obviously join the Euro, and it would be the ideal time for either Great Britain or an independent Scotland and the former Kingdom of England to re-accede to the EU.
One can never say never, but that seems fanciful.
Is it fanciful that we would have a border poll during transition? The question of "what next?" for GB would be acute in those circumstances.
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Northern Ireland voted to join the Irish Republic. Why would the other 62 m inhabitants of this country change their minds over the Euro? If Scotland had voted for independence in 2014, it would have had no bearing at all on the attitude of voters in RUK to Euro membership.
It would starkly demonstrate that Brexit was a historic mistake. Euro membership would just be part of the package of accepting that our destiny is to play a full role in European integration.
Rubbish. If anything it would accelerate English nationalism, the most Unionist figures in Scotland were all staunch Remainers
English nationhood is not incompatible with European federalism. I would argue that it's actually the best way for the English to be reconciled to becoming a modern European country.
Of course it is, English nationalists were the most prominent Leavers, Unionists were mainly Remainers. Losing pro Remain Scotland and Northern Ireland would just entrench and strengthen the pro Brexit majority in England and Wales.
You can be a modern European country without being part of a Federal EU and the Eurozone, see Switzerland and Norway
Philosophically, it’s bankrupt. Many of its erstwhile backers have gone quiet or publicly disowned the project. The public are bored it with it, or associate it with calamity.
Only Rees Mogg and the ERG seem to care anymore but they have already lost the main arguments. Corbyn remains privately loyal of course, but cannot bring himself to say it out loud.
I’m not even sure David David believes in it intellectually, although he remains committed to seeing it through for career reasons.
Like a house with rotten timbers and worm eaten joists, it still appears solid, but is one strong gust away from complete collapse.
Ironically, an exit to EEA might be the only way to keep Brexit alive, as it at least coherent. But perhaps only Gove or Johnson are capable of of leading that pivot.
Brexit is dying? Gold Standard Survation had 50% of voters still backing Leave only yesterday
...but 73% think it's going badly today.
On the Leave side partly because it is not hard Brexit enough
English nationhood is not incompatible with European federalism. I would argue that it's actually the best way for the English to be reconciled to becoming a modern European country.
Of course it is, English nationalists were the most prominent Leavers, Unionists were mainly Remainers. Losing pro Remain Scotland and Northern Ireland would just entrench and strengthen the pro Brexit majority in England and Wales.
You can be a modern European country without being part of a Federal EU and the Eurozone, see Switzerland
Some events can have paradoxical outcomes and Brexit was driven by very contradictory impulses.
Switzerland is content to be a bystander of history. I don't think England is.
' A big shout out to the 4% who thought Brexit would go badly but think it is going well. '
Looks like they sampled Cameron and Osborne.
The 4% = "who thought Brexit would go badly..." = "I bet the B*****ds will sell us out and we won't leave" + ".. but think its going well" = "... but now its going so badly we'll end up with No Deal so hurrah". Or else they didn't understand the question.
Isn’t 4% the group who answered yes to the question “have you ever been decapitated?”
Ie pranksters, idiots and the randomly clicking to get their YouGov points
English nationhood is not incompatible with European federalism. I would argue that it's actually the best way for the English to be reconciled to becoming a modern European country.
Of course it is, English nationalists were the most prominent Leavers, Unionists were mainly Remainers. Losing pro Remain Scotland and Northern Ireland would just entrench and strengthen the pro Brexit majority in England and Wales.
You can be a modern European country without being part of a Federal EU and the Eurozone, see Switzerland
Some events can have paradoxical outcomes and Brexit was driven by very contradictory impulses.
Switzerland is content to be a bystander of history. I don't think England is.
79% of those who think of themselves as English NOT British voted Leave.
66% of those who think of themselves as more English than British voted Leave.
51% of those who think of themselves as equally English and British voted Leave, just under the 52% of voters as a whole who voted Leave.
60% of those who think of themselves as British NOT English voted Remain.
63% of those who think of themselves as more British than English voted Remain.
England survived and prospered for centuries as an independent nation before the Union with Scotland and Ireland, let alone before it joined the EEC/EU. It was also never part of the Holy Roman Empire, the Hapsburg Empire, the Napoleonic Empire or Nazi rule unlike most of Western Europe.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Now that the “ideologues” begins Brexit are pretty much all saying Brexit is crap it can only be a matter of time before the public follow suit.
I'll laugh like a drain if Brexit leads to the UK ultimately rejoining the EU and signing up to the Euro.
Speaking personally this would be ideal for emigres like myself. However it seems highly unlikley.
The most unlikely aspect of that scenario is the idea that the UK would rejoin. The UK will be dismembered and the constituent parts will adopt the Euro.
If there were a border poll during the transition deal, Northern Ireland would obviously join the Euro, and it would be the ideal time for either Great Britain or an independent Scotland and the former Kingdom of England to re-accede to the EU.
One can never say never, but that seems fanciful.
Is it fanciful that we would have a border poll during transition? The question of "what next?" for GB would be acute in those circumstances.
Let's say, for
It would starkly demonstrate that Brexit was a historic mistake. Euro membership would just be part of the package of accepting that our destiny is to play a full role in European integration.
Rubbish. If anything it would accelerate English nationalism, the most Unionist figures in Scotland were all staunch Remainers
English nationhood is not incompatible with European federalism. I would argue that it's actually the best way for the English to be reconciled to becoming a modern European country.
Of course it is, English nationalists were the most prominent Leavers, Unionists were mainly Remainers. Losing pro Remain Scotland and Northern Ireland would just entrench and strengthen the pro Brexit majority in England and Wales.
You can be a modern European country without being part of a Federal EU and the Eurozone, see Switzerland and Norway
In Northern Ireland Scotland, and Wales , most Unionists were Leavers. Nationalists were very strongly Remain, on the basis that my enemy's enemy is my friend.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Now that the “ideologues” begins Brexit are pretty much all saying Brexit is crap it can only be a matter of time before the public follow suit.
I'll laugh like a drain if Brexit leads to the UK ultimately rejoining the EU and signing up to the Euro.
Speaking personally this would be ideal for emigres like myself. However it seems highly unlikley.
The most unlikely aspect of that scenario is the idea that the UK would rejoin. The UK will be dismembered and the constituent parts will adopt the Euro.
If there were a border poll during the transition deal, Northern Ireland would obviously join the Euro, and it would be the ideal time for either Great Britain or an independent Scotland and the former Kingdom of England to re-accede to the EU.
One can never say never, but that seems fanciful.
Is it fanciful that we would have a border poll during transition? The question of "what next?" for GB would be acute in those circumstances.
Let's say, for
It would starkly demonstrate that Brexit was a historic mistake. Euro membership would just be part of the package of accepting that our destiny is to play a full role in European integration.
Rubbish. If anything it would accelerate English nationalism, the most Unionist figures in Scotland were all staunch Remainers
English nationhood is not incompatible with European federalism. I would argue that it's actually the best way for the English to be reconciled to becoming a modern European country.
Of course it is, End Norway
In Northern Ireland Scotland, and Wales , most Unionists were Leavers. Nationalists were very strongly Remain, on the basis that my enemy's enemy is my friend.
Though Davidson, Darling, Brown etc all pushed the Remain case and over a third of SNP voters voted Leave. The UUP also backed Remain even if the DUP did not.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
I like the look on Abe's face.
I like the guy immediately to our left from Abe, sandwiched between him and Merkel. He's leaning in and looking right at the camera, all 'hmm, what's going on here, eh?'
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
You wonder if the photo also has rarity value given it's surely the first time Trump has looked a woman in the eye rather than the chest.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
I like the look on Abe's face.
I like the guy immediately to our left from Abe, sandwiched between him and Merkel. He's leaning in and looking right at the camera, all 'hmm, what's going on here, eh?'
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
You wonder if the photo also has rarity value given it's surely the first time Trump has looked a woman in the eye rather than the chest.
Well it might have been seconds after she said 'my eyes are up here', but though it is hard to tell I think he's actually looking at Macron.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Philosophically, it’s bankrupt. Many of its erstwhile backers have gone quiet or publicly disowned the project. The public are bored it with it, or associate it with calamity.
Only Rees Mogg and the ERG seem to care anymore but they have already lost the main arguments. Corbyn remains privately loyal of course, but cannot bring himself to say it out loud.
I’m not even sure David David believes in it intellectually, although he remains committed to seeing it through for career reasons.
Like a house with rotten timbers and worm eaten joists, it still appears solid, but is one strong gust away from complete collapse.
Ironically, an exit to EEA might be the only way to keep Brexit alive, as it at least coherent. But perhaps only Gove or Johnson are capable of of leading that pivot.
No one has lost any arguments. The same reasons for leaving the EU still apply and are still valid. Of course Remoaners like you will try and claim it is all doomed but in the end there is no appetite amongst the politicians for reversing the decision as they know it would end their careers and quite possibly their parties. So either they see Brexit through with whatever deal they feel is survivable or we have a WTO Brexit. Either way we will be leaving.
Philosophically, it’s bankrupt. Many of its erstwhile backers have gone quiet or publicly disowned the project. The public are bored it with it, or associate it with calamity.
Only Rees Mogg and the ERG seem to care anymore but they have already lost the main arguments. Corbyn remains privately loyal of course, but cannot bring himself to say it out loud.
I’m not even sure David David believes in it intellectually, although he remains committed to seeing it through for career reasons.
Like a house with rotten timbers and worm eaten joists, it still appears solid, but is one strong gust away from complete collapse.
Ironically, an exit to EEA might be the only way to keep Brexit alive, as it at least coherent. But perhaps only Gove or Johnson are capable of of leading that pivot.
No one has lost any arguments. The same reasons for leaving the EU still apply and are still valid. Of course Remoaners like you will try and claim it is all doomed but in the end there is no appetite amongst the politicians for reversing the decision as they know it would end their careers and quite possibly their parties. So either they see Brexit through with whatever deal they feel is survivable or we have a WTO Brexit. Either way we will be leaving.
I disagree.
It’s Emperor’s New Clothes, and once someone is brave enough to point and laugh (or pivot to EEA as I suggest) the whole rotten carapace will collapse.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
I don't think Juncker's in that picture.
May still seems to be part of Team EU though:
standing at the back trying to see if she can get a friend, pathetic cretin.
Philosophically, it’s bankrupt. Many of its erstwhile backers have gone quiet or publicly disowned the project. The public are bored it with it, or associate it with calamity.
Only Rees Mogg and the ERG seem to care anymore but they have already lost the main arguments. Corbyn remains privately loyal of course, but cannot bring himself to say it out loud.
I’m not even sure David David believes in it intellectually, although he remains committed to seeing it through for career reasons.
Like a house with rotten timbers and worm eaten joists, it still appears solid, but is one strong gust away from complete collapse.
Ironically, an exit to EEA might be the only way to keep Brexit alive, as it at least coherent. But perhaps only Gove or Johnson are capable of of leading that pivot.
No one has lost any arguments. The same reasons for leaving the EU still apply and are still valid. Of course Remoaners like you will try and claim it is all doomed but in the end there is no appetite amongst the politicians for reversing the decision as they know it would end their careers and quite possibly their parties. So either they see Brexit through with whatever deal they feel is survivable or we have a WTO Brexit. Either way we will be leaving.
I disagree.
It’s Emperor’s New Clothes, and once someone is brave enough to point and laugh (or pivot to EEA as I suggest) the whole rotten carapace will collapse.
I know you believe that but it does show an utter disconnect from reality.
Now I would love to see the EEA option pursued. As I said at the end of the last thread in answer to Andy Cook's blueprint I agree with every single thing he said. It would be my dream Brexit. But I also know it is pie in the sky now for me to think I will get it. It would be painted as an utter betrayal and neither Corbyn nor May have the balls (if you will excuse the phrase) to support it. So we will continue with May's mishandling and Corbyn's 'away with the fairies' approach and the most likely result I see now is the WTO Brexit.
Philosophically, it’s bankrupt. Many of its erstwhile backers have gone quiet or publicly disowned the project. The public are bored it with it, or associate it with calamity.
Only Rees Mogg and the ERG seem to care anymore but they have already lost the main arguments. Corbyn remains privately loyal of course, but cannot bring himself to say it out loud.
I’m not even sure David David believes in it intellectually, although he remains committed to seeing it through for career reasons.
Like a house with rotten timbers and worm eaten joists, it still appears solid, but is one strong gust away from complete collapse.
Ironically, an exit to EEA might be the only way to keep Brexit alive, as it at least coherent. But perhaps only Gove or Johnson are capable of of leading that pivot.
No one has lost any arguments. The same reasons for leaving the EU still apply and are still valid. Of course Remoaners like you will try and claim it is all doomed but in the end there is no appetite amongst the politicians for reversing the decision as they know it would end their careers and quite possibly their parties. So either they see Brexit through with whatever deal they feel is survivable or we have a WTO Brexit. Either way we will be leaving.
I disagree.
It’s Emperor’s New Clothes, and once someone is brave enough to point and laugh (or pivot to EEA as I suggest) the whole rotten carapace will collapse.
I know you believe that but it does show an utter disconnect from reality.
Now I would love to see the EEA option pursued. As I said at the end of the last thread in answer to Andy Cook's blueprint I agree with every single thing he said. It would be my dream Brexit. But I also know it is pie in the sky now for me to think I will get it. It would be painted as an utter betrayal and neither Corbyn nor May have the balls (if you will excuse the phrase) to support it. So we will continue with May's mishandling and Corbyn's 'away with the fairies' approach and the most likely result I see now is the WTO Brexit.
Suboptimal but still better than staying in.
I actually think your option is closer, or more attainable than you think.
It needs a Gove or Johnson to front it, but the moment of “betrayal” is over.
Sure, the loony fringe will cry foul, but they wil do that anyway and they are increasingly marginal figures.
If you have courage of your convictions you should join the EEA campaign.
At times of crisis you need an inspiring, decisive leader.
Similarly, Boris is the man for taking on the task of implementing WTO terms. You need someone who has the big picture and strategies who does not get bogged down in the detail. Rules are there to be broken not as a straight jacket.
I think Boris is the only person who can lead the Tory party to an overall majority in the event of a snap election. He still has an appeal to the man or woman in the street who does not have an interest in detailed policies. He is the Trump figure.
I can't imagine the current favourites (Gove and Rees- Mogg) having that wide appeal. I'm sure Tory MPS can see this too (and probably so can Gove and Rees-Mogg). That's why I'm backing Boris as next Tory leader in spite of his obvious flaws. Trump's obvious flaws didn't prevent him winning first the primaries and then the election.
While I personally find Boris's act, his politics, and his obvious contempt for voters and the people truly retchworthy, and I'd assess his intellect and his competence as terribly low and his ability to improve as non-existent, I have to admit that he does have charisma. He may be the nearest equivalent to Trump at the moment too.
For psychopolitical reasons that aren't just connected with the survival of the Tory party a "man of the moment" will at some point emerge. There is no way Theresa May will be PM in 2022. A figure will emerge who rams the country down the toilet as the moneyed classes fly off across the Atlantic adopts the mantle of "saviour".
But the dislike and distrust in which Boris is held by apparatchiks at the Treasury and elsewhere, including by some senior Tory politicians, may be sufficient to stop him. The upper "permanent state" at the core of government is much larger in Britain than in the US, and there's no precedent for a new PM holding a bonfire of the Humphreys. Calling the Treasury "the heart of Remain" is Steve Bannon "Leninist" talk. While the media have not dwelt too long on previous resignations from the civil service that have happened in connection with criminal wars, I doubt a Boris rampant will be able to decimate the top bracket and pack it with personally loyal fanatics.
Jacob Rees-Mogg also has a great deal of charisma. What did those who think Mogg couldn't win a comfortable majority think about Tony Blair in 1994?
The sharp Alastair Campbell, who knows how to craft the image required to win a landslide for what becomes a long-term popular government if anyone does, and who doubtless has good judgement as to when that's possible and when it's not, tried recently to rubbish JRM. That probably wasn't strategic, but there's little reason to do it if he's not scared.
Arron Banks, the millionaire businessman who helped fund Brexit, had three meetings with the Russian ambassador to Britain — raising explosive questions about attempts by Moscow to influence the referendum result.
Emails by Banks and his sidekick Andy Wigmore, shown to The Sunday Times, reveal an extensive web of links between Banks’s Leave.EU campaign and Russian officials.
They show they made repeated contact with officials to discuss business opportunities and issues of mutual interest throughout the referendum campaign and its aftermath.
In his book on the referendum, The Bad Boys of Brexit, and in another public statement, Banks claimed to have had only one meeting with Putin’s envoy Alexander Yakovenko, in September 2015.
But today The Sunday Times can reveal that the pair also had lunch with the ambassador just three days after they and Nigel Farage visited US president Donald Trump in New York in November 2016.
Last night Banks admitted that he handed over telephone numbers for members of Trump’s transition team to Russian officials.
Trump, whose campaign staff are under investigation by a special prosecutor probing whether they colluded with Moscow, stunned the world yesterday by calling for Russia to be readmitted to the G7 group of nations.
The 40,000 emails were obtained by the journalist Isabel Oakeshott, Banks’s ghostwriter on The Bad Boys of Brexit. She is now writing a book with Lord Ashcroft, a former treasurer of the Conservative Party, that covers Russian “hybrid warfare” techniques to influence western politics.
She came forward after her emails were “hacked”. They have now been passed to the House of Commons digital, culture, media and sport select committee, which is investigating Russian attempts to influence western politics with fake news.
Philosophically, it’s bankrupt. Many of its erstwhile backers have gone quiet or publicly disowned the project. The public are bored it with it, or associate it with calamity.
Only Rees Mogg and the ERG seem to care anymore but they have already lost the main arguments. Corbyn remains privately loyal of course, but cannot bring himself to say it out loud.
I’m not even sure David David believes in it intellectually, although he remains committed to seeing it through for career reasons.
Like a house with rotten timbers and worm eaten joists, it still appears solid, but is one strong gust away from complete collapse.
Ironically, an exit to EEA might be the only way to keep Brexit alive, as it at least coherent. But perhaps only Gove or Johnson are capable of of leading that pivot.
Brexit is dying? Gold Standard Survation had 50% of voters still backing Leave only yesterday
...but 73% think it's going badly today.
That doesn't mean they think it was wrong. Just that it is being badly handled by the current Government.
I suspect most Leave supporters on here would be amongst that 73%. It doesn't mean we think the vote was wrong nor that Brexit will be a disaster. We just think it could be better handled.
There are regular polls showing that people think the NHS is in big trouble. That doesn't mean they are anti-NHS, nor that they think it is a bad idea, just that they believe it is being badly managed by the current administration.
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
You wonder if the photo also has rarity value given it's surely the first time Trump has looked a woman in the eye rather than the chest.
Well it might have been seconds after she said 'my eyes are up here', but though it is hard to tell I think he's actually looking at Macron.
It is entirely possible that if Scotland and/or Northern Ireland secede the UK will be known as The Former United Kingdom, or FUK for short.
If anything, the independence referendum rejuvenated Scottish Unionism.
LOL, not in Scotland , it was 75% before it started and is only just over 50% now. It is only a matter of time now.
Awfully complacent. Direction of travel in the past is no guarantee of future outcome - if it were, then support for the union would surely be around 15% by now, given where it has been in the past and how many years since the first referendum.
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
But it’s not a second vote. It’s a vote on the deal - and a chance for the People to tell the incompetent and/or Russian-funded Brexitarchy to go do one.
I actually think your option is closer, or more attainable than you think.
It needs a Gove or Johnson to front it, but the moment of “betrayal” is over.
Sure, the loony fringe will cry foul, but they wil do that anyway and they are increasingly marginal figures.
If you have courage of your convictions you should join the EEA campaign.
I have been part of the EEA campaign from the very start. As I pointed out to HYUFD yesterday I was campaigning for that option (and incidently wrote a thread header supporting it) both before and after the vote. I regularly get accused of wanting to ignore the will of the people because I believe in it. Funnily enough often by Remainers who want to reverse the decision of the referendum.
Nor am I alone. There are plenty of commentators such as Richard North who were strongly in favour of the EEA option for many years. If you think criticism of the Leave campaign is strong on here you should go and see what he and is supporters have to say about it. It would make your eyes water.
Philosophically, it’s bankrupt. Many of its erstwhile backers have gone quiet or publicly disowned the project. The public are bored it with it, or associate it with calamity.
Only Rees Mogg and the ERG seem to care anymore but they have already lost the main arguments. Corbyn remains privately loyal of course, but cannot bring himself to say it out loud.
I’m not even sure David David believes in it intellectually, although he remains committed to seeing it through for career reasons.
Like a house with rotten timbers and worm eaten joists, it still appears solid, but is one strong gust away from complete collapse.
Ironically, an exit to EEA might be the only way to keep Brexit alive, as it at least coherent. But perhaps only Gove or Johnson are capable of of leading that pivot.
No one has lost any arguments. The same reasons for leaving the EU still apply and are still valid. Of course Remoaners like you will try and claim it is all doomed but in the end there is no appetite amongst the politicians for reversing the decision as they know it would end their careers and quite possibly their parties. So either they see Brexit through with whatever deal they feel is survivable or we have a WTO Brexit. Either way we will be leaving.
I disagree.
It’s Emperor’s New Clothes, and once someone is brave enough to point and laugh (or pivot to EEA as I suggest) the whole rotten carapace will collapse.
We've had people pointing and claiming its a disaster since 24/06/16.
But the reasons that they've been claiming have become thinner and thinner.
By now they expected to be knee deep in closed car factories, departing bankers and crops rotting in the fields.
In Northern Ireland Scotland, and Wales , most Unionists were Leavers. Nationalists were very strongly Remain, on the basis that my enemy's enemy is my friend.
Not 'prominent' Unionists in Scotland, though I realise Ruth Davidson has had more lines in the sand over this and other issues than a Charlie Sheen beach party. If anyone could clarify what her current stance on Brexit is I'd be most grateful.
I actually think your option is closer, or more attainable than you think.
It needs a Gove or Johnson to front it, but the moment of “betrayal” is over.
Sure, the loony fringe will cry foul, but they wil do that anyway and they are increasingly marginal figures.
If you have courage of your convictions you should join the EEA campaign.
I have been part of the EEA campaign from the very start. As I pointed out to HYUFD yesterday I was campaigning for that option (and incidently wrote a thread header supporting it) both before and after the vote. I regularly get accused of wanting to ignore the will of the people because I believe in it. Funnily enough often by Remainers who want to reverse the decision of the referendum.
Nor am I alone. There are plenty of commentators such as Richard North who were strongly in favour of the EEA option for many years. If you think criticism of the Leave campaign is strong on here you should go and see what he and is supporters have to say about it. It would make your eyes water.
Richard North is yet another one who refuses to believe the Leave vote had anything whatsoever to do with immigration when the main reason Leave got over 50% was the desire for tighter immigration controls not his pet obsession with more control over widget making in the EEA. I have even told some of his supporters that on his board much to their annoyance.
In a decade or so after a number of years of no free movement and tighter immigration controls rejoining the EEA may be an option again but not now.
@TheScreamingEagles - Did Remain seek assistance from foreign powers during the referendum?
Not from passenger-jet downing, Salisbury-poisoning, hybrid warmaking ones, no.
Funny, because I don't remember Leave getting Putin to come over and campaign for them.
Another useful idiot.
In case you hadn’t noticed, Putin has cleverly forged links with every populist movement in the West.
Even in my green and innocent homeland - NZ - the new(ish) coalition has made a bizarre pledge to secure closer economic links with Russia at the behest of the Ukippish NZ First party.
From California secession to Five Star, and most prominently of all Brexit and Trump - just watch those roubles work.
@TheScreamingEagles - Did Remain seek assistance from foreign powers during the referendum?
Not from passenger-jet downing, Salisbury-poisoning, hybrid warmaking ones, no.
Funny, because I don't remember Leave getting Putin to come over and campaign for them.
Another useful idiot.
In case you hadn’t noticed, Putin has cleverly forged links with every populist movement in the West.
Even in my green and innocent homeland - NZ - the new(ish) coalition has made a bizarre pledge to secure closer economic links with Russia at the behest of the Ukippish NZ First party.
From California secession to Five Star, and most prominently of all Brexit and Trump - just watch those roubles work.
Philosophically, it’s bankrupt. Many of its erstwhile backers have gone quiet or publicly disowned the project. The public are bored it with it, or associate it with calamity.
Only Rees Mogg and the ERG seem to care anymore but they have already lost the main arguments. Corbyn remains privately loyal of course, but cannot bring himself to say it out loud.
I’m not even sure David David believes in it intellectually, although he remains committed to seeing it through for career reasons.
Like a house with rotten timbers and worm eaten joists, it still appears solid, but is one strong gust away from complete collapse.
Ironically, an exit to EEA might be the only way to keep Brexit alive, as it at least coherent. But perhaps only Gove or Johnson are capable of of leading that pivot.
No one has lost any arguments. The same reasons for leaving the EU still apply and are still valid. Of course Remoaners like you will try and claim it is all doomed but in the end there is no appetite amongst the politicians for reversing the decision as they know it would end their careers and quite possibly their parties. So either they see Brexit through with whatever deal they feel is survivable or we have a WTO Brexit. Either way we will be leaving.
I disagree.
It’s Emperor’s New Clothes, and once someone is brave enough to point and laugh (or pivot to EEA as I suggest) the whole rotten carapace will collapse.
We've had people pointing and claiming its a disaster since 24/06/16.
But the reasons that they've been claiming have become thinner and thinner.
By now they expected to be knee deep in closed car factories, departing bankers and crops rotting in the fields.
Actually this board was wall to wall disaster - from Remainers and Brexiters alike - on Friday.
Get up to speed, grandaddy. The arguments that “won” the vote are not enough to sustain it.
@TheScreamingEagles - Did Remain seek assistance from foreign powers during the referendum?
Not from passenger-jet downing, Salisbury-poisoning, hybrid warmaking ones, no.
Funny, because I don't remember Leave getting Putin to come over and campaign for them.
Another useful idiot.
In case you hadn’t noticed, Putin has cleverly forged links with every populist movement in the West.
Even in my green and innocent homeland - NZ - the new(ish) coalition has made a bizarre pledge to secure closer economic links with Russia at the behest of the Ukippish NZ First party.
From California secession to Five Star, and most prominently of all Brexit and Trump - just watch those roubles work.
Yes, and with no attempt to even hide it. Putin likes people to know who he owns.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Yup - Merkel is clearly playing the schoolmarm.
That is a great photo - though a slight move to the right by the photographer might have improved it... and obscured May completely.
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
But it’s not a second vote. It’s a vote on the deal - and a chance for the People to tell the incompetent and/or Russian-funded Brexitarchy to go do one.
Then call it a referendum on the deal (and I was envisaging a second vote should, at this point, probably include a remain option). This 'people's vote' stuff is transparently garbage, based on the assumption that people dislike the term referendum. If people want to back the options in a referendum they will do so, even if they are saying to focus groups they don't like the idea of referendums.
All referendums, all elections, are people's votes (and it wouldn't be a vote against the 'Brexitarcy', it would be against the people's vote last time) - trying to make a vote on the deal seem unique by terming it so is absurd, and I really cannot see any non shady reason for trying to call it something else. Do you believe a vote on the deal would be more a people's vote than any other vote by the people? If not, it's just plain silly.
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
But it’s not a second vote. It’s a vote on the deal - and a chance for the People to tell the incompetent and/or Russian-funded Brexitarchy to go do one.
Then call it a referendum on the deal (and I was envisaging a second vote should, at this point, probably include a remain option). This 'people's vote' stuff is transparently garbage, based on the assumption that people dislike the term referendum. If people want to back the options in a referendum they will do so, even if they are saying to focus groups they don't like the idea of referendums.
All referendums, all elections, are people's votes (and it wouldn't be a vote against the 'Brexitarcy', it would be against the people's vote last time) - trying to make a vote on the deal seem unique by terming it so is absurd, and I really cannot see any non shady reason for trying to call it something else. Do you believe a vote on the deal would be more a people's vote than any other vote by the people? If not, it's just plain silly.
It's just the EU's way of doing things.. make them vote again and again until they give the right answer.
Philosophically, it’s bankrupt. Many of its erstwhile backers have gone quiet or publicly disowned the project. The public are bored it with it, or associate it with calamity.
Only Rees Mogg and the ERG seem to care anymore but they have already lost the main arguments. Corbyn remains privately loyal of course, but cannot bring himself to say it out loud.
I’m not even sure David David believes in it intellectually, although he remains committed to seeing it through for career reasons.
Like a house with rotten timbers and worm eaten joists, it still appears solid, but is one strong gust away from complete collapse.
Ironically, an exit to EEA might be the only way to keep Brexit alive, as it at least coherent. But perhaps only Gove or Johnson are capable of of leading that pivot.
No one has lost any arguments. The same reasons for leaving the EU still apply and are still valid. Of course Remoaners like you will try and claim it is all doomed but in the end there is no appetite amongst the politicians for reversing the decision as they know it would end their careers and quite possibly their parties. So either they see Brexit through with whatever deal they feel is survivable or we have a WTO Brexit. Either way we will be leaving.
I disagree.
It’s Emperor’s New Clothes, and once someone is brave enough to point and laugh (or pivot to EEA as I suggest) the whole rotten carapace will collapse.
We've had people pointing and claiming its a disaster since 24/06/16.
But the reasons that they've been claiming have become thinner and thinner.
By now they expected to be knee deep in closed car factories, departing bankers and crops rotting in the fields.
Actually this board was wall to wall disaster - from Remainers and Brexiters alike - on Friday.
Get up to speed, grandaddy. The arguments that “won” the vote are not enough to sustain it.
No not disaster just disappointed. May is being awful but that doesn't undermine Brexit it undermines May.
Similarly Brown was an absolute disaster. That doesn't and didn't undermine Britain being outside the Eurozone it undermined Brown.
I have just neen looking at polls from previous Parliaments , and surprised that in March /April 1976 Labour enjoyed leads as high as 6% & 7% over the Tories - ie 18 months into the October 1974 Parliament. It didn't mean lot,however, re-predicting the 1979 election outcome.
That Sunday Times article refers to emails by Arron Banks and his "sidekick" Andy Wigmore and then to "the 40,000 emails". That's a lot. How did Isabel Oakeshott get them? (As if we don't know!)
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
But it’s not a second vote. It’s a vote on the deal - and a chance for the People to tell the incompetent and/or Russian-funded Brexitarchy to go do one.
Then call it a referendum on the deal (and I was envisaging a second vote should, at this point, probably include a remain option). This 'people's vote' stuff is transparently garbage, based on the assumption that people dislike the term referendum. If people want to back the options in a referendum they will do so, even if they are saying to focus groups they don't like the idea of referendums.
All referendums, all elections, are people's votes (and it wouldn't be a vote against the 'Brexitarcy', it would be against the people's vote last time) - trying to make a vote on the deal seem unique by terming it so is absurd, and I really cannot see any non shady reason for trying to call it something else. Do you believe a vote on the deal would be more a people's vote than any other vote by the people? If not, it's just plain silly.
It's amazing that all these Remainers who insist on the importance of a vote on the terms of Leave never wanted a vote on the many new terms of Remain over the last forty years. Their belief in democracy is similar to Erodgan's: a train to ride until they get to the station they want, then you get off.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Yup - Merkel is clearly playing the schoolmarm.
That is a great photo - though a slight move to the right by the photographer might have improved it... and obscured May completely.
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
But it’s not a second vote. It’s a vote on the deal - and a chance for the People to tell the incompetent and/or Russian-funded Brexitarchy to go do one.
If its a vote on the deal then the two options should be accept the deal or reject it - in which case it is WTO. If there is a Remain option then it is a second vote.
I have just neen looking at polls from previous Parliaments , and surprised that in March /April 1976 Labour enjoyed leads as high as 6% & 7% over the Tories - ie 18 months into the October 1974 Parliament. It didn't mean lot,however, re-predicting the 1979 election outcome.
Tsk, you're grasping at straws.
Those leads were down to Labour dominating the airwaves due to the leadership contest that saw Jim Callaghan become PM.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Yup - Merkel is clearly playing the schoolmarm.
That is a great photo - though a slight move to the right by the photographer might have improved it... and obscured May completely.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Really?
I see someone sitting there not giving a flying fuck; someone who will do whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter what harm it causes his own people and others; someone who is impossible to engage with on a rational basis.
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
But it’s not a second vote. It’s a vote on the deal - and a chance for the People to tell the incompetent and/or Russian-funded Brexitarchy to go do one.
If its a vote on the deal then the two options should be accept the deal or reject it - in which case it is WTO. If there is a Remain option then it is a second vote.
A reject shouldn’t (necessarily) lead to WTO. We ought to keep open the option for EEA or Remain.
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
But it’s not a second vote. It’s a vote on the deal - and a chance for the People to tell the incompetent and/or Russian-funded Brexitarchy to go do one.
If its a vote on the deal then the two options should be accept the deal or reject it - in which case it is WTO. If there is a Remain option then it is a second vote.
A reject shouldn’t (necessarily) lead to WTO. We ought to keep open the option for EEA or Remain.
We already voted on whether to Remain or not. If you want that vote then it is a second referendum under the EU's 'keep asking until they give the right answer' programme. It will be a second referendum and will be portrayed as such with the associated message of 'you voted the wrong way last time, try again'.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Yup - Merkel is clearly playing the schoolmarm.
That is a great photo - though a slight move to the right by the photographer might have improved it... and obscured May completely.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Really?
I see someone sitting there not giving a flying fuck; someone who will do whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter what harm it causes his own people and others; someone who is impossible to engage with on a rational basis.
Trump is not an idealogue. Trump is about Trump. To him the only thing that matters is what his policies do to Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and Iowa. He does not give a ____ about anything else.
That Sunday Times article refers to emails by Arron Banks and his "sidekick" Andy Wigmore and then to "the 40,000 emails". That's a lot. How did Isabel Oakeshott get them? (As if we don't know!)
Presumably the Russians themselves leaked them. Now Brexit is going ahead, it's in Putin's interest to make us think he engineered it - that will rub salt into the wounds of division, cast suspicion over senior figures in the government and demoralize the population, who will darkly wonder if Vlad isn't really controlling everything. Banks and co. just didn't know what they were getting into.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Really?
I see someone sitting there not giving a flying fuck; someone who will do whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter what harm it causes his own people and others; someone who is impossible to engage with on a rational basis.
To be fair though I think Trump would have done a better job of negotiating with Barnier than May/Davis has done. The British desire to be seen to be reasonable at all times has been ruthlessly exploited. Trump would have had had no such worries.
I have just neen looking at polls from previous Parliaments , and surprised that in March /April 1976 Labour enjoyed leads as high as 6% & 7% over the Tories - ie 18 months into the October 1974 Parliament. It didn't mean lot,however, re-predicting the 1979 election outcome.
Tsk, you're grasping at straws.
Those leads were down to Labour dominating the airwaves due to the leadership contest that saw Jim Callaghan become PM.
You do know new PMs get a polling boost?
Labour would have won the election in October 1978 as it would have in October 2007.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Really?
I see someone sitting there not giving a flying fuck; someone who will do whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter what harm it causes his own people and others; someone who is impossible to engage with on a rational basis.
Trump is not an idealogue. Trump is about Trump. To him the only thing that matters is what his policies do to Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and Iowa. He does not give a ____ about anything else.
Having seen how Trump handles the G7, best stock up with tinned beans and iodine pills for next Tuesdays meeting with Li'l Rocket Man.
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
But it’s not a second vote. It’s a vote on the deal - and a chance for the People to tell the incompetent and/or Russian-funded Brexitarchy to go do one.
Then call it a referendum on the deal (and I was envisaging a second vote should, at this point, probably include a remain option). This 'people's vote' stuff is transparently garbage, based on the assumption that people dislike the term referendum. If people want to back the options in a referendum they will do so, even if they are saying to focus groups they don't like the idea of referendums.
All referendums, all elections, are people's votes (and it wouldn't be a vote against the 'Brexitarcy', it would be against the people's vote last time) - trying to make a vote on the deal seem unique by terming it so is absurd, and I really cannot see any non shady reason for trying to call it something else. Do you believe a vote on the deal would be more a people's vote than any other vote by the people? If not, it's just plain silly.
Quite agree, most nauseating expression since "the people's Princess," and hard to square with the Remainer view that the Brexit vote was the unacceptable face of, um, populism.
I have just neen looking at polls from previous Parliaments , and surprised that in March /April 1976 Labour enjoyed leads as high as 6% & 7% over the Tories - ie 18 months into the October 1974 Parliament. It didn't mean lot,however, re-predicting the 1979 election outcome.
Tsk, you're grasping at straws.
Those leads were down to Labour dominating the airwaves due to the leadership contest that saw Jim Callaghan become PM.
You do know new PMs get a polling boost?
I well understand that but Labour had a clear lead prior to Callaghan taking over on April 5th. As far back as November 1975 Gallup had Labour 5.5% ahead.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Really?
I see someone sitting there not giving a flying fuck; someone who will do whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter what harm it causes his own people and others; someone who is impossible to engage with on a rational basis.
To be fair though I think Trump would have done a better job of negotiating with Barnier than May/Davis has done. The British desire to be seen to be reasonable at all times has been ruthlessly exploited. Trump would have had had no such worries.
A weak negotiating hand is a weak negotiating hand; and that is what the UK has. Not sure anyone could make much of it.
I have just neen looking at polls from previous Parliaments , and surprised that in March /April 1976 Labour enjoyed leads as high as 6% & 7% over the Tories - ie 18 months into the October 1974 Parliament. It didn't mean lot,however, re-predicting the 1979 election outcome.
Tsk, you're grasping at straws.
Those leads were down to Labour dominating the airwaves due to the leadership contest that saw Jim Callaghan become PM.
You do know new PMs get a polling boost?
Labour would have won the election in October 1978 as it would have in October 2007.
Who knows, on both counts. I'm sure people would have said May would have won an election in 2017 if she hadn't held one.
I have just neen looking at polls from previous Parliaments , and surprised that in March /April 1976 Labour enjoyed leads as high as 6% & 7% over the Tories - ie 18 months into the October 1974 Parliament. It didn't mean lot,however, re-predicting the 1979 election outcome.
Tsk, you're grasping at straws.
Those leads were down to Labour dominating the airwaves due to the leadership contest that saw Jim Callaghan become PM.
You do know new PMs get a polling boost?
Labour would have won the election in October 1978 as it would have in October 2007.
And May would have won an election had she held one last year...
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Really?
I see someone sitting there not giving a flying fuck; someone who will do whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter what harm it causes his own people and others; someone who is impossible to engage with on a rational basis.
To be fair though I think Trump would have done a better job of negotiating with Barnier than May/Davis has done. The British desire to be seen to be reasonable at all times has been ruthlessly exploited. Trump would have had had no such worries.
Only because Trump represents the US, which is powerful enough that rejecting the constraints of a rule based system is potentially viable, as a powerful Mafia gang can also be viable despite the deleterious effect on the rest of society. Britain needs the rules, which is why HMG has negotiated as it has. Putting Trump in charge wouldn't be helpful.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Really?
I see someone sitting there not giving a flying fuck; someone who will do whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter what harm it causes his own people and others; someone who is impossible to engage with on a rational basis.
I expect he might say that if he snicked himself shaving, for instance, his blood would ooze red white and blue.
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
But it’s not a second vote. It’s a vote on the deal - and a chance for the People to tell the incompetent and/or Russian-funded Brexitarchy to go do one.
If its a vote on the deal then the two options should be accept the deal or reject it - in which case it is WTO. If there is a Remain option then it is a second vote.
A reject shouldn’t (necessarily) lead to WTO. We ought to keep open the option for EEA or Remain.
We already voted on whether to Remain or not. If you want that vote then it is a second referendum under the EU's 'keep asking until they give the right answer' programme. It will be a second referendum and will be portrayed as such with the associated message of 'you voted the wrong way last time, try again'.
The vote would be to accept or reject the deal. However a vote to reject would not necessarily imply a vote for WTO.
If you genuinely want an EEA, how are you going to get there, Richard?
You need:
- May to fall and be replaced by an EEAer or; - The Commons to reject the deal and force May into an EEA deal, or; - A vote on the deal which rejects the government’s proposal and leads, probably with May’s ousting, to a pivot toward EEA.
Your hostility to a public vote is blocking one of the possible routes to an EEA solution.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Really?
I see someone sitting there not giving a flying fuck; someone who will do whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter what harm it causes his own people and others; someone who is impossible to engage with on a rational basis.
To be fair though I think Trump would have done a better job of negotiating with Barnier than May/Davis has done. The British desire to be seen to be reasonable at all times has been ruthlessly exploited. Trump would have had had no such worries.
A weak negotiating hand is a weak negotiating hand; and that is what the UK has. Not sure anyone could make much of it.
It has been a weak hand, but also played badly.
Not least because 15 months after A50 was served, the government Brexit committee cannot agree a common objective.
Trump's petulant posturing would have gone down very poorly in the Brexit negotiations. The only advantage would be knowing that WTO Brexit was nailed on earlier, so better time to prepare.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Really?
I see someone sitting there not giving a flying fuck; someone who will do whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter what harm it causes his own people and others; someone who is impossible to engage with on a rational basis.
Trump is not an idealogue. Trump is about Trump. To him the only thing that matters is what his policies do to Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and Iowa. He does not give a ____ about anything else.
Having seen how Trump handles the G7, best stock up with tinned beans and iodine pills for next Tuesdays meeting with Li'l Rocket Man.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Really?
I see someone sitting there not giving a flying fuck; someone who will do whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter what harm it causes his own people and others; someone who is impossible to engage with on a rational basis.
Trump is not an idealogue. Trump is about Trump. To him the only thing that matters is what his policies do to Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and Iowa. He does not give a ____ about anything else.
Having seen how Trump handles the G7, best stock up with tinned beans and iodine pills for next Tuesdays meeting with Li'l Rocket Man.
Perhaps this is what Boris is promising with his “meltdown”.
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
But it’s not a second vote. It’s a vote on the deal - and a chance for the People to tell the incompetent and/or Russian-funded Brexitarchy to go do one.
If its a vote on the deal then the two options should be accept the deal or reject it - in which case it is WTO. If there is a Remain option then it is a second vote.
A reject shouldn’t (necessarily) lead to WTO. We ought to keep open the option for EEA or Remain.
We already voted on whether to Remain or not. If you want that vote then it is a second referendum under the EU's 'keep asking until they give the right answer' programme. It will be a second referendum and will be portrayed as such with the associated message of 'you voted the wrong way last time, try again'.
The vote would be to accept or reject the deal. However a vote to reject would not necessarily imply a vote for WTO.
If you genuinely want an EEA, how are you going to get there, Richard?
You need:
- May to fall and be replaced by an EEAer or; - The Commons to reject the deal and force May into an EEA deal, or; - A vote on the deal which rejects the government’s proposal and leads, probably with May’s ousting, to a pivot toward EEA.
Your hostility to a public vote is blocking one of the possible routes to an EEA solution.
An EEA-type agreement is guaranteed to be one of the options? What if it is just deal or no deal?
The poll shows the public is shifting towards wanting to stay in the EU’s single market. Currently 38% would prefer to stay in the single market even if it means allowing free movement of Labour, while 34% would prefer to end free movement of labour even if it means we leave the single market.
I have just neen looking at polls from previous Parliaments , and surprised that in March /April 1976 Labour enjoyed leads as high as 6% & 7% over the Tories - ie 18 months into the October 1974 Parliament. It didn't mean lot,however, re-predicting the 1979 election outcome.
Tsk, you're grasping at straws.
Those leads were down to Labour dominating the airwaves due to the leadership contest that saw Jim Callaghan become PM.
You do know new PMs get a polling boost?
Labour would have won the election in October 1978 as it would have in October 2007.
Who knows, on both counts. I'm sure people would have said May would have won an election in 2017 if she hadn't held one.
Rebel Tory MPs who want to keep the UK in the EU customs union and single market appeared on Saturday to be backing away from defeating Theresa May in crucial parliamentary votes this week – because they fear the resulting humiliation could threaten her leadership and let in Boris Johnson.
Before a momentous week in the Commons, several votes – including on the customs union and the role of parliament in the Brexit “endgame” – remain on a knife edge. Labour, the SNP and Liberal Democrats need only a dozen or so Tories to join them to inflict humiliation on May, and throw her Brexit strategy into chaos.
But on Saturday there were signs that May and her whips had reduced the threat level from critical to severe, as key Tory rebels said they feared that striking now could trigger a full-blown leadership crisis that would destabilise the entire party and pave the way for a hardline Brexiter such as Johnson to mount a challenge.
One former minister and leading rebel among the 12 hardliners who back staying in the customs union and single market told the Observer: “It is a political calculation. If we were to defeat her on that now, does that further weaken her and give the European Research Group [led by Jacob Rees-Mogg] more opportunities to stick their knife into her? That is not where we want to be.”
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
But it’s not a second vote. It’s a vote on the deal - and a chance for the People to tell the incompetent and/or Russian-funded Brexitarchy to go do one.
If its a vote on the deal then the two options should be accept the deal or reject it - in which case it is WTO. If there is a Remain option then it is a second vote.
A reject shouldn’t (necessarily) lead to WTO. We ought to keep open the option for EEA or Remain.
We already voted on whether to Remain or not. If you want that vote then it is a second referendum under the EU's 'keep asking until they give the right answer' programme. It will be a second referendum and will be portrayed as such with the associated message of 'you voted the wrong way last time, try again'.
The vote would be to accept or reject the deal. However a vote to reject would not necessarily imply a vote for WTO.
If you genuinely want an EEA, how are you going to get there, Richard?
You need:
- May to fall and be replaced by an EEAer or; - The Commons to reject the deal and force May into an EEA deal, or; - A vote on the deal which rejects the government’s proposal and leads, probably with May’s ousting, to a pivot toward EEA.
Your hostility to a public vote is blocking one of the possible routes to an EEA solution.
An EEA-type agreement is guaranteed to be one of the options? What if it is just deal or no deal?
I think we need to test the assumption that “no deal” means WTO. I don’t know why it would. I know May would like it to, to scare us into supporting her. And the timetable makes everything almost impossible.
But fuck it, why should it? I see no need to let the country march off a cliff because “reasons”.
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
Reason #3345 for a People’s Vote.
Please just call it a second referendum. I'm not opposed to one, and in the last couple of weeks I've come to think we are probably going to have to have one, but calling it that just looks so childish, as though the first one was not a people's vote.
But it’s not a second vote. It’s a vote on the deal - and a chance for the People to tell the incompetent and/or Russian-funded Brexitarchy to go do one.
If its a vote on the deal then the two options should be accept the deal or reject it - in which case it is WTO. If there is a Remain option then it is a second vote.
A reject shouldn’t (necessarily) lead to WTO. We ought to keep open the option for EEA or Remain.
We already voted on whether to Remain or not. If you want that vote then it is a second referendum under the EU's 'keep asking until they give the right answer' programme. It will be a second referendum and will be portrayed as such with the associated message of 'you voted the wrong way last time, try again'.
The vote would be to accept or reject the deal. However a vote to reject would not necessarily imply a vote for WTO.
If you genuinely want an EEA, how are you going to get there, Richard?
You need:
- May to fall and be replaced by an EEAer or; - The Commons to reject the deal and force May into an EEA deal, or; - A vote on the deal which rejects the government’s proposal and leads, probably with May’s ousting, to a pivot toward EEA.
Your hostility to a public vote is blocking one of the possible routes to an EEA solution.
An EEA-type agreement is guaranteed to be one of the options? What if it is just deal or no deal?
I do not want another vote, but if it was Deal or no Deal (WTO), then Deal would be endorsed and accepted. Like the Substantive Commons vote, people would have to choose sides.
That is a wonderful photograph. Look at the body language. Macron is speaking. Bolton is aghast. Merkel is dominant - "What do you have to say for yourself, boy?" Theresa is tucked in behind. Juncker is steadying himself. Trump is a shrunken but defiant little boy, arms crossed. A picture is worth a 1000 words.
Really?
I see someone sitting there not giving a flying fuck; someone who will do whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter what harm it causes his own people and others; someone who is impossible to engage with on a rational basis.
Trump is not an idealogue. Trump is about Trump. To him the only thing that matters is what his policies do to Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and Iowa. He does not give a ____ about anything else.
I think it is narrower than that. To him all that matters is him.
He needs constant reassurance that he's a great president - hence the sycophancy of those around him.
He needs to be seen to win. Hence his twitter battles. And his obsession with Obama. His abuse of American power for short term demonstrations of his ability to wield that power - even if it undermines the long term interests of the US.
He's a deeply insecure man who admires strong men - Putin, Macron, Netanyahu - and needs to prove his masculinity with his trophy wives and conquests. He doesn't admire strong women who are a great threat to him.
He can't be seen to fail. He'll rationalise failure away but I fear his response if a major failure happens that he can't rationalise away. Next test is on Tuesday.
Comments
It has created a division with the Republic of Ireland but that is a different matter
You can be a modern European country without being part of a Federal EU and the Eurozone, see Switzerland and Norway
Switzerland is content to be a bystander of history. I don't think England is.
Ie pranksters, idiots and the randomly clicking to get their YouGov points
66% of those who think of themselves as more English than British voted Leave.
51% of those who think of themselves as equally English and British voted Leave, just under the 52% of voters as a whole who voted Leave.
60% of those who think of themselves as British NOT English voted Remain.
63% of those who think of themselves as more British than English voted Remain.
England survived and prospered for centuries as an independent nation before the Union with Scotland and Ireland, let alone before it joined the EEC/EU. It was also never part of the Holy Roman Empire, the Hapsburg Empire, the Napoleonic Empire or Nazi rule unlike most of Western Europe.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/
A picture is worth a 1000 words.
May still seems to be part of Team EU though:
https://twitter.com/shippersunbound/status/1005498543740727301?s=21
It’s Emperor’s New Clothes, and once someone is brave enough to point and laugh (or pivot to EEA as I suggest) the whole rotten carapace will collapse.
Now I would love to see the EEA option pursued. As I said at the end of the last thread in answer to Andy Cook's blueprint I agree with every single thing he said. It would be my dream Brexit. But I also know it is pie in the sky now for me to think I will get it. It would be painted as an utter betrayal and neither Corbyn nor May have the balls (if you will excuse the phrase) to support it. So we will continue with May's mishandling and Corbyn's 'away with the fairies' approach and the most likely result I see now is the WTO Brexit.
Suboptimal but still better than staying in.
1) Recant your treasonous support for Russia Leave
or
2) Be sent to The Tower
It needs a Gove or Johnson to front it, but the moment of “betrayal” is over.
Sure, the loony fringe will cry foul, but they wil do that anyway and they are increasingly marginal figures.
If you have courage of your convictions you should join the EEA campaign.
For psychopolitical reasons that aren't just connected with the survival of the Tory party a "man of the moment" will at some point emerge. There is no way Theresa May will be PM in 2022. A figure will emerge who rams the country down the toilet as the moneyed classes fly off across the Atlantic adopts the mantle of "saviour".
But the dislike and distrust in which Boris is held by apparatchiks at the Treasury and elsewhere, including by some senior Tory politicians, may be sufficient to stop him. The upper "permanent state" at the core of government is much larger in Britain than in the US, and there's no precedent for a new PM holding a bonfire of the Humphreys. Calling the Treasury "the heart of Remain" is Steve Bannon "Leninist" talk. While the media have not dwelt too long on previous resignations from the civil service that have happened in connection with criminal wars, I doubt a Boris rampant will be able to decimate the top bracket and pack it with personally loyal fanatics.
Jacob Rees-Mogg also has a great deal of charisma. What did those who think Mogg couldn't win a comfortable majority think about Tony Blair in 1994?
The sharp Alastair Campbell, who knows how to craft the image required to win a landslide for what becomes a long-term popular government if anyone does, and who doubtless has good judgement as to when that's possible and when it's not, tried recently to rubbish JRM. That probably wasn't strategic, but there's little reason to do it if he's not scared.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5p5Mc_AZ0c
Arron Banks, the millionaire businessman who helped fund Brexit, had three meetings with the Russian ambassador to Britain — raising explosive questions about attempts by Moscow to influence the referendum result.
Emails by Banks and his sidekick Andy Wigmore, shown to The Sunday Times, reveal an extensive web of links between Banks’s Leave.EU campaign and Russian officials.
They show they made repeated contact with officials to discuss business opportunities and issues of mutual interest throughout the referendum campaign and its aftermath.
In his book on the referendum, The Bad Boys of Brexit, and in another public statement, Banks claimed to have had only one meeting with Putin’s envoy Alexander Yakovenko, in September 2015.
But today The Sunday Times can reveal that the pair also had lunch with the ambassador just three days after they and Nigel Farage visited US president Donald Trump in New York in November 2016.
Last night Banks admitted that he handed over telephone numbers for members of Trump’s transition team to Russian officials.
Trump, whose campaign staff are under investigation by a special prosecutor probing whether they colluded with Moscow, stunned the world yesterday by calling for Russia to be readmitted to the G7 group of nations.
The 40,000 emails were obtained by the journalist Isabel Oakeshott, Banks’s ghostwriter on The Bad Boys of Brexit. She is now writing a book with Lord Ashcroft, a former treasurer of the Conservative Party, that covers Russian “hybrid warfare” techniques to influence western politics.
She came forward after her emails were “hacked”. They have now been passed to the House of Commons digital, culture, media and sport select committee, which is investigating Russian attempts to influence western politics with fake news.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/exclusive-emails-reveal-russian-links-of-millionaire-brexit-backer-arron-banks-6lf5xdp6h
I suspect most Leave supporters on here would be amongst that 73%. It doesn't mean we think the vote was wrong nor that Brexit will be a disaster. We just think it could be better handled.
There are regular polls showing that people think the NHS is in big trouble. That doesn't mean they are anti-NHS, nor that they think it is a bad idea, just that they believe it is being badly managed by the current administration.
Oi, there was no need to throw my coat at me!
Nor am I alone. There are plenty of commentators such as Richard North who were strongly in favour of the EEA option for many years. If you think criticism of the Leave campaign is strong on here you should go and see what he and is supporters have to say about it. It would make your eyes water.
But the reasons that they've been claiming have become thinner and thinner.
By now they expected to be knee deep in closed car factories, departing bankers and crops rotting in the fields.
In a decade or so after a number of years of no free movement and tighter immigration controls rejoining the EEA may be an option again but not now.
In case you hadn’t noticed, Putin has cleverly forged links with every populist movement in the West.
Even in my green and innocent homeland - NZ - the new(ish) coalition has made a bizarre pledge to secure closer economic links with Russia at the behest of the Ukippish NZ First party.
From California secession to Five Star, and most prominently of all Brexit and Trump - just watch those roubles work.
Get up to speed, grandaddy. The arguments that “won” the vote are not enough to sustain it.
I expected Brexit to go badly but I think it is going well so far
All referendums, all elections, are people's votes (and it wouldn't be a vote against the 'Brexitarcy', it would be against the people's vote last time) - trying to make a vote on the deal seem unique by terming it so is absurd, and I really cannot see any non shady reason for trying to call it something else. Do you believe a vote on the deal would be more a people's vote than any other vote by the people? If not, it's just plain silly.
Similarly Brown was an absolute disaster. That doesn't and didn't undermine Britain being outside the Eurozone it undermined Brown.
Brexit will continue. May has her days numbered.
This is it from a different perspective:
https://twitter.com/Scavino45/status/1005464870551150592?s=19
Those leads were down to Labour dominating the airwaves due to the leadership contest that saw Jim Callaghan become PM.
You do know new PMs get a polling boost?
I see someone sitting there not giving a flying fuck; someone who will do whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter what harm it causes his own people and others; someone who is impossible to engage with on a rational basis.
We ought to keep open the option for EEA or Remain.
https://twitter.com/JohnOBrennan2/status/1005450046836498434?s=19
However a vote to reject would not necessarily imply a vote for WTO.
If you genuinely want an EEA, how are you going to get there, Richard?
You need:
- May to fall and be replaced by an EEAer or;
- The Commons to reject the deal and force May into an EEA deal, or;
- A vote on the deal which rejects the government’s proposal and leads, probably with May’s ousting, to a pivot toward EEA.
Your hostility to a public vote is blocking one of the possible routes to an EEA solution.
Not least because 15 months after A50 was served, the government Brexit committee cannot agree a common objective.
Trump's petulant posturing would have gone down very poorly in the Brexit negotiations. The only advantage would be knowing that WTO Brexit was nailed on earlier, so better time to prepare.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/09/fewer-leave-voters-back-tories-handling-of-brexit-poll
Before a momentous week in the Commons, several votes – including on the customs union and the role of parliament in the Brexit “endgame” – remain on a knife edge. Labour, the SNP and Liberal Democrats need only a dozen or so Tories to join them to inflict humiliation on May, and throw her Brexit strategy into chaos.
But on Saturday there were signs that May and her whips had reduced the threat level from critical to severe, as key Tory rebels said they feared that striking now could trigger a full-blown leadership crisis that would destabilise the entire party and pave the way for a hardline Brexiter such as Johnson to mount a challenge.
One former minister and leading rebel among the 12 hardliners who back staying in the customs union and single market told the Observer: “It is a political calculation. If we were to defeat her on that now, does that further weaken her and give the European Research Group [led by Jacob Rees-Mogg] more opportunities to stick their knife into her? That is not where we want to be.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/09/stop-boris-theresa-may-mps-backing-crucial-votes-brexit
But fuck it, why should it? I see no need to let the country march off a cliff because “reasons”.
He needs constant reassurance that he's a great president - hence the sycophancy of those around him.
He needs to be seen to win. Hence his twitter battles. And his obsession with Obama. His abuse of American power for short term demonstrations of his ability to wield that power - even if it undermines the long term interests of the US.
He's a deeply insecure man who admires strong men - Putin, Macron, Netanyahu - and needs to prove his masculinity with his trophy wives and conquests. He doesn't admire strong women who are a great threat to him.
He can't be seen to fail. He'll rationalise failure away but I fear his response if a major failure happens that he can't rationalise away. Next test is on Tuesday.