Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why Revoke is now very much on the table

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited May 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why Revoke is now very much on the table

A zombie government will bring a zombie Withdrawal Agreement back to parliament next month, and in true zombie style, it will get bashed and still not really die. Ever since the first Meaningful Vote in January, when the government lost by well over 200 votes, Theresa May has been locked in a political vice where she couldn’t countenance No Deal, couldn’t accept No Brexit but couldn’t deliver any Brexit deal either – yet one of those three outcomes must ultimately conclude this phase of the process.

Read the full story here


«1345678

Comments

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    First! Like LEAVE....was......
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Second like remain :D and the Lib Dems. :o
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited May 2019
    Oh yes, revoke is becoming more likely by the day. Probably needs another extension before they are bold enough for it but the extreme positions are becoming normal. If no deal cannot be countenanced then not switching to revoke becomes riskier and riskier if you refuse any compromise as remainers are (just as leaver holdouts continue to stymie compromise in the other direction).

    Zombie government is an apt description. An absolutely pathetic and sad, shuffling corpse of a government. And Boris attaching electrodes to its nipples wont do more than give it a jolt.
  • nunuonenunuone Posts: 1,138
    I fear Boris would REVOKE if it was politically expedient to do so.

    The man does not have a principled bone in his body.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    brendan16 said:

    > @rottenborough said:

    >





    How did we Londoners cope for 8 years - it really won't be the end of the world Marie! We even held the Olympics too.
    His ability to cause harm as PM will be far higher, as will potential to do good, if we are lucky. The jobs are not very comparable.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    > @AndyJS said:

    > > @rottenborough said:

    > > NYT:

    > >

    > > "Venezuela’s Collapse Is the Worst Outside of War in Decades, Economists Say

    > > The crumbling of Venezuela’s economy has now outpaced the fall of the Soviet Union, Cuba’s unraveling in the 1990s and Zimbabwe’s collapse under Robert Mugabe.


    > >

    > > Shortages of food, water and medication have sunk most of the population into a deepening humanitarian crisis."

    > >

    >

    > Any comment from Corbyn?



    I expect Corbyn would blame Venezuela's collapse on American sanctions which for one reason or another are rarely mentioned on pb.

    Because they were doing just fine before the actually biting sanctions occurred were they?

    I recall Ken tried that line on the basis the ambassador told him that.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    dixiedean said:

    The original sin of Rory Stewart appears to be going on the media defending government policy without lying, abusing anyone, or making up some fantastical unicorny shit.

    Doing the job of a government MP of any Party up until very recently in other words.

    Dastardly indeed.
    Cyclefree said:

    > @The_Taxman said:

    > > @rottenborough said:

    > > Tories to collapse Government if Boris Johnson becomes PM:

    > >

    > >

    > >

    > >

    > >

    > > https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7042737/Ministers-threaten-bring-government-accept-Boris-PM.html

    > >

    > > Boris will not go No Deal immediately. He will announce he is returning to Brussels to negotiate and the EU will give him an extension. Why on earth would he lose a key vote only days into his premiership (assuming all summer is used as an election contest)?

    >

    > There is a problem in UK politics and that is people who voted Remain cannot understand why the UK should still leave the EU, when through a process of deduction any deal is worse than the one we have as a member of the EU and No Deal is cataclysmic. These same remain people project Brexit onto Boris Johnson, he is the personification of Brexit. The problem for Johnson is he is that hated by sections of society they will never vote for him. There are also Tory MPs who share this hatred of Johnson, some of the MPs have already left the PCP but some have remained until now. If he becomes PM they will leave or even vote down his government because they feel he is unfit for office..



    I have heard some words for no deal but "cataclysmic?" Do you remainers have some kind of competition?



    No deal is a disruption to the economy while it adjusts to the new trading terms that may or may not cause a technical recession and then after 9 months or so the economy will grow at a decent rate and still be creating jobs.



    That is what every economic forecast has said.

    I love it how for some Brexiteers those economic forecasters who were wrong about what would happen to the economy after the Brexit vote are now to be treated as gurus when it comes to what will happen after a No Deal Brexit.
    Of course. Bit like the old Yes Minister gag of 'so your statistics are facts while my facts are merely statistics?' Thus, with predictions so long as they back up ones views they are sound.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited May 2019
    I have this terrible thought, which is no doubt why I cannot sleep again (that or excitement to see John wick 3) that Tory policy will soon be little more than the Boris policy of meaningless but bombastic guff, and because it works with the Tory members that means the leadership contest will boil down to who can visibly orgasm the most while yelling 'Brexit!' at the top of their lungs.

    It satisfies them, if no one else, but no one could accuse the Tories of being considerate Brexiters.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    The original sin of Rory Stewart appears to be going on the media defending government policy without lying, abusing anyone, or making up some fantastical unicorny shit.

    Doing the job of a government MP of any Party up until very recently in other words.

    Dastardly indeed.
    Cyclefree said:

    > @The_Taxman said:

    > > @rottenborough said:

    > > Tories to collapse Government if Boris Johnson becomes PM:

    > >

    > >

    > >

    > >

    > >

    > > https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7042737/Ministers-threaten-bring-government-accept-Boris-PM.html

    > >

    > > Boris will not go No Deal immediately. He will announce he is returning to Brussels to negotiate and the EU will give him an extension. Why on earth would he lose a key vote only days into his premiership (assuming all summer is used as an election contest)?

    >

    > There is a problem in UK politics and that is people who voted Remain cannot understand why the UK should still leave the EU, when through a process of deduction any deal is worse than the one we have as a member of the EU and No Deal is cataclysmic. These same remain people project Brexit onto Boris Johnson, he is the personification of Brexit. The problem for Johnson is he rnment because they feel he is unfit for office..



    I have heard some words for no deal but "cataclysmic?" Do you remainers have some kind of competition?



    No deal is a disruption to the economy while it adjusts to the new trading terms that may or may not cause a technical recession and then after 9 months or so the economy will grow at a


    That is what every economic forecast has said.

    I love it how for some Brexiteers those economic forecasters who were wrong about what would happen to the economy after the Brexit vote are now to be treated as gurus when it comes to what will happen after a No Deal Brexit.
    Of course. Bit like the old Yes Minister gag of 'so your statistics are facts while my facts are merely statistics?' Thus, with predictions so long as they back up ones views they are sound.
    It would be remiss to note in his enthusiasm Rory did make up his much the public backed the deal of course. But on the whole he has been more reasonable than not.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2019
    The odds on the Australian government holding onto office have collapsed to 10/1.

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.127103176
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    > @kle4 said:
    > Because they were doing just fine before the actually biting sanctions occurred were they?

    Chavez' daughter has done very well for herself......

    https://www.diariolasamericas.com/maria-gabriela-chavez-podria-ser-la-mujer-mas-rica-venezuela-n3265811
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    > @AndyJS said:
    > The odds on the Australian government holding onto office have collapsed to 10/1.
    >
    > https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.127103176

    Knifing moderate Prime Ministers and replacing them with right wing numpties not playing out well?

    Colour me stunned....
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    > @kle4 said:
    > Tory policy will soon be little more than the Boris policy of meaningless but bombastic guff, and because it works with the Tory members that means the leadership contest will boil down to who can visibly orgasm the most while yelling 'Brexit!' at the top of their lungs.

    Wouldn't surprise me in the least......hence Rory's poor polling....
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,094
    edited May 2019
    Anecdata. Been chatting to a few (ie half a dozen) contacts around North Notts whilst doing daily things. Most working class seem keen on Brexit Party as a protest vote for 'not delivering on the Referendum'. Emphasis on lack of faith, and both self-determination and immigration.

    This is Ashfield/Mansfield, so unusual local politics :-).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575
    I think he means risks killing the Tory party, but didn’t feel it sounded very good.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575
    On the other side of the coin has to be the fear of Farage if parliament engineers Revoke. How many MPs are prepared to sacrifice their careers to do what they think is right, especially if they can tell themselves it risks a populist demagogue in government ?

    I’m not convinced the Betfair odds are generous.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575
    The most pointless and crack handed announcement of a run for the presidency so far:
    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/05/27/the-teen-who-thwarted-bill-de-blasios-presidential-announcement

    <i>”The following morning, Fleisher’s alarm went off at 5:55 a.m. He started writing his newsletter. “I’m Gabe Fleisher, reporting live from WUTP World HQ in my bedroom,” he typed. “It’s Thursday, May 16, 2019. 263 days until the 2020 Iowa caucuses. 537 days until Election Day 2020.” A few minutes later, de Blasio’s campaign video dropped, showing the Mayor being chauffeured around the city in a black S.U.V., to a soundtrack of horn-heavy jazz. Meanwhile, on “Good Morning America,” Stephanopoulos read de Blasio the results of a recent poll: seventy-six per cent of New York City voters felt that he shouldn’t run. Outside the studio, protesters—who, thanks to Fleisher, had got wind of the Mayor’s announcement the night before—began to gather. (De Blasio’s run has unified the city: that morning, protesters from the New York Police Department and the Black Lives Matter movement stood together, chanting “Liar!”)”</i>

    Even Tulsi Gabbard has a rationale for running.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    The original sin of Rory Stewart appears to be going on the media defending government policy without lying, abusing anyone, or making up some fantastical unicorny shit.

    Doing the job of a government MP of any Party up until very recently in other words.

    Dastardly indeed.
    Cyclefree said:

    > @The_Taxman said:

    > > @rottenborough said:

    > > Tories to collapse Government if Boris Johnson becomes PM:

    > >

    > >

    > >

    > >

    > >

    > > https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7042737/Ministers-threaten-bring-government-accept-Boris-PM.html

    > >

    > > Boris will not go No Deal immediately. He will announce he is returning to Brussels to negotiate and the EU will give him an extension. Why on earth would he lose a key vote only days into his premiership (assuming all summer is used as an election contest)?

    >

    > .



    I have heard some words for no deal but "cataclysmic?" Do you remainers have some kind of competition?



    No deal is a disruption to the economy while it adjusts to the new trading terms that may or may not cause a technical recession and then after 9 months or so the economy will grow at a decent rate and still be creating jobs.



    That is what every economic forecast has said.

    I love it how for some Brexiteers those economic forecasters who were wrong about what would happen to the economy after the Brexit vote are now to be treated as gurus when it comes to what will happen after a No Deal Brexit.
    Of course. Bit like the old Yes Minister gag of 'so your statistics are facts while my facts are merely statistics?' Thus, with predictions so long as they back up ones views they are sound.
    Stewart is useless, anyone with a brain cell would avoid promoting May's turd. He has shown he has no aptitude to be anything never mind PM.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Australian Federal Election under way. Former PM relearns about never working with children or animals.....

    https://twitter.com/BenJames22/status/1129602837778845696
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    My main worry about Boris (among many) is he'd "see his place in History" by "standing shoulder to shoulder" with Trump in an Iran war. One of Harold Wilson's oft overlooked strengths was his repeated refusals to LBJ to join in Vietnam....especially if Macron joins in....
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,094
    edited May 2019
    Thanks to whoever posted the "Islamophobia" 'working' 'definition'. Unable to find the post now.

    Had been looking for it on their website, and notfound it.

    What a hopelessly shoddy piece of work - so based on very current affairs that it will have a shelf-life of at best a couple of years.

    This process lost credibility with me personally when the original set of "weekly occurrences of Islamophobia" from the MCB turned out to be dragged together from a whole decade of social media 'sharings' , and prompt action had generally been taken when the Tory Party became aware.

    https://twitter.com/MuslimCouncil/status/1001914876992868352
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Revoke woikd be awesome not just for this remainer but the ERG would self combust..
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Good morning, everyone.

    Revocation would certainly be confirmation, were it needed, that we live in interesting times.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,225
    > @SquareRoot said:
    > Revoke woikd be awesome not just for this remainer but the ERG would self combust..

    Revoke or No Deal? To me, this is sailing between Scylla and Charybdis. I'm not sure on which we founder but either way there seems to be a certain inevitabiity about it.
  • Revoke and then what?
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,225
    > @twistedfirestopper3 said:
    > Revoke and then what?

    Years of quarreling over the EU.

    Plus ca change....
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Perhaps, but I fear that no one is going to be able to force this to a resolution of any kind and Britain is now stuck indefinitely in the EU’s anteroom.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,519
    > @twistedfirestopper3 said:
    > Revoke and then what?

    That is precisely the question. It would do nothing to fix the glaring gulf that currently divides out politics, and risks dividing segments of our society.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Punter, what I liked about that choice was that Scylla would definitely kill six of the crew, but Charybdis could destroy everyone (or you might survive entirely).

    Saw a glimpse of the Clash of the Titans remake. Two chaps fighting some pixels. Rather lacked the charm of the Harryhausen classic.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,519
    > @MattW said:
    > Thanks to whoever posted the "Islamophobia" 'working' 'definition'. Unable to find the post now.
    >
    > Had been looking for it on their website, and notfound it.
    >
    > What a hopelessly shoddy piece of work - so based on very current affairs that it will have a shelf-life of at best a couple of years.
    >
    > This process lost credibility with me personally when the original set of "weekly occurrences of Islamophobia" from the MCB turned out to be dragged together from a whole decade of social media 'sharings' , and prompt action had generally been taken when the Tory Party became aware.
    >
    > https://twitter.com/MuslimCouncil/status/1001914876992868352

    Whilst I agree that the definition is pants, I do think the Conservatives should have an inquiry into such a matter. If they're reasonably clean (as I think they are), then a fair inquiry will show it - and where there are problems, it will give pointers on where and how to how to improve.

    To do otherwise risks slipping and sliding into the morass: the same sort of thinking that Labour's fallen into. "Of course we're clean; we've been anti-Racist all our lives! It's just that the Jews, I mean Israel, are absolutely horrible. Think of all those lovely fireworks the Palestinians keep firing at them, to order to brighten up their day!"

    (The fact a Labour supporter could call Hamas' and Palestinian rockets 'fireworks' shows how far down the self-delusional rabbit-hole they have descended.)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575
    > @Peter_the_Punter said:
    > > @SquareRoot said:
    > > Revoke woikd be awesome not just for this remainer but the ERG would self combust..
    >
    > Revoke or No Deal? To me, this is sailing between Scylla and Charybdis. I'm not sure on which we founder but either way there seems to be a certain inevitabiity about it.

    Adrift might be more accurate. Sailing implies purpose.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,349
    Thanks, Mr Herdson, for an interesting analysis.

    I'm bored with Brexit, but it has achieved something positive. It's shown up MPs for what they are. Self-serving liars.

    Manifestos are irrelevant, to be forgotten at will. The voters' verdict is to be ignored by these paragons of virtue who know better. Purely by virtue of being chosen from a selection of two candidates who toe the party line, and have all the faults of MPs (see above).

    I was talking to one Brexit voter who is an avid Corbyn fan and he's decided to vote for Labour? Why? Because he's frightened the Labour party could have a spectacularly bad result in the Euros.

    A revoke? It would solve one problem but reinforce the anti-democratic reputation of whoever did it.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674

    Revoke and then what?

    As you were , and lots of whining
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669
    > @JosiasJessop said:
    > > @twistedfirestopper3 said:
    > > Revoke and then what?
    >
    > That is precisely the question. It would do nothing to fix the glaring gulf that currently divides out politics, and risks dividing segments of our society.

    We were divided 52:48 three years ago, now it's probably the other way round and more than 4%. So after Revoke we would still be divided but the economy would be in better shape than the alternative and we would be slightly less divided than the alternative. What should be done is the government should address the concerns of the areas that we're put in the position of thinking they had nothing to lose by voting Leave.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969

    Revoke and then what?

    Then we never talk about Brexit ever again.

    Brexit would be like the one night stand you hope your other half never finds out about.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669
    > @CarlottaVance said:
    > My main worry about Boris (among many) is he'd "see his place in History" by "standing shoulder to shoulder" with Trump in an Iran war. One of Harold Wilson's oft overlooked strengths was his repeated refusals to LBJ to join in Vietnam....especially if Macron joins in....

    Yes, agree about Harold Wilson.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,343
    For those who want Revoke there is little doubt that their best friend is the passage of time. (If the EU wanted Revoke its best tactic would be the grant an unlimited extension without conditions. This would at least mean that some time would pass while we argue - even more than is the case already.) If and when enough time passes the whole climate changes. After say 4 years (late spring 2020) PM Boris/Dominic/Gove/Leadsom could stand up with a sort of straight face and say that just as we have elections every 5 years because things and people change and mandates expire, so, regrettably, we must do the same with this mandate.

    This time lapse is entirely possible, as long as while lots of people speak boldly of 'No Deal' no one is going to be willing to be the one responsible for actually doing it. and they won't. Not parliament, not government, not Boris, not Raab etc and not the EU.

    Revoke is the more likely outcome now for these reasons.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069
    > @JosiasJessop said:
    > > @twistedfirestopper3 said:
    > > Revoke and then what?
    >
    > That is precisely the question. It would do nothing to fix the glaring gulf that currently divides out politics, and risks dividing segments of our society.

    So nothing worse than Brexit itself?
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669
    > @CarlottaVance said:
    > Australian Federal Election under way. Former PM relearns about never working with children or animals.....
    >
    > https://twitter.com/BenJames22/status/1129602837778845696

    Weird day. I'm agreeing with Carlotta about everything!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    If we do Brexit the people who have been grumbling about how bad everything is, and how it's all the fault of the 'Europeans' will start looking back.....'cos that's what they do.... and saying how good it all was when we were IN the EU.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,519
    > @logical_song said:
    > > @JosiasJessop said:
    > > > @twistedfirestopper3 said:
    > > > Revoke and then what?
    > >
    > > That is precisely the question. It would do nothing to fix the glaring gulf that currently divides out politics, and risks dividing segments of our society.
    >
    > We were divided 52:48 three years ago, now it's probably the other way round and more than 4%. So after Revoke we would still be divided but the economy would be in better shape than the alternative and we would be slightly less divided than the alternative. What should be done is the government should address the concerns of the areas that we're put in the position of thinking they had nothing to lose by voting Leave.

    I voted remain. I would vote remain in a second referendum (although I'd caveat that by saying it would depend on the individual question and options being sensible). However I think public opinion has not shifted as much as you think, and that a second referendum with sensible options would lead to another leave result - and perhaps by a larger margin.

    Why?

    Because:
    *) Much if Brexit is not about fact, but about emotion, and the 'betrayal' narrative will be strong.
    *) Remainers have been doing lots of howling, but making f'all effort to actually sell the good the EU does.
    *) People will not like being asked the 'same' question twice, even though the original referendum was flawed and parliament has been proven to be incompetent.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,047
    malcolmg said:

    Revoke and then what?

    As you were , and lots of whining
    Is that a general rule we should apply whenever there's a referendum result that the powers that be don't like Malc? Asking for a friend.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    > @Morris_Dancer said:
    > Mr. Punter, what I liked about that choice was that Scylla would definitely kill six of the crew, but Charybdis could destroy everyone (or you might survive entirely).
    >
    > Saw a glimpse of the Clash of the Titans remake. Two chaps fighting some pixels. Rather lacked the charm of the Harryhausen classic.

    There is a start trek episode where one guy is black one side and white the other snd the other guy is the obverse. They end up fighting each other for eternity even tho their worlds have been destroyed..
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited May 2019
    > @SquareRoot said:
    > > @Morris_Dancer said:
    > > Mr. Punter, what I liked about that choice was that Scylla would definitely kill six of the crew, but Charybdis could destroy everyone (or you might survive entirely).
    > >
    > > Saw a glimpse of the Clash of the Titans remake. Two chaps fighting some pixels. Rather lacked the charm of the Harryhausen classic.
    >
    > There is a start trek episode where one guy is black one side and white the other snd the other guy is the obverse. They end up fighting each other for eternity even tho their worlds have been destroyed..

    I think its called the last battlefield
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    Stat of the Day: There are 9 declared candidates for the Dem nomination who punters on Betfair give a worse chance of winning it than Hillary Clinton, and a further 5 candidates who the employees at Betfair haven't even bothered adding to the website.

    The only candidates 'above the Clinton line' are Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, Beto O'Rourke, Andrew Yang, Tulsi Gabbard, Amy Klobuchar, and Cory Booker.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669
    > @JosiasJessop said:
    > > @logical_song said:
    > > > @JosiasJessop said:
    > > > > @twistedfirestopper3 said:
    > > > > Revoke and then what?
    > > >
    > > > That is precisely the question. It would do nothing to fix the glaring gulf that currently divides out politics, and risks dividing segments of our society.
    > >
    > > We were divided 52:48 three years ago, now it's probably the other way round and more than 4%. So after Revoke we would still be divided but the economy would be in better shape than the alternative and we would be slightly less divided than the alternative. What should be done is the government should address the concerns of the areas that we're put in the position of thinking they had nothing to lose by voting Leave.
    >
    > I voted remain. I would vote remain in a second referendum (although I'd caveat that by saying it would depend on the individual question and options being sensible). However I think public opinion has not shifted as much as you think, and that a second referendum with sensible options would lead to another leave result - and perhaps by a larger margin.
    >
    > Why?
    >
    > Because:
    > *) Much if Brexit is not about fact, but about emotion, and the 'betrayal' narrative will be strong.
    > *) Remainers have been doing lots of howling, but making f'all effort to actually sell the good the EU does.
    > *) People will not like being asked the 'same' question twice, even though the original referendum was flawed and parliament has been proven to be incompetent.

    I agree with a lot of what you say, but the question was about Revoke.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069
    > @TheScreamingEagles said:
    > Revoke and then what?
    >
    > Then we never talk about Brexit ever again.
    >
    > Brexit would be like the one night stand you hope your other half never finds out about.

    Any Eurovision related thoughts?

    I rather like Norway and Denmark for a e/w, likely to benefit from the Scandinavian block vote.

    San Marino would be fun, if only to see if the village hall is big enough to stage next years contest.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,225
    > @Morris_Dancer said:
    > Mr. Punter, what I liked about that choice was that Scylla would definitely kill six of the crew, but Charybdis could destroy everyone (or you might survive entirely).
    >
    > Saw a glimpse of the Clash of the Titans remake. Two chaps fighting some pixels. Rather lacked the charm of the Harryhausen classic.

    Yes, I agree - especially if you could nominate the six to go. Let me see now....Boris, Jacob, Michael, Andrea....

    Agree even more about Clash. Harryhausen was a genius.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    Foxy said:

    > @TheScreamingEagles said:

    > Revoke and then what?

    >

    > Then we never talk about Brexit ever again.

    >

    > Brexit would be like the one night stand you hope your other half never finds out about.



    Any Eurovision related thoughts?



    I rather like Norway and Denmark for a e/w, likely to benefit from the Scandinavian block vote.



    San Marino would be fun, if only to see if the village hall is big enough to stage next years contest.

    Eurovision is hard to call since they changed the voting system. Is just easy to lay Le Royaume-Uni.

    I didn’t watch any of the semi finals this week.

    Didn’t have the time.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,519
    > @logical_song said:
    > > @JosiasJessop said:
    > > > @logical_song said:
    > > > > @JosiasJessop said:
    > > > > > @twistedfirestopper3 said:
    > > > > > Revoke and then what?
    > > > >
    > > > > That is precisely the question. It would do nothing to fix the glaring gulf that currently divides out politics, and risks dividing segments of our society.
    > > >
    > > > We were divided 52:48 three years ago, now it's probably the other way round and more than 4%. So after Revoke we would still be divided but the economy would be in better shape than the alternative and we would be slightly less divided than the alternative. What should be done is the government should address the concerns of the areas that we're put in the position of thinking they had nothing to lose by voting Leave.
    > >
    > > I voted remain. I would vote remain in a second referendum (although I'd caveat that by saying it would depend on the individual question and options being sensible). However I think public opinion has not shifted as much as you think, and that a second referendum with sensible options would lead to another leave result - and perhaps by a larger margin.
    > >
    > > Why?
    > >
    > > Because:
    > > *) Much if Brexit is not about fact, but about emotion, and the 'betrayal' narrative will be strong.
    > > *) Remainers have been doing lots of howling, but making f'all effort to actually sell the good the EU does.
    > > *) People will not like being asked the 'same' question twice, even though the original referendum was flawed and parliament has been proven to be incompetent.
    >
    > I agree with a lot of what you say, but the question was about Revoke.

    Ahem. Yes. :)

    I think the points still remain: revoke's a non-starter without a referendum because the public mood will not be with it.
  • thecommissionerthecommissioner Posts: 165
    edited May 2019
    The question is whether the EU/Brussels want to risk an SNP in Westminster style relationship with the UK for ever more.

    The EU elections will show that while the notion of the EU appeals to european electorates, the reality results in them electing ever increasing numbers of politicians opposed to either immigration, integration, further expansion or eurozone austerity.

    There may be the odd electorate that differs from this norm but most of the bigger electorates, are now at the point where the doubts have eaten away at their enthusiasm and belief.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,519
    > @Luckyguy1983 said:
    > Revoke and then what?
    >
    > As you were , and lots of whining
    >
    > Is that a general rule we should apply whenever there's a referendum result that the powers that be don't like Malc? Asking for a friend.

    It's not just that the powers-that-be don't like it; it's the fact that leave won by promising incompatible things to different groups of people. That's why, even after winning, leavers cannot agree the way forward.

    I'd have a lot more time for your argument if the main leavers were all on-side with May's deal. But they're as split as the country.

    It's a tragedy for the country that May's deal offers an (IMO) reasonable way of bodging the two leave offers, but many leavers won't accept it.

    They're real, stinking winnets.

    There is plenty of blame to spread around for the current mess, and sadly much of it lies with leavers and Brexiteers as well as May, her government, remainers, Labour, etc.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Root, I think I remember that episode.

    Mr. Punter, I agree, and would add that modern films seem to overuse CGI. I don't want match, but it seems in some cases to be detrimental.

    Consider the Indiana Jones films. I suspect the Crystal Skull will age the worst, because the first three used practical effects, whereas Crystal Skull relied on CGI. Even when I first saw it, the car chase scene graphics look very obviously fake.

    ....

    I think I have the answer. Make both front benches fight a gorgon. Whoever wins, becomes PM. If all get turned to stone, the country will somehow have to muddle through without the likes of May or Corbyn...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069
    > @TheScreamingEagles said:
    > > @TheScreamingEagles said:
    >
    > > Revoke and then what?
    >
    > >
    >
    > > Then we never talk about Brexit ever again.
    >
    > >
    >
    > > Brexit would be like the one night stand you hope your other half never finds out about.
    >
    >
    >
    > Any Eurovision related thoughts?
    >
    >
    >
    > I rather like Norway and Denmark for a e/w, likely to benefit from the Scandinavian block vote.
    >
    >
    >
    > San Marino would be fun, if only to see if the village hall is big enough to stage next years contest.
    >
    > Eurovision is hard to call since they changed the voting system. Is just easy to lay Le Royaume-Uni.
    >
    > I didn’t watch any of the semi finals this week.
    >
    > Didn’t have the time.

    The new voting system is why my punts are e/w or top 10 placings, though skybet has some interesting requestabet specials.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    > @Morris_Dancer said:
    > Mr. Root, I think I remember that episode.
    >
    > Mr. Punter, I agree, and would add that modern films seem to overuse CGI. I don't want match, but it seems in some cases to be detrimental.
    >
    > Consider the Indiana Jones films. I suspect the Crystal Skull will age the worst, because the first three used practical effects, whereas Crystal Skull relied on CGI. Even when I first saw it, the car chase scene graphics look very obviously fake.
    >
    > ....
    >
    > I think I have the answer. Make both front benches fight a gorgon. Whoever wins, becomes PM. If all get turned to stone, the country will somehow have to muddle through without the likes of May or Corbyn...

    Hasn’t this already happened? Would explain much.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,759

    I think I have the answer. Make both front benches fight a gorgon. Whoever wins, becomes PM. If all get turned to stone, the country will somehow have to muddle through without the likes of May or Corbyn...

    If our politicians reflect the country, surely they would mirror the Gorgon powers and turn THEM to stone?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    As a Remainer the thought of revoke is very worrying . I think the only way that happens is if there’s such chaos going on outside of parliament . Say no deal can’t be stopped because the PM refuses to ask for an extension. or one isn’t granted , the pound collapses , people start panic buying , businesses start packing up and leaving big time .

    With chaos going on the public mood might change sufficiently. Revoke is really the nuclear option and to be avoided if at all possible.

    I support a second vote , this whole sorry episode in the UK history started with a ref and if it’s going to be stopped really has to do so with another one.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    With Farage and co shouting a betrayal narrative if they do not get exactly what he wants, it will take something rather special to make Revoke politically sustainable.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. 67, if I were pro-EU that'd be, mostly, my thinking too.

    But the MPs who want that need to recognise they have to pass something to achieve that end. Faintly hoping for it whilst voting down everything and voting for meaningless nothings ('we don't want no deal' doesn't mean anything by itself) doesn't do a damned thing.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    Revoke is certainly on the table if we get to October the EU do not agree further extension or Macron vetoes that and the only alternative is No Deal.

    If the Commons votes to revoke Article 50 without even another referendum however Farage will not believe his luck!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Jonathan, inertia might be something that's underestimated.

    "Just stop banging on about it" is the sentiment of a lot of people who aren't noisy fringe types.

    Mr. HYUFD, that's the main question. Another, related, is would there be time (or a mini-extension to allow it) for a referendum?
  • houndtanghoundtang Posts: 450
    > @Nigelb said:
    > https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1129576982637883392
    >
    >
    >
    > I think he means risks killing the Tory party, but didn’t feel it sounded very good.

    The last election killed Brexit - that was obvious at 10pm on the night.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    > @CarlottaVance said:
    > Australian Federal Election under way. Former PM relearns about never working with children or animals.....
    >
    > https://twitter.com/BenJames22/status/1129602837778845696

    Polls close in Australia in 40 minutes, election coverage started on ABC

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/newschannel/
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674

    malcolmg said:

    Revoke and then what?

    As you were , and lots of whining
    Is that a general rule we should apply whenever there's a referendum result that the powers that be don't like Malc? Asking for a friend.
    I am merely answering the question that was asked, if revoked it will be as you were and years of whining.
    Much like the way YES was robbed in 2014 and the whining continues, I will whine till the next one gives us independence. I am certain it will not be all sweetness and light down south regardless of what may is chosen, there will be almost half pissed off either way, same as Scotland and it will need to be done again at some point.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    > @malcolmg said:
    > Revoke and then what?
    >
    > As you were , and lots of whining
    >
    > Is that a general rule we should apply whenever there's a referendum result that the powers that be don't like Malc? Asking for a friend.
    >
    > I am merely answering the question that was asked, if revoked it will be as you were and years of whining.
    > Much like the way YES was robbed in 2014 and the whining continues, I will whine till the next one gives us independence. I am certain it will not be all sweetness and light down south regardless of what may is chosen, there will be almost half pissed off either way, same as Scotland and it will need to be done again at some point.
    Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. G, the SNP would've gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for those meddling voters.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    > @Morris_Dancer said:
    > Mr. Jonathan, inertia might be something that's underestimated.
    >
    > "Just stop banging on about it" is the sentiment of a lot of people who aren't noisy fringe types.
    >
    > Mr. HYUFD, that's the main question. Another, related, is would there be time (or a mini-extension to allow it) for a referendum?

    By October there would not be time for another referendum no, it would be revoke or no deal and the current Commons would likely vote for the former
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    HYUFD said:

    > @malcolmg said:

    > Revoke and then what?

    >

    > As you were , and lots of whining

    >

    > Is that a general rule we should apply whenever there's a referendum result that the powers that be don't like Malc? Asking for a friend.

    >

    > I am merely answering the question that was asked, if revoked it will be as you were and years of whining.

    > Much like the way YES was robbed in 2014 and the whining continues, I will whine till the next one gives us independence. I am certain it will not be all sweetness and light down south regardless of what may is chosen, there will be almost half pissed off either way, same as Scotland and it will need to be done again at some point.

    Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote

    It was a very close referendum and as I say almost half will not be happy regardless of which way they go. England is F****d for many years.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote

    Not really, it’s like Yes winning, but having no plan or agreement on what Yes means, spending three years arguing and then blaming everyone else for not solving their problems for them.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    > @malcolmg said:
    > > @malcolmg said:
    >
    > > Revoke and then what?
    >
    > >
    >
    > > As you were , and lots of whining
    >
    > >
    >
    > > Is that a general rule we should apply whenever there's a referendum result that the powers that be don't like Malc? Asking for a friend.
    >
    > >
    >
    > > I am merely answering the question that was asked, if revoked it will be as you were and years of whining.
    >
    > > Much like the way YES was robbed in 2014 and the whining continues, I will whine till the next one gives us independence. I am certain it will not be all sweetness and light down south regardless of what may is chosen, there will be almost half pissed off either way, same as Scotland and it will need to be done again at some point.
    >
    > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
    >
    > It was a very close referendum and as I say almost half will not be happy regardless of which way they go. England is F****d for many years.

    Referendums are often very divisive unless one side wins comfortably but you still should respect the result of them however close they are
  • ah009ah009 Posts: 436
    > @Jonathan said:
    >
    > > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
    >
    > Not really, it’s like Yes winning, but having no plan or agreement on what Yes means, spending three years arguing and then blaming everyone else for not solving their problems for them.
    >
    >

    Which, of course, probably wouldn't have happened since there was a huge prospectus published long before that referendum. Opinions naturally differ on the quality of that plan,but a plan there was.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,343
    HYUFD said:

    > @Morris_Dancer said:

    > Mr. Jonathan, inertia might be something that's underestimated.

    >

    > "Just stop banging on about it" is the sentiment of a lot of people who aren't noisy fringe types.

    >

    > Mr. HYUFD, that's the main question. Another, related, is would there be time (or a mini-extension to allow it) for a referendum?



    By October there would not be time for another referendum no, it would be revoke or no deal and the current Commons would likely vote for the former

    Can we be not be further extensions from October? And why not? There may be a good reason, it all gets a bit confusing, but I don't know what it is.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited May 2019
    > @ah009 said:
    > > @Jonathan said:
    > >
    > > > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
    > >
    > > Not really, it’s like Yes winning, but having no plan or agreement on what Yes means, spending three years arguing and then blaming everyone else for not solving their problems for them.
    > >
    > >
    >
    > Which, of course, probably wouldn't have happened since there was a huge prospectus published long before that referendum. Opinions naturally differ on the quality of that plan,but a plan there was.

    Divisions within Yes would soon have emerged on the closeness of the relationship they wanted with the rUK exactly as they have within Leave on the relationship with the EU and of course some SNP voters even voted to leave the EU.

    Plenty of Leavers produced detailed summaries of how Brexit would work but Westminster has refused to even implement Brexit so discussions on the future relationship can even properly begin
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,343
    Jonathan said:

    > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote



    Not really, it’s like Yes winning, but having no plan or agreement on what Yes means, spending three years arguing and then blaming everyone else for not solving their problems for them.

    Parliament is the sovereign body, so it's not about blaming everyone else for not solving the problem. Solving the hardest questions is what parliament is for. The failure lies there. Their own efforts in creating the FTPA doesn't help, but again only parliament can resolve it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    > @algarkirk said:
    > > @Morris_Dancer said:
    >
    > > Mr. Jonathan, inertia might be something that's underestimated.
    >
    > >
    >
    > > "Just stop banging on about it" is the sentiment of a lot of people who aren't noisy fringe types.
    >
    > >
    >
    > > Mr. HYUFD, that's the main question. Another, related, is would there be time (or a mini-extension to allow it) for a referendum?
    >
    >
    >
    > By October there would not be time for another referendum no, it would be revoke or no deal and the current Commons would likely vote for the former
    >
    > Can we be not be further extensions from October? And why not? There may be a good reason, it all gets a bit confusing, but I don't know what it is.

    We can but only if Macron does not veto further extensions and he originally wanted extension no further than June, October was a compromise between Macron and the rest of the EU who wanted to extend until early next year
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    “Some brothers are stars, some sisters are stars...”

    https://twitter.com/bbcnewsnight/status/1129455332110086144?s=21
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,547
    > @nico67 said:
    > As a Remainer the thought of revoke is very worrying . I think the only way that happens is if there’s such chaos going on outside of parliament . Say no deal can’t be stopped because the PM refuses to ask for an extension. or one isn’t granted , the pound collapses , people start panic buying , businesses start packing up and leaving big time .
    >
    > With chaos going on the public mood might change sufficiently. Revoke is really the nuclear option and to be avoided if at all possible.
    >
    > I support a second vote , this whole sorry episode in the UK history started with a ref and if it’s going to be stopped really has to do so with another one.

    I think revoke would be presented as buying time, we clearly have no agreed plan for leave, no deal would be a disaster so let's put the whole thing on hold for a few years while we get our act together. In practice of course it's very unlikely that parliament would agree to invoke again later, but that will only become clear over time.

    But I agree with you, it's a risky strategy and a second vote, much as I hate the idea, is probably the only realistic way forward. But it must be made clear in advance what version of "Leave" we are voting on.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,545
    Brexit is a huge mess that merely gets embedded in if we do pass the Withdrawal Agreement . There seems little appetite for a damage limited Brexit consisting of May's Deal plus permanent negotiations/non stop concessions to the EU. No Deal just turns a highly damaging Brexit into a catastrophic one and we will end up in the EU or "Vassal State" anyway.

    It comes down whether we want to deal with the mess or face up to Farage, who will exploit any No Deal or Vassal State outcomes anyway.

    We are all in denial.
  • houndtang said:

    > @Nigelb said:

    >



    >

    >

    >

    > I think he means risks killing the Tory party, but didn’t feel it sounded very good.



    The last election killed Brexit - that was obvious at 10pm on the night.
    Killed it? It has consumed everything on almost every day since, and will continue to do so until it's delivered. The Tories and Labour are being chewed up now.

    It is not just the UK it's affecting either, it's the EU.

    Brexit is festering like a open wound within an EU that has the parties of conservative reform, national freedoms and direct democracy likely to make advances almost across the board in the next week or so.

    The electorate are fed up with both a failure to deliver and the general lack of gumption on display in our skewed parliament.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069
    edited May 2019
    > @ah009 said:
    > > @Jonathan said:
    > >
    > > > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
    > >
    > > Not really, it’s like Yes winning, but having no plan or agreement on what Yes means, spending three years arguing and then blaming everyone else for not solving their problems for them.
    > >
    > >
    >
    > Which, of course, probably wouldn't have happened since there was a huge prospectus published long before that referendum. Opinions naturally differ on the quality of that plan,but a plan there was.

    The Brexiteers learnt from Sindyref the importance of not having a plan, so as to keep the widest spectrum of voters. It works, but then gives the mess that we are in now.

    The German satirists had it right in January:

    https://youtu.be/cH0jvLbVrNw
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    > @HYUFD said:
    > > @malcolmg said:
    > > > @malcolmg said:
    > > > Much like the way YES was robbed in 2014 and the whining continues, I will whine till the next one gives us independence. I am certain it will not be all sweetness and light down south regardless of what may is chosen, there will be almost half pissed off either way, same as Scotland and it will need to be done again at some point.
    > >
    > > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
    > >
    > > It was a very close referendum and as I say almost half will not be happy regardless of which way they go. England is F****d for many years.
    >
    > Referendums are often very divisive unless one side wins comfortably but you still should respect the result of them however close they are

    Not when the Tories "win" by cheating. They overlooked the fact that seeming to win is one thing, and getting acceptance for that result is quite another.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    > @PClipp said:
    > > @HYUFD said:
    > > > @malcolmg said:
    > > > > @malcolmg said:
    > > > > Much like the way YES was robbed in 2014 and the whining continues, I will whine till the next one gives us independence. I am certain it will not be all sweetness and light down south regardless of what may is chosen, there will be almost half pissed off either way, same as Scotland and it will need to be done again at some point.
    > > >
    > > > Not quite the same though, the equivalent is Yes winning in 2014 52% to 48% for No and Westminster refusing to recognise and implement the Yes to independence vote
    > > >
    > > > It was a very close referendum and as I say almost half will not be happy regardless of which way they go. England is F****d for many years.
    > >
    > > Referendums are often very divisive unless one side wins comfortably but you still should respect the result of them however close they are
    >
    > Not when the Tories "win" by cheating. They overlooked the fact that seeming to win is one thing, and getting acceptance for that result is quite another.

    It was technically Leave who won not the Tories, many Tories including myself voted Remain, a number of Labour voters voted Leave. Remain of course had government funded leaflets saying the benefits of staying in the EU
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,960
    edited May 2019
    Sir Kier Starmer on Today, saying "I'm not going to play the blame game....but the Government wouldn't future-proof any deal."

    How do you propose they do that, Kier?

    And how about if the Tories were talking about future-proofing against an incoming Labour Govt.? Preventing nationalisations for example?

    What an idiot.
  • argyllrsargyllrs Posts: 155
    Not convinced that either Con or Lab do well long term if revoke happens.
    The BXP show the numbers of people who find leaving the EU a big deal.
    If revoke is implemented then;-
    Cons will not get a majority for years - and don't rely on the propaganda of Brexit being a right wing party. If and it's a big if they can keep Claire Fox and others then it will be more a party of individual rights and will not necessarily support Tories in a coalition. To me it could be more akin to the historic Liberal Party?
    Labour have a different problem. If the Brexit Party can be anywhere near relevant for the northern working classes then Labour could end up becoming much more a chattering class party of navel gazers. This then leaves them competing more directly with Liberal Democrats and Greens and with minimal automatic votes to count on.
    Hoping the issue will go away is a pipe dream. The EU will continue integrating and will not allow us to keep holding them back - for the next twenty years at least, with each new treaty more people will say enough is enough.
    I don't believe that the Brexit Party will quite pull off all that they hope, but unless a pretty hard Brexit is now achieved they will need to be factored in to any hopes of winning a GE.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    > @FF43 said:
    > Brexit is a huge mess that merely gets embedded in if we do pass the Withdrawal Agreement . There seems little appetite for a damage limited Brexit consisting of May's Deal plus permanent negotiations/non stop concessions to the EU. No Deal just turns a highly damaging Brexit into a catastrophic one and we will end up in the EU or "Vassal State" anyway.
    >
    > It comes down whether we want to deal with the mess or face up to Farage, who will exploit any No Deal or Vassal State outcomes anyway.
    >
    > We are all in denial.
    As are Remainers who ignore the risks of a Farage premiership and the Brexit Party winning the next general election if they revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit
  • ah009ah009 Posts: 436
    > @thecommissioner said:
    > The electorate are fed up with both a failure to deliver and the general lack of gumption on display in our skewed parliament.

    The electorate are fed up with the parliament it elected less than 2 years ago?
    I mean, yes. Perhaps the blame lies with the electorate this time.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    Polls just closed in Australia for their general election.

    First results due shortly, full coverage on ABC here

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/newschannel/
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    > @algarkirk said:
    > Can we be not be further extensions from October? And why not? There may be a good reason, it all gets a bit confusing, but I don't know what it is.

    Yes, but the (IMO perfectly reasonable) EU position is that they are tired of this soap opera, and they will only give an extension if it'll be used for something quite specific. They agreed to the extension till October on the basis that May promised that we'd really get on with it, get a bipartisan deal or whatever. She then sent Parliament off on a long holiday, after which desultory talks resumed with no expectation of success.

    The EU likes Britain, by and large. They wish us well. They even wish we'd Revoke. But really they want us to stop pissing about indefinitely. An extension in October because there'a new PM and a referendum or an election imminent, OK. An extension to explore what might maybe done? NON.
  • StreeterStreeter Posts: 684

    Sir Kier Starmer on Today, saying "I'm not going to play the blame game....but the Government wouldn't future-proof any deal."



    How do you propose they do that, Kier?



    And how about if the Tories were talking about future-proofing against an incoming Labour Govt.? Preventing nationalisations for example?



    What an idiot.

    If the outcome of the negotiations could not be guaranteed there was no point to the negotiations.
  • > @MarqueeMark said:
    > Sir Kier Starmer on Today, saying "I'm not going to play the blame game....but the Government wouldn't future-proof any deal."
    >
    > How do you propose they do that, Kier?
    >
    > And how about if the Tories were talking about future-proofing against an incoming Labour Govt.? Preventing nationalisations for example?
    >
    > What an idiot.

    I stopped reading at "Sir".
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    > @MarqueeMark said:
    > Sir Kier Starmer on Today, saying "I'm not going to play the blame game....but the Government wouldn't future-proof any deal."
    >
    > How do you propose they do that, Kier?
    >
    > And how about if the Tories were talking about future-proofing against an incoming Labour Govt.? Preventing nationalisations for example?
    >
    > What an idiot.

    Future proofing is easy. Just hold and win a referendum. Then however mad the idea, future generations are obliged to implement it.
  • StreeterStreeter Posts: 684
    HYUFD said:

    > @FF43 said:

    > Brexit is a huge mess that merely gets embedded in if we do pass the Withdrawal Agreement . There seems little appetite for a damage limited Brexit consisting of May's Deal plus permanent negotiations/non stop concessions to the EU. No Deal just turns a highly damaging Brexit into a catastrophic one and we will end up in the EU or "Vassal State" anyway.

    >

    > It comes down whether we want to deal with the mess or face up to Farage, who will exploit any No Deal or Vassal State outcomes anyway.

    >

    > We are all in denial.

    As are Remainers who ignore the risks of a Farage premiership and the Brexit Party winning the next general election if they revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit

    What if it’s Leavers who decide to revoke?
  • ah009ah009 Posts: 436
    > @HYUFD said:
    > Plenty of Leavers produced {mutually contradictory} summaries of how Brexit would work but Westminster {including leavers} has refused to even implement Brexit so discussions on the future relationship can even properly begin {because they don't agree even on the basics, which is exactly the point}

    ^ made my comments inline. I'm happy that we are reasonably aligned in this.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069
    > @argyllrs said:
    > Not convinced that either Con or Lab do well long term if revoke happens.
    > The BXP show the numbers of people who find leaving the EU a big deal.
    > If revoke is implemented then;-
    > Cons will not get a majority for years - and don't rely on the propaganda of Brexit being a right wing party. If and it's a big if they can keep Claire Fox and others then it will be more a party of individual rights and will not necessarily support Tories in a coalition. To me it could be more akin to the historic Liberal Party?
    > Labour have a different problem. If the Brexit Party can be anywhere near relevant for the northern working classes then Labour could end up becoming much more a chattering class party of navel gazers. This then leaves them competing more directly with Liberal Democrats and Greens and with minimal automatic votes to count on.
    > Hoping the issue will go away is a pipe dream. The EU will continue integrating and will not allow us to keep holding them back - for the next twenty years at least, with each new treaty more people will say enough is enough.
    > I don't believe that the Brexit Party will quite pull off all that they hope, but unless a pretty hard Brexit is now achieved they will need to be factored in to any hopes of winning a GE.

    Claire Fox is no longer left wing, despite her pro-terrorist Revolutionary Communist Party roots. Interestingly, the Brexit Party includes a number of these other former RCP members, but they do seem to have changed their views according to what Moscow wants:

    https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1128429129433526272?s=19

    Though to be fair, as the BP has published no manifesto or policy other than WTO Brexit, we really do not know if it is a left or right wing party. Currently they are thriving on ambiguity.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    > @HYUFD said:
    >
    > As are Remainers who ignore the risks of a Farage premiership and the Brexit Party winning the next general election if they revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit
    >
    ------

    Passing the deal would not only help Farage to win, but it would help him stay in power afterwards because he'd be no longer be on the hook for implementing No Deal.

    "We are all in denial".
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    edited May 2019
    > @HYUFD said:
    > As are Remainers who ignore the risks of a Farage premiership and the Brexit Party winning the next general election if they revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit

    If we're going to have Brexit I'd rather it was implemented by a Farage government than a Tory government: At least he's closely enough identified with the whole thing that when the thing fails most of the people who voted for it will be able to see that thing failed.

    If the Tories do it the Faragists will just blame the failure on Remainers and insist that it requires something even more extreme, and either we'll end up with the Faragist government anyhow or the Tories will keep chasing after ever-more-extreme levels of Faragism.
This discussion has been closed.