Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .


Might get the w.a. through but will make the actual trade talks a lot tougher to manage... That said may probably won't be in power for that part of it so I'd guess she might throw government support behind this?
 
For all the many, many criticisms you can legitimately throw at May, you have to admire the size of her balls.

Though then you remember that if it all goes wrong, the little people suffer and she retires into obscurity to live out her days in comfort, her wealth presumably squirreled away offshore in various currencies. Its actually everyone else's future she is playing chicken with, not her own.

Still. Balls.

So, what do you think she would do if she didn't "have balls"? What was the "no-balls" option?

(Edit: In my opinion, what May is doing is the most cowardly choice of them all: basically she is doing nothing and she blames all others, the parliament, the EU... )
 
Last edited:
Probably, has to be confirmed.

Just saw this:

France, Spain and Belgium are ready to veto a Brexit extension, the Press Association understands. The PA report goes on:

Sources have said France, Spain, Belgium and maybe Italy stand prepared to reject an extension without evidence Parliament is now ready to accept a deal and “the deadlock can be broken”.

Some member states worry there is no point to an extension as, even after 1,000 days of negotiation, Theresa May’s deal keeps being rejected and the EU cannot move any further towards the UK.

One source said: “We’re not against an extension per se but we need to have two things - first a demonstration that the situation has changed and there is a guarantee the extension is for something and second that an extension won’t be detrimental to the EU.

“Yes, a no-deal Brexit would be damaging and it’s absolutely not what we want but I think we’re ready to go to this situation because there are only two solutions - either a deal is accepted or there is no deal.

“The deal has been rejected and it keeps being rejected so if we come to no-deal then so be it.”

It is understood French president Emmanuel Macron believes Brexit is holding up his plans for radical reform of the EU and needs to be brought to a conclusion.

I am hoping that they do Veto the extension, enough is enough for me.
 
Not call a vote on a deal that has been rejected twice already the week before leaving day with no extension on the table when you know perfectly well that no deal will spell catastrophe for the country.

That's the "no-balls" choice? That's nothing.

After two years of failed negotiations, the "huge balls" decision would be to cancel article 50, call for new elections, and retire ... since she was incapable of finding a solution. What she is doing all this time is what any coward would be doing.
 
That's the "no-balls" choice? That's nothing.

After two years of failed negotiations, the "huge balls" decision would be to cancel article 50, call for new elections, and retire ... since she was incapable of finding a solution. What she is doing all this time is what any coward would be doing.
Yeah, you're right. About the first bit I mean. That would be braver.
 
Yes, I can see that, but a lot of our leavers believe that we're not the US, and we will have to trade with the EU and them with us, so let's 'clear the decks' with a 'no deal' if necessary and then come at it a fresh! In my experience, which I admit is limited, this view is getting stronger, not weaker, as a way to move past Brexit!

I can understand each point of view.

For Brexiteers the UK would be giving away its major card (39b) for a mere withdrawal agreement. Thus it would be better for them to go on a no deal brexit and try to negotiate something better. However that argument has 2 major flaws. First of all a no deal Brexit would literally cripple the UK's economy. The UK would be desperate to sign trade deals at that point as WTO rules are pretty shit. Secondly if the UK crush out with a no deal Brexit then the EU will have to re-arrange its budget to accommodate that 39b hole. Once that happens (and it will be painful for some) all there will be is a group of very pissed off countries who'll be expected to negotiate a trade deal with an unreliable country who had placed them in this shit in the first place and is in now desperate for a trade deal with little to offer in exchange. At that point, the best course of action for the EU would be to make Brexit as painful as possible, so UK based companies leave, they go to the EU country and someone else picks up the tab.
 
Yeah, you're right. About the first bit I mean. That would be braver.

Cheers mate, I am glad we agree.

A Prime Minister should take responsibility for the situations, not pass the buck. If she cannot find a solution, then she should resign, not blame others. She is being paid to do a job, nobody forced her to take this job. If she can't do the job, she should retire.
 
I dont understand this. If MPs vote for May's deal there is no need for a referendum. And even if there was a referendum, why would we negotiate another deal with the EU (option C) if MPs backed May's deal?

A remainer would want a people's vote. If that goes tits up then he'll prefer an orderly Brexit were he can negotiate a deal with the EU on friendly terms. By offering them a people's vote in exchange of them supporting a withdrawal agreement, the remainers will get what they want + a second chance to influence negotiations if they lose again.
 
Yeah I did acknowledge that in my post. All that is on the line is her reputation, now and through history, which I imagine is a big motivator for her. But you are right, it is hardly worrying about feeding your kids.
I do strangely think history will treat her kindly. Took on the impossible job and despite what anyone said, she managed to get a deal on the table, which was considered the hardest bit of the negotiations. Regardless whether the MPs agreed with it or not, good or bad.

Cameron meanwhile shirked responsibility.
 
I do strangely think history will treat her kindly. Took on the impossible job and despite what anyone said, she managed to get a deal on the table, which was considered the hardest bit of the negotiations. Regardless whether the MPs agreed with it or not, good or bad.

Cameron meanwhile shirked responsibility.

I don't agree with this. Cameron understood that he messed up and he quit. Why should he try to implement something he didn't agree with? That's more honest and honorable that what May is doing. Of course we can still blame Cameron for the decision to have a referendum, but his decision to quit was the right one.
 
Why do you think there could be amendments or a long extension?

Amendments to the motion called next week not the withdrawal agreement. My guess is May will go and a soft brexit compromise will come out of resulting action. The EU want us to go that direction as it only results in changes to the political declaration (i think).

The only options that might pass parliament are second ref and soft brexit right now so it's time they were taken seriously.
 
" ...was a bad deal" etc..

"Was deal."

mancini
 
I do strangely think history will treat her kindly. Took on the impossible job and despite what anyone said, she managed to get a deal on the table, which was considered the hardest bit of the negotiations. Regardless whether the MPs agreed with it or not, good or bad.

Cameron meanwhile shirked responsibility.
A lot hinges on the next few weeks.
 
I do strangely think history will treat her kindly. Took on the impossible job and despite what anyone said, she managed to get a deal on the table, which was considered the hardest bit of the negotiations. Regardless whether the MPs agreed with it or not, good or bad.

Cameron meanwhile shirked responsibility.

What exactly was difficult about getting a deal on the table? She set her red lines and the EU returned with what that meant.

I think she's about to go anywhere. There's nothing left for her to do
 
Amendments to the motion called next week not the withdrawal agreement. My guess is May will go and a soft brexit compromise will come out of resulting action. The EU want us to go that direction as it only results in changes to the political declaration (i think).

The only options that might pass parliament are second ref and soft brexit right now so it's time they were taken seriously.

Yes it would have to be the political declaration. The problem is that I don't see parliament agreeing on anything, whatever it is, everyone's got an angle and there are about five or six different ones. Plus I think time is up, decision to be made in the next few days.
 
Cheers mate, I am glad we agree.

A Prime Minister should take responsibility for the situations, not pass the buck. If she cannot find a solution, then she should resign, not blame others. She is being paid to do a job, nobody forced her to take this job. If she can't do the job, she should retire.
Don't forget that she is an MP for a party. She's just the 'fall guy'. Taking the hit for the team. Everyone will blame her and the party goes on.
 
I do strangely think history will treat her kindly. Took on the impossible job and despite what anyone said, she managed to get a deal on the table, which was considered the hardest bit of the negotiations. Regardless whether the MPs agreed with it or not, good or bad.

Cameron meanwhile shirked responsibility.

I dont. She took on a difficult job and failed miserably in it. She set a bunch of contradictory, impossible red lines and the EU put together a treaty that satisfied it. Her red lines resulted in the biggest government defeat in the history of what must be the oldest parliament in the world. Did she even have a majority in her own party for it?
 
I feel like we're going to accidentally fall off of the cliff with a No Deal at the end of next week.
 
Unconfirmed but widely reported that Corbyn walked out of oppositions leaders meeting because Chuka was there. Unhelpful sod :lol: