Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The sum of all fears

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited October 3 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The sum of all fears

Nobody kicks a dead dog, Dale Carnegie noted.  Based on that observation, we can conclude two things from the Conservative party conference.  First, the government is very fearful that a fresh referendum is a runner.  And secondly, Boris Johnson remains a serious and potent threat.  Speaker after speaker at the Conservative party conference lined up to launch an attack on one or other of these.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Really enjoyed reading this
  • Love the title as well, great Tom Clancy book.
  • Like Mad King George?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,320
    I can buy this - the fundamental problems remain in place, and I don't see why a relatively positive conference for May will make squaring the circles needs for a deal with parliament or the EU any easier.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 11,786
    Third like Boris
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 10,360
    FBI has not been given the authority to interview Kavanaugh (or Ford).

    Backing him a 1/3 seems super smart by me now.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 2,708
    I'm not sure that what your duo of sooth-sayers may say or not say worries me at all. I'd listen to you well ahead of them., What they may not see, and we may not see and may not say worries me far more. Brexit is a gamble. It's more of a gamble now than ever given the slight shittiness exhibited by the EU.
  • Carolus_RexCarolus_Rex Posts: 1,357

    Really enjoyed reading this

    Not least for the Calvin Coolidge reference.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460
    Spurs 0 - Barcelona 2 (30 mins)
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,313
    Nice article, thanks.

    And hmmm .....

    Michel Barnier ..... is not sure that he will have a success story to point to in his main work for the last two years.

    I'd quite like to know what his definition of success is .....

    Good evening, everybody.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,121
    IanB2 said:

    Third like Boris

    Actually you were fifth in a field of three.

    Put that way, sounds even more like Boris...
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 9,827
    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,121
    That tweet is a very unconvincing comment by the good Mr Eagles.

    Surely he would go down swinging by claiming The Last Jedi is a good film?
  • My iPhone Xs Max is brilliant, not been an issue for me.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,121
    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460
    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,121

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,828
    I like your posts generally but you have an utterly bizarre obsession with Apple. It’s downright weird!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 31,241

    My iPhone Xs Max is brilliant, not been an issue for me.
    You appear to be one of the lucky ones.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Not sure his mps are so sanquine
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 5,782

    Love the title as well, great Tom Clancy book.

    The film was really good too, unusually for book adaptations.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,121

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Not sure his mps are so sanquine
    His MPs have just had several graphic illustrations of what happens to serial rebels who defy the Dear Leader.

    Which remains amusing when you consider he followed the Tory whip more times than David Cameron.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 5,591
    To me the interesting part of the speech was the "those seeking a perfect Brexit, risk getting no Brexit"

    The first time that the PM has expressed the view that Brexit may not happen. Quite significant.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 7,191
    edited October 3
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Really, really not. Even if you think Corbyn and McDonnell would have a private preference for a No Deal/Rock-Hard Brexit (I don't think they do, but I accept there's enough in their past voting records on Europe matters to make an argument for it), they have enough political sense to know they can't have their fingerprints on it. They will 100% vote to block a No Deal Brexit.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,320

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Not sure his mps are so sanquine
    They may be relying on the hope that the government not getting a deal, somehow, gets them to a position of remain. I think the good doctor is quite right that, for whatever reason, Labour simply will not back any deal that May comes back with, not in sufficient numbers to overcome the rebel Tories at any rate.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 34,621
    edited October 3
    Anazina said:

    I like your posts generally but you have an utterly bizarre obsession with Apple. It’s downright weird!
    Is that better or worse than a bizarre obsession with the Alternative Vote system?

    Asking for a friend. :smiley:
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 3,085
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Let alone get through 28 other legislatures.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 1,946
    Foxy said:

    To me the interesting part of the speech was the "those seeking a perfect Brexit, risk getting no Brexit"

    The first time that the PM has expressed the view that Brexit may not happen. Quite significant.

    Throwing down the gauntlet in that snippet will not escape the attention of the ERG.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,964
    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    While it's by no means a "zero chance", if a deal is struck down by the Commons, surely May resigns and we either have a new Conservative leader (who will likely as not ask for an extension), or we have a General Election, or we have new leader followed by a new election.

    In each of these scenarios, I think the UK government asks for an extension.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 11,337
    edited October 3
    Foxy said:

    To me the interesting part of the speech was the "those seeking a perfect Brexit, risk getting no Brexit"

    The first time that the PM has expressed the view that Brexit may not happen. Quite significant.

    Not convinced. May's strategy seems quite clear and unsubtle:

    1. Terrify everyone with the dreadful consequences of No Deal. Aircraft grounded, food shortages, banking chaos, whatever. The worse the better. It may indeed mostly be true.
    2. Set up a choice of "whatever she comes up with" vs No Deal vs No Brexit.
    3. Dare everyone to risk the option that scares them most.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,483
    Just to be clear. I am not going anywhere in case people got that impression in the previous thread. I just could not be bothered arguing about what others project on to me.

    I did not respond to further comments because I was called away for domestic issues (a woman's work is never done). Nonetheless, thank you to all for the supportive posts.

    As far as Brexit goes, I am prepared to wait and see what happens
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,964
    dixiedean said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Let alone get through 28 other legislatures.
    Treaties, though, can go provisionally into force before they're fully ratified. So, the EU's Economic Partnership Agreement with Botswana has not been ratified by everyone but is provisionally in force, and will remain so until it is either ratified by everyone, or one of the parties advises that it will be not be able to ratify (by it being struck down in a national parliament).

    For this reason, the real deadline is further away than it appears.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 26,049
    Her total failure to sell Chequers both at home and abroad should be an abject lesson for the textbooks in future on the art of political salesmanship.

    Small example: it took her two months to produce a reasonable Facebook video attempting to sell it, and by then it was far too little too late. Her enemies had got there first and it was on life support anyway.

    She being convinced, herself, just isn't enough as PM. If she'd had the terrible two still with her they might have aggressively briefed and terrified a few colleagues into their place, but that wouldn't have worked either.

    I'm far from convinced she's learnt this lesson, or ever will.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,320

    Her total failure to sell Chequers both at home and abroad should be an abject lesson for the textbooks in future on the art of political salesmanship.

    Small example: it took her two months to produce a reasonable Facebook video attempting to sell it, and by then it was far too little too late. Her enemies had got there first and it was on life support anyway.

    She being convinced, herself, just isn't enough as PM. If she'd had the terrible two still with her they might have aggressively briefed and terrified a few colleagues into their place, but that wouldn't have worked either.

    I'm far from convinced she's learnt this lesson, or ever will.

    How can she learn it if those who are opposed to it don't act to stop her?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 5,591

    Foxy said:

    To me the interesting part of the speech was the "those seeking a perfect Brexit, risk getting no Brexit"

    The first time that the PM has expressed the view that Brexit may not happen. Quite significant.

    Not convinced. May's strategy seems quite clear and unsubtle:

    1. Terrify everyone with the dreadful consequences of No Deal. Aircraft grounded, food shortages, banking chaos, whatever. The worse the better. It may indeed mostly be true.
    2. Set up a choice of "whatever she comes up with" vs No Deal vs No Brexit.
    3. Dare everyone to risk the option that scares them most.
    Yes, I do not think there is a cunning plan.

    It is just interesting to see an admission that we may not Brexit from the very top of government.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460

    Just to be clear. I am not going anywhere in case people got that impression in the previous thread. I just could not be bothered arguing about what others project on to me.

    I did not respond to further comments because I was called away for domestic issues (a woman's work is never done). Nonetheless, thank you to all for the supportive posts.

    As far as Brexit goes, I am prepared to wait and see what happens

    +1
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,121
    Danny565 said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Really, really not. Even if you think Corbyn and McDonnell would have a private preference for a No Deal/Rock-Hard Brexit (I don't think they do, but I accept there's enough in their past voting records on Europe matters to make an argument for it), they have enough political sense to know they can't have their fingerprints on it. They will 100% vote to block a No Deal Brexit.
    I am irresistibly reminded of General Melchett.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 26,049
    On topic, I still think a deal will be done, and it will pass both parliaments, with a lot of grumbling. Both sides will try and save face and move on, from sheer emotional and political exhaustion, if nothing else.

    The 2nd referendum chat really hasn't helped her. It's got a lot of influential people in the EU (who only talk to people who already agree with them, remember) very belligerent on Brexit, including those like Guy Verhofstadht, who smell blood.

    I'd say No Deal is still as high a chance as 45%.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 26,049
    kle4 said:

    Her total failure to sell Chequers both at home and abroad should be an abject lesson for the textbooks in future on the art of political salesmanship.

    Small example: it took her two months to produce a reasonable Facebook video attempting to sell it, and by then it was far too little too late. Her enemies had got there first and it was on life support anyway.

    She being convinced, herself, just isn't enough as PM. If she'd had the terrible two still with her they might have aggressively briefed and terrified a few colleagues into their place, but that wouldn't have worked either.

    I'm far from convinced she's learnt this lesson, or ever will.

    How can she learn it if those who are opposed to it don't act to stop her?
    I'd have thought she'd have learnt something from GE2017 last year.

    She hasn't. Well, she's learnt a little something, which is to "go with the flow" on the dance moves and be slightly less robotic, but she hasn't learnt anything politically.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,460
    ydoethur said:

    Danny565 said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Really, really not. Even if you think Corbyn and McDonnell would have a private preference for a No Deal/Rock-Hard Brexit (I don't think they do, but I accept there's enough in their past voting records on Europe matters to make an argument for it), they have enough political sense to know they can't have their fingerprints on it. They will 100% vote to block a No Deal Brexit.
    I am irresistibly reminded of General Melchett.
    Very Good Darling ....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,320

    kle4 said:

    Her total failure to sell Chequers both at home and abroad should be an abject lesson for the textbooks in future on the art of political salesmanship.

    Small example: it took her two months to produce a reasonable Facebook video attempting to sell it, and by then it was far too little too late. Her enemies had got there first and it was on life support anyway.

    She being convinced, herself, just isn't enough as PM. If she'd had the terrible two still with her they might have aggressively briefed and terrified a few colleagues into their place, but that wouldn't have worked either.

    I'm far from convinced she's learnt this lesson, or ever will.

    How can she learn it if those who are opposed to it don't act to stop her?
    I'd have thought she'd have learnt something from GE2017 last year.

    She hasn't. Well, she's learnt a little something, which is to "go with the flow" on the dance moves and be slightly less robotic, but she hasn't learnt anything politically.
    She is still PM and has to try to do the job so long as she is there and thinks the probably replacements would be even worse. Her solutions do not appear to be working, but resigning at this point won't help and clearly she thinks the other solutions are even worse. If she cannot learn enough to try something else the party has to have the balls to remove her.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 3,085
    edited October 3
    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Let alone get through 28 other legislatures.
    Treaties, though, can go provisionally into force before they're fully ratified. So, the EU's Economic Partnership Agreement with Botswana has not been ratified by everyone but is provisionally in force, and will remain so until it is either ratified by everyone, or one of the parties advises that it will be not be able to ratify (by it being struck down in a national parliament).

    For this reason, the real deadline is further away than it appears.
    I understand that. My point was that a last minute deal, cobbled together for the purpose achieving an agreement capable of passing our Parliament is far more likely to be unacceptable to other countries than one which can be pre-sold to other governments, with any glaring problems identified and ironed out.
    Most treaties aren't subject to time pressure.
    Although we may be past that point anyway.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,121
    JackW said:

    ydoethur said:

    Danny565 said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Really, really not. Even if you think Corbyn and McDonnell would have a private preference for a No Deal/Rock-Hard Brexit (I don't think they do, but I accept there's enough in their past voting records on Europe matters to make an argument for it), they have enough political sense to know they can't have their fingerprints on it. They will 100% vote to block a No Deal Brexit.
    I am irresistibly reminded of General Melchett.
    Very Good Darling ....
    Oh baaaah!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,964

    On topic, I still think a deal will be done, and it will pass both parliaments, with a lot of grumbling. Both sides will try and save face and move on, from sheer emotional and political exhaustion, if nothing else.

    The 2nd referendum chat really hasn't helped her. It's got a lot of influential people in the EU (who only talk to people who already agree with them, remember) very belligerent on Brexit, including those like Guy Verhofstadht, who smell blood.

    I'd say No Deal is still as high a chance as 45%.

    That could happen for a number of reasons:

    1. Mrs May and M. Barnier are unable to reach an agreement.
    2. The UK parliament will not agree to the agreement.
    3. The EU parliament ditto.

    I would discount 3, as it seems pretty unlikely. But which of 1 and 2 do you think the most likely to create No Deal? (Even better, give me probabilities!)

    My personal view is that 1 is actually quite unlikely, despite everything that is said in the press. But 2 is quite likely indeed.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 835
    edited October 3

    Her total failure to sell Chequers both at home and abroad should be an abject lesson for the textbooks in future on the art of political salesmanship.

    Small example: it took her two months to produce a reasonable Facebook video attempting to sell it, and by then it was far too little too late. Her enemies had got there first and it was on life support anyway.

    She being convinced, herself, just isn't enough as PM. If she'd had the terrible two still with her they might have aggressively briefed and terrified a few colleagues into their place, but that wouldn't have worked either.

    I'm far from convinced she's learnt this lesson, or ever will.

    I am no fan of May but she is better than the two alternatives of Corbyn or Boris Johnson.

    Johnson has said nothing and done nothing that would suggest an alternative strategy that does not close down sections of the economy. Two mass production car producers have said they are going to shut down after next march because of the uncertainty and reliability of the supply chain for a period.

    Arm chair generals like you have succumbed to some kind of mass mental illness over Brexit where you are willing for the economy to go down the tubes for no reason. Britain will be a diminished power with a smaller economy, that is less able to demonstrate its power economically, politically and militarily. People like you are advocating that we in effect put sanctions on our own economy. Bonkers!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,964
    dixiedean said:

    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Let alone get through 28 other legislatures.
    Treaties, though, can go provisionally into force before they're fully ratified. So, the EU's Economic Partnership Agreement with Botswana has not been ratified by everyone but is provisionally in force, and will remain so until it is either ratified by everyone, or one of the parties advises that it will be not be able to ratify (by it being struck down in a national parliament).

    For this reason, the real deadline is further away than it appears.
    I understand that. My point was that a last minute deal, cobbled together for the purpose achieving an agreement capable of passing our Parliament is far more likely to be unacceptable to other countries than one which can be pre-sold to other governments, with any glaring problems identified and ironed out.
    Most treaties aren't subject to time pressure.
    Although we may be past that point anyway.
    Does the Withdrawal Agreement (including transition) require ratification by all the parliaments? Or only the (eventual, presumably) Free Trade Agreement?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,121
    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Let alone get through 28 other legislatures.
    Treaties, though, can go provisionally into force before they're fully ratified. So, the EU's Economic Partnership Agreement with Botswana has not been ratified by everyone but is provisionally in force, and will remain so until it is either ratified by everyone, or one of the parties advises that it will be not be able to ratify (by it being struck down in a national parliament).

    For this reason, the real deadline is further away than it appears.
    I understand that. My point was that a last minute deal, cobbled together for the purpose achieving an agreement capable of passing our Parliament is far more likely to be unacceptable to other countries than one which can be pre-sold to other governments, with any glaring problems identified and ironed out.
    Most treaties aren't subject to time pressure.
    Although we may be past that point anyway.
    Does the Withdrawal Agreement (including transition) require ratification by all the parliaments? Or only the (eventual, presumably) Free Trade Agreement?
    Withdrawal agreement appears to be QMV, the later FTA would be unanimous.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 31,779

    Love the title as well, great Tom Clancy book.

    “You may take the most gallant sailor, the most intrepid airman, or the most audacious soldier, put them at a table together—what do you get? The sum of their fears.” —16 November 1943

    Winston Churchill
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 26,049

    Her total failure to sell Chequers both at home and abroad should be an abject lesson for the textbooks in future on the art of political salesmanship.

    Small example: it took her two months to produce a reasonable Facebook video attempting to sell it, and by then it was far too little too late. Her enemies had got there first and it was on life support anyway.

    She being convinced, herself, just isn't enough as PM. If she'd had the terrible two still with her they might have aggressively briefed and terrified a few colleagues into their place, but that wouldn't have worked either.

    I'm far from convinced she's learnt this lesson, or ever will.

    I am no fan of May but she is better than the two alternatives of Corbyn or Boris Johnson.

    Johnson has said nothing and done nothing that would suggest an alternative strategy that does not close down sections of the economy. Two mass production car producers have said they are going to shut down after next march because of the uncertainty and reliability of the supply chain for a period.

    Arm chair generals like you have succumbed to some kind of mass mental illness over Brexit where you are willing for the economy to go down the tubes for no reason. Britain will be a diminished power with a smaller economy, that is less able to demonstrate its power economically, politically and militarily. People like you are advocating that we in effect put sanctions on our own economy. Bonkers!
    Lovely to hear from you.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 5,591
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Let alone get through 28 other legislatures.
    Treaties, though, can go provisionally into force before they're fully ratified. So, the EU's Economic Partnership Agreement with Botswana has not been ratified by everyone but is provisionally in force, and will remain so until it is either ratified by everyone, or one of the parties advises that it will be not be able to ratify (by it being struck down in a national parliament).

    For this reason, the real deadline is further away than it appears.
    I understand that. My point was that a last minute deal, cobbled together for the purpose achieving an agreement capable of passing our Parliament is far more likely to be unacceptable to other countries than one which can be pre-sold to other governments, with any glaring problems identified and ironed out.
    Most treaties aren't subject to time pressure.
    Although we may be past that point anyway.
    Does the Withdrawal Agreement (including transition) require ratification by all the parliaments? Or only the (eventual, presumably) Free Trade Agreement?
    Withdrawal agreement appears to be QMV, the later FTA would be unanimous.
    One of many reasons, including getting through our parliament, why Blind Brexit is likely.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 26,049
    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, I still think a deal will be done, and it will pass both parliaments, with a lot of grumbling. Both sides will try and save face and move on, from sheer emotional and political exhaustion, if nothing else.

    The 2nd referendum chat really hasn't helped her. It's got a lot of influential people in the EU (who only talk to people who already agree with them, remember) very belligerent on Brexit, including those like Guy Verhofstadht, who smell blood.

    I'd say No Deal is still as high a chance as 45%.

    That could happen for a number of reasons:

    1. Mrs May and M. Barnier are unable to reach an agreement.
    2. The UK parliament will not agree to the agreement.
    3. The EU parliament ditto.

    I would discount 3, as it seems pretty unlikely. But which of 1 and 2 do you think the most likely to create No Deal? (Even better, give me probabilities!)

    My personal view is that 1 is actually quite unlikely, despite everything that is said in the press. But 2 is quite likely indeed.
    I think it's more similar. If she gets a deal the pressure to pass it will be immense as will the desire to move on to the next stage.

    I can't be arsed working out percentages. It would involve a little bit of Venn diagramming.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 26,049
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Her total failure to sell Chequers both at home and abroad should be an abject lesson for the textbooks in future on the art of political salesmanship.

    Small example: it took her two months to produce a reasonable Facebook video attempting to sell it, and by then it was far too little too late. Her enemies had got there first and it was on life support anyway.

    She being convinced, herself, just isn't enough as PM. If she'd had the terrible two still with her they might have aggressively briefed and terrified a few colleagues into their place, but that wouldn't have worked either.

    I'm far from convinced she's learnt this lesson, or ever will.

    How can she learn it if those who are opposed to it don't act to stop her?
    I'd have thought she'd have learnt something from GE2017 last year.

    She hasn't. Well, she's learnt a little something, which is to "go with the flow" on the dance moves and be slightly less robotic, but she hasn't learnt anything politically.
    She is still PM and has to try to do the job so long as she is there and thinks the probably replacements would be even worse. Her solutions do not appear to be working, but resigning at this point won't help and clearly she thinks the other solutions are even worse. If she cannot learn enough to try something else the party has to have the balls to remove her.
    Why do you think I'm advocating resignation or replacement?

    I'm simply observing she's very slow to learn some very obvious lessons.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 31,779
    I’m surprised people were surprised May didn’t utter the word “Chequers” in her speech - it was missing from her post Salzburg statement too.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460
    My take on today

    Inspiration to use dancing queen for entry to the podium

    Confident speech warning the hard brexiteers push too hard and no brexit

    Generous to Dianne Abbott and paid tribute to Jo Cox

    Made a very clear distinction between labour mps and Corbyn's group
    (I expect this theme to continue as it is easier to isolate the hard left)

    Announced council house building by local authorities

    Improved cancer prevention and treatments

    Investment in the NHS and social care

    Froze fuel duty and

    Legislate for staff to retain tips

    Hetrosexual civil partnerships

    End to austerity



    She still faces mountains in front of her but I bet she has a relaxed evening tonight with Philip in no 10

    PS - If I missed anything please add it to the list
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 3,085
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Let alone get through 28 other legislatures.
    Treaties, though, can go provisionally into force before they're fully ratified. So, the EU's Economic Partnership Agreement with Botswana has not been ratified by everyone but is provisionally in force, and will remain so until it is either ratified by everyone, or one of the parties advises that it will be not be able to ratify (by it being struck down in a national parliament).

    For this reason, the real deadline is further away than it appears.
    I understand that. My point was that a last minute deal, cobbled together for the purpose achieving an agreement capable of passing our Parliament is far more likely to be unacceptable to other countries than one which can be pre-sold to other governments, with any glaring problems identified and ironed out.
    Most treaties aren't subject to time pressure.
    Although we may be past that point anyway.
    Does the Withdrawal Agreement (including transition) require ratification by all the parliaments? Or only the (eventual, presumably) Free Trade Agreement?
    Withdrawal agreement appears to be QMV, the later FTA would be unanimous.
    Cheers. This Brexit is too complex for my poor little head. In which case I withdraw my ill-informed observation. Still feel a last minute agreement would be sub-optimal.
    Also. If it is QMV, what incentive is there for a Nation which is outvoted on a Withdrawal Agreement to vote in favour of an FTA at a later date when they are still unhappy with the original terms of the withdrawal?
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 905
    I am having lunch with an ex head of The CAA tomorrow, any questions I will ask them and report back.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 31,779
    I was slightly surprised as I thought the edict had come down “no no-deal preparation”. But this would mean planes could keep flying (on safety grounds at any rate).
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,320

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Her total failure to sell Chequers both at home and abroad should be an abject lesson for the textbooks in future on the art of political salesmanship.

    Small example: it took her two months to produce a reasonable Facebook video attempting to sell it, and by then it was far too little too late. Her enemies had got there first and it was on life support anyway.

    She being convinced, herself, just isn't enough as PM. If she'd had the terrible two still with her they might have aggressively briefed and terrified a few colleagues into their place, but that wouldn't have worked either.

    I'm far from convinced she's learnt this lesson, or ever will.

    How can she learn it if those who are opposed to it don't act to stop her?
    I'd have thought she'd have learnt something from GE2017 last year.

    She hasn't. Well, she's learnt a little something, which is to "go with the flow" on the dance moves and be slightly less robotic, but she hasn't learnt anything politically.
    She is still PM and has to try to do the job so long as she is there and thinks the probably replacements would be even worse. Her solutions do not appear to be working, but resigning at this point won't help and clearly she thinks the other solutions are even worse. If she cannot learn enough to try something else the party has to have the balls to remove her.
    Why do you think I'm advocating resignation or replacement?

    I'm simply observing she's very slow to learn some very obvious lessons.
    Why do you think I was suggesting you are advocating either of those things? I was outlining my own view that if she is unable to learn lessons and the path she is on is so bad, others need to step up and remove her.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,320
    Liverpool playing terribly tonight - what has happened to them over the last 3-4 weeks? Even when they were winning they still were not looking quite right.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 7,191
    ydoethur said:

    Danny565 said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is there a deal that May can get through the commons?

    Yes. No Deal, which doesn't require a further commons vote.

    This is one reason why despite the very real likelihood of disaster No Deal has always been the likeliest outcome.
    Or last minute deal
    The point is a last minute Deal might well not get through the Commons. Labour, and especially Corbyn, are sufficiently short-sighted and stupid to back no deal for partisan advantage without fully understanding the consequences.

    If it goes to the last minute, back no deal.
    Really, really not. Even if you think Corbyn and McDonnell would have a private preference for a No Deal/Rock-Hard Brexit (I don't think they do, but I accept there's enough in their past voting records on Europe matters to make an argument for it), they have enough political sense to know they can't have their fingerprints on it. They will 100% vote to block a No Deal Brexit.
    I am irresistibly reminded of General Melchett.
    Amusing. How's your prediction of Labour falling to 25% in the polls going?
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,417
    Nice piece from Mr Meeks, except for his egregious use of "people's vote". It is a grotesque phrase, worthy of some cheap dictatorship claiming it is a "people's republic". What is a people's vote anyway? How does it differ from a 2nd referendum? Was the first one was an animals' vote? Did only voles and weasels get a say?

    Pff.

    Nonetheless, I have to say that, following recent convos with lots of people, I now anecodtally reckon a 2nd vote is a real possibility. Indeed maybe a probability.

    I've heard Leavers and Remainers alike say Fuck it, we have to vote again.

    The mood is slowly swinging. The fact that parliament will vote down any deal (unless TMay produces a miracle - highly unlikely) likewise means we are shit-creeked, politically.

    A 2nd referendum is the backpaddle that will save the day. Unless it returns the same vote as before. Hah.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 26,049
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Her total failure to sell Chequers both at home and abroad should be an abject lesson for the textbooks in future on the art of political salesmanship.

    Small example: it took her two months to produce a reasonable Facebook video attempting to sell it, and by then it was far too little too late. Her enemies had got there first and it was on life support anyway.

    She being convinced, herself, just isn't enough as PM. If she'd had the terrible two still with her they might have aggressively briefed and terrified a few colleagues into their place, but that wouldn't have worked either.

    I'm far from convinced she's learnt this lesson, or ever will.

    How can she learn it if those who are opposed to it don't act to stop her?
    I'd have thought she'd have learnt something from GE2017 last year.

    She hasn't. Well, she's learnt a little something, which is to "go with the flow" on the dance moves and be slightly less robotic, but she hasn't learnt anything politically.
    She is still PM and has to try to do the job so long as she is there and thinks the probably replacements would be even worse. Her solutions do not appear to be working, but resigning at this point won't help and clearly she thinks the other solutions are even worse. If she cannot learn enough to try something else the party has to have the balls to remove her.
    Why do you think I'm advocating resignation or replacement?

    I'm simply observing she's very slow to learn some very obvious lessons.
    Why do you think I was suggesting you are advocating either of those things? I was outlining my own view that if she is unable to learn lessons and the path she is on is so bad, others need to step up and remove her.
    Fair enough.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,320
    SeanT said:

    Nice piece from Mr Meeks, except for his egregious use of "people's vote". It is a grotesque phrase, worthy of some cheap dictatorship claiming it is a "people's republic". What is a people's vote anyway? How does it differ from a 2nd referendum? Was the first one was an animals' vote? Did only voles and weasels get a say?

    Pff.

    Nonetheless, I have to say that, following recent convos with lots of people, I now anecodtally reckon a 2nd vote is a real possibility. Indeed maybe a probability.

    I've heard Leavers and Remainers alike say Fuck it, we have to vote again.

    The mood is slowly swinging. The fact that parliament will vote down any deal (unless TMay produces a miracle - highly unlikely) likewise means we are shit-creeked, politically.

    A 2nd referendum is the backpaddle that will save the day. Unless it returns the same vote as before. Hah.

    It clearly won't be exactly the same, since it won't be some generic leave, it may or may not have different leave options and may or maynot include remain. But while it may not solve the issue, it seems parliament cannot either at present, and it should be tried before another GE (which is no less likely to return something less chaotic).
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 9,827
    Can anyone describe the deal a majority in the Commons could vote for?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460
    Napoli 1 - Liverpool 0 (90 mins goal)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,320
    Jonathan said:

    Can anyone describe the deal a majority in the Commons could vote for?

    Not with the parliamentary arithmetic we currently have.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,417
    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:

    Nice piece from Mr Meeks, except for his egregious use of "people's vote". It is a grotesque phrase, worthy of some cheap dictatorship claiming it is a "people's republic". What is a people's vote anyway? How does it differ from a 2nd referendum? Was the first one was an animals' vote? Did only voles and weasels get a say?

    Pff.

    Nonetheless, I have to say that, following recent convos with lots of people, I now anecodtally reckon a 2nd vote is a real possibility. Indeed maybe a probability.

    I've heard Leavers and Remainers alike say Fuck it, we have to vote again.

    The mood is slowly swinging. The fact that parliament will vote down any deal (unless TMay produces a miracle - highly unlikely) likewise means we are shit-creeked, politically.

    A 2nd referendum is the backpaddle that will save the day. Unless it returns the same vote as before. Hah.

    It clearly won't be exactly the same, since it won't be some generic leave, it may or may not have different leave options and may or maynot include remain. But while it may not solve the issue, it seems parliament cannot either at present, and it should be tried before another GE (which is no less likely to return something less chaotic).
    I reckon the chance of a 2nd ref must be about 50% now. We're at an impasse. I begin to see no other way out.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 7,664
    I think this batch of licences apply to services that non EU companies supply to EU airlines, rather than the right of UK airlines to fly to the EU.

    BTW I don't think all air traffic will stop. The issue I suspect is the uncertainty. If you buy a ticket three months ahead you won't know for certain if that flight will happen. Or else you can't buy the ticket at all.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460
    Jonathan said:

    Can anyone describe the deal a majority in the Commons could vote for?

    Not at this stage - need to wait and see.

    However, I do think TM warning to hard brexiteers that they could see no brexit is a coded warning that rejection of her deal or no deal makes a second referendum very likely
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,032
    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, I still think a deal will be done, and it will pass both parliaments, with a lot of grumbling. Both sides will try and save face and move on, from sheer emotional and political exhaustion, if nothing else.

    The 2nd referendum chat really hasn't helped her. It's got a lot of influential people in the EU (who only talk to people who already agree with them, remember) very belligerent on Brexit, including those like Guy Verhofstadht, who smell blood.

    I'd say No Deal is still as high a chance as 45%.

    That could happen for a number of reasons:

    1. Mrs May and M. Barnier are unable to reach an agreement.
    2. The UK parliament will not agree to the agreement.
    3. The EU parliament ditto.

    I would discount 3, as it seems pretty unlikely. But which of 1 and 2 do you think the most likely to create No Deal? (Even better, give me probabilities!)

    My personal view is that 1 is actually quite unlikely, despite everything that is said in the press. But 2 is quite likely indeed.
    Interesting that she was positioning today to blame Labour for voting a down a deal not because it was a bad deal, but to play politics.

    If she gets a deal and Labour votes it down, Labour will own No Deal Brexit. Very, very unwise....which means they will probably do it.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 28,024

    Love the title as well, great Tom Clancy book.

    Or, as someone who's bad at maths may put it, The Fear of all Sums :lol:
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,320

    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, I still think a deal will be done, and it will pass both parliaments, with a lot of grumbling. Both sides will try and save face and move on, from sheer emotional and political exhaustion, if nothing else.

    The 2nd referendum chat really hasn't helped her. It's got a lot of influential people in the EU (who only talk to people who already agree with them, remember) very belligerent on Brexit, including those like Guy Verhofstadht, who smell blood.

    I'd say No Deal is still as high a chance as 45%.

    That could happen for a number of reasons:

    1. Mrs May and M. Barnier are unable to reach an agreement.
    2. The UK parliament will not agree to the agreement.
    3. The EU parliament ditto.

    I would discount 3, as it seems pretty unlikely. But which of 1 and 2 do you think the most likely to create No Deal? (Even better, give me probabilities!)

    My personal view is that 1 is actually quite unlikely, despite everything that is said in the press. But 2 is quite likely indeed.
    Interesting that she was positioning today to blame Labour for voting a down a deal not because it was a bad deal, but to play politics.

    If she gets a deal and Labour votes it down, Labour will own No Deal Brexit. Very, very unwise....which means they will probably do it.
    Labour cannot vote it down unless plenty of Tories join in (DUP notwithstanding), there's no way the government which cannot get it through its own party does not, at the very least, share in it when it fails.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 5,591
    SeanT said:

    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:

    Nice piece from Mr Meeks, except for his egregious use of "people's vote". It is a grotesque phrase, worthy of some cheap dictatorship claiming it is a "people's republic". What is a people's vote anyway? How does it differ from a 2nd referendum? Was the first one was an animals' vote? Did only voles and weasels get a say?

    Pff.

    Nonetheless, I have to say that, following recent convos with lots of people, I now anecodtally reckon a 2nd vote is a real possibility. Indeed maybe a probability.

    I've heard Leavers and Remainers alike say Fuck it, we have to vote again.

    The mood is slowly swinging. The fact that parliament will vote down any deal (unless TMay produces a miracle - highly unlikely) likewise means we are shit-creeked, politically.

    A 2nd referendum is the backpaddle that will save the day. Unless it returns the same vote as before. Hah.

    It clearly won't be exactly the same, since it won't be some generic leave, it may or may not have different leave options and may or maynot include remain. But while it may not solve the issue, it seems parliament cannot either at present, and it should be tried before another GE (which is no less likely to return something less chaotic).
    I reckon the chance of a 2nd ref must be about 50% now. We're at an impasse. I begin to see no other way out.
    I wouldn't go that high. My guess would be maybe 10%, but we are heading for the crunch.

    The Leavers best chance of avoiding it is Blind Brexit. After that a #peoplesvote cannot include Remain as an option.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,320

    Jonathan said:

    Can anyone describe the deal a majority in the Commons could vote for?

    Not at this stage - need to wait and see.

    However, I do think TM warning to hard brexiteers that they could see no brexit is a coded warning that rejection of her deal or no deal makes a second referendum very likely
    We've already heard such coded warnings before, so far they haven't backed down (nor has it mattered that much as the EU has rejected her offer). So when she comes back with something even more watered down, eventually the ERG crowd will have to stand up and be counted - if Chequers is terrible, watered down Chequers must also be opposed, even if the risk is no Brexit. We shall see how terrible they truly think it is I guess.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 9,827
    edited October 3
    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, I still think a deal will be done, and it will pass both parliaments, with a lot of grumbling. Both sides will try and save face and move on, from sheer emotional and political exhaustion, if nothing else.

    The 2nd referendum chat really hasn't helped her. It's got a lot of influential people in the EU (who only talk to people who already agree with them, remember) very belligerent on Brexit, including those like Guy Verhofstadht, who smell blood.

    I'd say No Deal is still as high a chance as 45%.

    That could happen for a number of reasons:

    1. Mrs May and M. Barnier are unable to reach an agreement.
    2. The UK parliament will not agree to the agreement.
    3. The EU parliament ditto.

    I would discount 3, as it seems pretty unlikely. But which of 1 and 2 do you think the most likely to create No Deal? (Even better, give me probabilities!)

    My personal view is that 1 is actually quite unlikely, despite everything that is said in the press. But 2 is quite likely indeed.
    Interesting that she was positioning today to blame Labour for voting a down a deal not because it was a bad deal, but to play politics.

    If she gets a deal and Labour votes it down, Labour will own No Deal Brexit. Very, very unwise....which means they will probably do it.
    Labour cannot vote it down unless plenty of Tories join in (DUP notwithstanding), there's no way the government which cannot get it through its own party does not, at the very least, share in it when it fails.
    If the government fails, the government takes the rap.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460
    Foxy said:

    SeanT said:

    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:

    Nice piece from Mr Meeks, except for his egregious use of "people's vote". It is a grotesque phrase, worthy of some cheap dictatorship claiming it is a "people's republic". What is a people's vote anyway? How does it differ from a 2nd referendum? Was the first one was an animals' vote? Did only voles and weasels get a say?

    Pff.

    Nonetheless, I have to say that, following recent convos with lots of people, I now anecodtally reckon a 2nd vote is a real possibility. Indeed maybe a probability.

    I've heard Leavers and Remainers alike say Fuck it, we have to vote again.

    The mood is slowly swinging. The fact that parliament will vote down any deal (unless TMay produces a miracle - highly unlikely) likewise means we are shit-creeked, politically.

    A 2nd referendum is the backpaddle that will save the day. Unless it returns the same vote as before. Hah.

    It clearly won't be exactly the same, since it won't be some generic leave, it may or may not have different leave options and may or maynot include remain. But while it may not solve the issue, it seems parliament cannot either at present, and it should be tried before another GE (which is no less likely to return something less chaotic).
    I reckon the chance of a 2nd ref must be about 50% now. We're at an impasse. I begin to see no other way out.
    I wouldn't go that high. My guess would be maybe 10%, but we are heading for the crunch.

    The Leavers best chance of avoiding it is Blind Brexit. After that a #peoplesvote cannot include Remain as an option.
    Please call it a second referendum - it gives it more creditability
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 7,664
    SeanT said:

    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:

    Nice piece from Mr Meeks, except for his egregious use of "people's vote". It is a grotesque phrase, worthy of some cheap dictatorship claiming it is a "people's republic". What is a people's vote anyway? How does it differ from a 2nd referendum? Was the first one was an animals' vote? Did only voles and weasels get a say?

    Pff.

    Nonetheless, I have to say that, following recent convos with lots of people, I now anecodtally reckon a 2nd vote is a real possibility. Indeed maybe a probability.

    I've heard Leavers and Remainers alike say Fuck it, we have to vote again.

    The mood is slowly swinging. The fact that parliament will vote down any deal (unless TMay produces a miracle - highly unlikely) likewise means we are shit-creeked, politically.

    A 2nd referendum is the backpaddle that will save the day. Unless it returns the same vote as before. Hah.

    It clearly won't be exactly the same, since it won't be some generic leave, it may or may not have different leave options and may or maynot include remain. But while it may not solve the issue, it seems parliament cannot either at present, and it should be tried before another GE (which is no less likely to return something less chaotic).
    I reckon the chance of a 2nd ref must be about 50% now. We're at an impasse. I begin to see no other way out.
    The somewhat narrow way out I think is to start negotiations on Canada but never get there. Never getting to Canada is quite easy. Both sides need to maintain the fiction of negotiation until it eventually runs out of steam. Because it's nominally a transition phase, it doesn't feel so much like the vassal state. The EU will like because the UK will be on best behaviour while negotiating.

    The simpler and better thing is membership but we rejected that.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,320
    Jonathan said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, I still think a deal will be done, and it will pass both parliaments, with a lot of grumbling. Both sides will try and save face and move on, from sheer emotional and political exhaustion, if nothing else.

    The 2nd referendum chat really hasn't helped her. It's got a lot of influential people in the EU (who only talk to people who already agree with them, remember) very belligerent on Brexit, including those like Guy Verhofstadht, who smell blood.

    I'd say No Deal is still as high a chance as 45%.

    That could happen for a number of reasons:

    1. Mrs May and M. Barnier are unable to reach an agreement.
    2. The UK parliament will not agree to the agreement.
    3. The EU parliament ditto.

    I would discount 3, as it seems pretty unlikely. But which of 1 and 2 do you think the most likely to create No Deal? (Even better, give me probabilities!)

    My personal view is that 1 is actually quite unlikely, despite everything that is said in the press. But 2 is quite likely indeed.
    Interesting that she was positioning today to blame Labour for voting a down a deal not because it was a bad deal, but to play politics.

    If she gets a deal and Labour votes it down, Labour will own No Deal Brexit. Very, very unwise....which means they will probably do it.
    Labour cannot vote it down unless plenty of Tories join in (DUP notwithstanding), there's no way the government which cannot get it through its own party does not, at the very least, share in it when it fails.
    If the government fails, the government takes the rap.
    Indeed so. They can say the opposition shot it down for partisan political reasons, they might even be right come the day, but they are the ones in office. Labour will always be able to claim they could have negotiated something better.
    Doesn't strike me as much of a surprise - May wanted the DUP bound more closely to back her, the DUP wanted more flexibility than that.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,417
    edited October 3
    How would PB-ers vote in a 2nd referendum? Would anyone change?

    I confess I would be drawn to Remain. Reluctantly, and with a sad sense of leaving behind a vision of my country as a proud sovereign nation, with an unexampled history of invention, conquest, enterprise and bravery, but nonetheless a nation that in all true senses no longer exists. In retrospect, if we were going to Leave it needed to happen before we signed the EU Constitution and accepted Article 50. That was the key that turned the lock, and made leaving so painful it could never be successfully done - or done without horrific damage.

    Of course we were promised a vote on that Constitution and Article 50, and we would have voted it down, and the crisis of Brexit would thus have been avoided with our pride intact (and the EU a better, more democratic place) but the political classes conspired to deny us this, and we are where are. Betrayed and jailed.

    I would therefore vote quite selfishly and for London properly prices and for my own monetary gain: I would probably switch to Remain, and then go on a ten day Tanqueray bender to drown my utter shame and self loathing.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,670
    Worth remembering that a couple of weeks ago both Caroline Flint and Lisa Nandy said they might well vote for a deal like Chequers (on separate editions of BBC2 Politics Live).

    Now whether they would actually do that - who knows? But there must be at least some reasonable chance that they might.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 31,779
    Interesting YouGov story in the Telegraph:

  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,828
    RobD said:

    Anazina said:

    I like your posts generally but you have an utterly bizarre obsession with Apple. It’s downright weird!
    Is that better or worse than a bizarre obsession with the Alternative Vote system?

    Asking for a friend. :smiley:
    :)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,320
    SeanT said:

    How would PB-ers vote in a 2nd referendum? Would anyone change?

    Possibly. It took a lot to go leave in the first place, and it is not appetizing to row back from that, but while EU intransigence has been worse than I feared and that bodes ill for remaining, fact is we have also done a piss poor job of preparation and it does not fill me with confidence either that the costs of Brexit will be mitigated or that the opportunities will be seized.

    But if the hinge it on more people's vote bollocks it might push me to another leave vote out of spite. It's so pathetic and transparent in its intentions, insulting regarding all other votes we have ever taken, that I cannot respect it.
  • stjohnstjohn Posts: 879
    SeanT said:

    How would PB-ers vote in a 2nd referendum? Would anyone change?

    I confess I would be drawn to Remain. Reluctantly, and with a sad sense of leaving behind a vision of my country as a proud sovereign nation, with an unexampled history of invention, conquest, enterprise and bravery, but nonetheless a nation that in all true senses no longer exists. In retrospect, if we were going to Leave it needed to happen before we signed the EU Constitution and accepted Article 50. That was the key that turned the lock, and made leaving so painful it could never be successfully done - or done without horrific damage.

    Of course we were promised a vote on that Constitution and Article 50, and we would have voted it down, and the crisis of Brexit would thus have been avoided with our pride intact (and the EU a better, more democratic place) but the political classes conspired to deny us this, and we are where are. Betrayed and jailed.

    I would therefore vote quite selfishly and for London properly prices and for my own monetary gain: I would probably switch to Remain, and then go on a ten day Tanqueray bender to drown my utter shame and self loathing.

    I would vote Remain - but I did that last time, so no change of opinion.

    As to London properly prices. Maybe they should be properly priced?
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 7,191
    BBC News doing a thorough "fact check" on May's claim that "the decade of austerity is over".
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,828
    Why not just extend Article 50 now for three years while we sort out a sensible plan? The rushing is actively damaging us. The situation is febrile.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 7,191
    SeanT said:

    How would PB-ers vote in a 2nd referendum? Would anyone change?

    I confess I would be drawn to Remain. Reluctantly, and with a sad sense of leaving behind a vision of my country as a proud sovereign nation, with an unexampled history of invention, conquest, enterprise and bravery, but nonetheless a nation that in all true senses no longer exists. In retrospect, if we were going to Leave it needed to happen before we signed the EU Constitution and accepted Article 50. That was the key that turned the lock, and made leaving so painful it could never be successfully done - or done without horrific damage.

    Of course we were promised a vote on that Constitution and Article 50, and we would have voted it down, and the crisis of Brexit would thus have been avoided with our pride intact (and the EU a better, more democratic place) but the political classes conspired to deny us this, and we are where are. Betrayed and jailed.

    I would therefore vote quite selfishly and for London properly prices and for my own monetary gain: I would probably switch to Remain, and then go on a ten day Tanqueray bender to drown my utter shame and self loathing.

    I would vote Remain, again, but with far more certainty than last time. Last time I didn't really care that much and was pretty sanguine when the Leave vote came through, which I'm definitely not now.

    That said, I think Leave would win a second referendum by a bigger margin than the first.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 7,664
    edited October 3
    No Deal is not viable. Canada is not possible within the medium term - too much negotiation. We haven't been able to agree three things for a Withdrawal Agreement on majority voting after two years, where we supposedly agreed on one of them already. Who thinks a comprehensive Super Canada requiring unanimity of 30 parliaments and likely a number of referendums is possible any time soon?

    So that leaves three possible options: membership, vassal state or permanent transition.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460
    Danny565 said:

    SeanT said:

    How would PB-ers vote in a 2nd referendum? Would anyone change?

    I confess I would be drawn to Remain. Reluctantly, and with a sad sense of leaving behind a vision of my country as a proud sovereign nation, with an unexampled history of invention, conquest, enterprise and bravery, but nonetheless a nation that in all true senses no longer exists. In retrospect, if we were going to Leave it needed to happen before we signed the EU Constitution and accepted Article 50. That was the key that turned the lock, and made leaving so painful it could never be successfully done - or done without horrific damage.

    Of course we were promised a vote on that Constitution and Article 50, and we would have voted it down, and the crisis of Brexit would thus have been avoided with our pride intact (and the EU a better, more democratic place) but the political classes conspired to deny us this, and we are where are. Betrayed and jailed.

    I would therefore vote quite selfishly and for London properly prices and for my own monetary gain: I would probably switch to Remain, and then go on a ten day Tanqueray bender to drown my utter shame and self loathing.

    I would vote Remain, again, but with far more certainty than last time. Last time I didn't really care that much and was pretty sanguine when the Leave vote came through, which I'm definitely not now.

    That said, I think Leave would win a second referendum by a bigger margin than the first.
    No idea how it would end to be honest
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 26,049
    SeanT said:

    How would PB-ers vote in a 2nd referendum? Would anyone change?

    I confess I would be drawn to Remain. Reluctantly, and with a sad sense of leaving behind a vision of my country as a proud sovereign nation, with an unexampled history of invention, conquest, enterprise and bravery, but nonetheless a nation that in all true senses no longer exists. In retrospect, if we were going to Leave it needed to happen before we signed the EU Constitution and accepted Article 50. That was the key that turned the lock, and made leaving so painful it could never be successfully done - or done without horrific damage.

    Of course we were promised a vote on that Constitution and Article 50, and we would have voted it down, and the crisis of Brexit would thus have been avoided with our pride intact (and the EU a better, more democratic place) but the political classes conspired to deny us this, and we are where are. Betrayed and jailed.

    I would therefore vote quite selfishly and for London properly prices and for my own monetary gain: I would probably switch to Remain, and then go on a ten day Tanqueray bender to drown my utter shame and self loathing.

    Leave. This is no time to go wobbly.

    Our eyes should keep focused on the prize. Almost all Brexit criticism is shitting ourselves about the transition.

    A new Brexit "status quo" is no trouble at all, despite the propaganda.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,828
    SeanT said:

    How would PB-ers vote in a 2nd referendum? Would anyone change?

    I confess I would be drawn to Remain. Reluctantly, and with a sad sense of leaving behind a vision of my country as a proud sovereign nation, with an unexampled history of invention, conquest, enterprise and bravery, but nonetheless a nation that in all true senses no longer exists. In retrospect, if we were going to Leave it needed to happen before we signed the EU Constitution and accepted Article 50. That was the key that turned the lock, and made leaving so painful it could never be successfully done - or done without horrific damage.

    Of course we were promised a vote on that Constitution and Article 50, and we would have voted it down, and the crisis of Brexit would thus have been avoided with our pride intact (and the EU a better, more democratic place) but the political classes conspired to deny us this, and we are where are. Betrayed and jailed.

    I would therefore vote quite selfishly and for London properly prices and for my own monetary gain: I would probably switch to Remain, and then go on a ten day Tanqueray bender to drown my utter shame and self loathing.

    Obviously I would stick to Remain but I agree with you and others that it should not be called the People’s Vote, which is somehow simultaneously naff and Orwellian
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 12,428
    SeanT said:

    How would PB-ers vote in a 2nd referendum? Would anyone change?

    I confess I would be drawn to Remain. Reluctantly, and with a sad sense of leaving behind a vision of my country as a proud sovereign nation, with an unexampled history of invention, conquest, enterprise and bravery, but nonetheless a nation that in all true senses no longer exists. In retrospect, if we were going to Leave it needed to happen before we signed the EU Constitution and accepted Article 50. That was the key that turned the lock, and made leaving so painful it could never be successfully done - or done without horrific damage.

    Of course we were promised a vote on that Constitution and Article 50, and we would have voted it down, and the crisis of Brexit would thus have been avoided with our pride intact (and the EU a better, more democratic place) but the political classes conspired to deny us this, and we are where are. Betrayed and jailed.

    I would therefore vote quite selfishly and for London properly prices and for my own monetary gain: I would probably switch to Remain, and then go on a ten day Tanqueray bender to drown my utter shame and self loathing.

    I'd still BeLeave. :D
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 26,049
    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:

    How would PB-ers vote in a 2nd referendum? Would anyone change?

    Possibly. It took a lot to go leave in the first place, and it is not appetizing to row back from that, but while EU intransigence has been worse than I feared and that bodes ill for remaining, fact is we have also done a piss poor job of preparation and it does not fill me with confidence either that the costs of Brexit will be mitigated or that the opportunities will be seized.

    But if the hinge it on more people's vote bollocks it might push me to another leave vote out of spite. It's so pathetic and transparent in its intentions, insulting regarding all other votes we have ever taken, that I cannot respect it.
    The people's vote crowd are so pompous and arrogant they could lose by a bigger margin than last time.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460
    FF43 said:

    No Deal is not viable. Canada is not possible within the medium term - too much negotiation. We haven't been able to agree three things for a Withdrawal Agreement on majority voting after two years, where we supposedly already agreed on one of them already. Who thinks a comprehensive Super Canada requiring unanimity of 30 parliaments and likely a number of referendums is possible any time soon?

    So that leaves three possible options: membership, vassal state or permanent transition.

    Some would say none of them are viable
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 26,049
    SeanT said:

    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:

    Nice piece from Mr Meeks, except for his egregious use of "people's vote". It is a grotesque phrase, worthy of some cheap dictatorship claiming it is a "people's republic". What is a people's vote anyway? How does it differ from a 2nd referendum? Was the first one was an animals' vote? Did only voles and weasels get a say?

    Pff.

    Nonetheless, I have to say that, following recent convos with lots of people, I now anecodtally reckon a 2nd vote is a real possibility. Indeed maybe a probability.

    I've heard Leavers and Remainers alike say Fuck it, we have to vote again.

    The mood is slowly swinging. The fact that parliament will vote down any deal (unless TMay produces a miracle - highly unlikely) likewise means we are shit-creeked, politically.

    A 2nd referendum is the backpaddle that will save the day. Unless it returns the same vote as before. Hah.

    It clearly won't be exactly the same, since it won't be some generic leave, it may or may not have different leave options and may or maynot include remain. But while it may not solve the issue, it seems parliament cannot either at present, and it should be tried before another GE (which is no less likely to return something less chaotic).
    I reckon the chance of a 2nd ref must be about 50% now. We're at an impasse. I begin to see no other way out.
    Nah. Doesn't happen unless it's legislated for.

    Precisely noone has explained how this happens with the Conservatives solidly in Government and with Leave being the bedrock of their members and voters.

This discussion has been closed.