Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

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

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
Sassy Colin said:
Its an antelope type animal, also known as a wildebeest.

There will never be a Govt of National Unity.
Click to expand...

What about a Govt of National Division?

I expect a hung parliament in an election and therefore we either have a coalition that is a kind of GNU, or we don't have a govt full stop.
 
MadMike said:
What about a Govt of National Division?

I expect a hung parliament in an election and therefore we either have a coalition that is a kind of GNU, or we don't have a govt full stop.
Click to expand...

A Conservative-Brexit Party coalition resulting from a late-November General Election, is probably the most likely outcome now.

I expect Parliament has done enough to avoid a 'no deal' crash out next month, but they will probably be powerless to prevent it in January (assuming that is when the extension expires).

There's always the possibility the Johnson might screw over the (now irrelevant) DUP and negotiate a NI only backstop though I suppose.
 
Last edited:
Let's say for arguments sake there's another extension till early next year on the proviso of a general election.

The way I see it you'll have the Tories campaigning (with the Brexit party?) to leave with no deal, Labour who are campaigning on a second referendum with the options being revoke or leave with Mays deal and some ribbons (?) and the Lib Dems who will campaign solely on revoke.

The stance that the Lib Dems are taking here is the worrying one as it increases the chances of a Con/Brexit Party government if they pull in a large number of the remain vote solely on that promise and with Swinson refusing to work with a Labour government that has Corbyn at the helm.
 
Lord Heseltine, the pro-European former Conservative deputy prime ministers, said it was a mistake for Dominic Cummings to claim that it was the remain side who represented the views of the wealthy elite:

"If you start talking about who are the richest influential people in this campaign - who owns the Telegraph? Who owns the Sun? Who owns the Daily Mail? People with riches, wealth, of untold millions. They are the ones who appoint the editors of newspapers that are frankly propaganda sheets for Leave. And for Dominic Cummings to try to shove the blame onto individuals who want to remain because they are rich is a major slip of the tongue."


(Sky)
 
EEF3ig3W4AE5ndo
 
sun_tzu said:
I'm sure he's looking for legal cover to get around the law... Most probably we are ending up in the courts (could it end up in the European courts of justice?...)
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that be a hoot? Especially if it found in HM Governments favour ;)
 
owlo said:
Can't see it ending up in the courts. If he refuses by the 20th or so, he'd be out on his ass for a GNU. If he refused that and decided to squat in office, they'd most certainly move for impeachment. He's fecked.
Click to expand...
not sure... they would move for a confidence motion on 20th and they would almost certainly defeat him... then technically he has 14 days to return to the house and show he can command a majority (of course he wont be able to but legally I think he can make a (tenuous) case for not standing down in that period... which leaves either a court case or the queen to dismiss him (i think she would rather avoid that)
 
Maticmaker said:
Wouldn't that be a hoot? Especially if it found in HM Governments favour ;)
Click to expand...
yeah the brexiteers cheering on the european courts whilst maintaining our parliament should be soverign above the ECJ... there would be some backtracking and squirming but i suspect peoples principals would be excused away if it got the result they wanted
 
Infra-red said:
A Conservative-Brexit Party coalition resulting from a late-November General Election, is probably the most likely outcome now.
Click to expand...

TBP/UKIP couldn't even get a seat when their stance was different from the Conservatives in the last 2 elections. What makes you think they'll get any seats now? Why would anyone vote for a single issue party when one of the major parties holds exactly the same position on the issue and is far more likely to end up in Govt. I mean voting for TBP is merely splitting the leave vote at this stage. I firmly expect them to have 0 seats again, but the more Leavers vote TBP the better.

Infra-red said:
I expect Parliament has done enough to avoid a 'no deal' crash out next month, but they will probably be powerless to prevent it in January (assuming that is when the extension expires).

There's always the possibility the Johnson might screw over the (now irrelevant) DUP and negotiate a NI only backstop though I suppose.
Click to expand...

If the Tories win an outright majority, that's exactly what I expect too. I very much doubt they will get that majority though. As is they stand to lose a lot of seats to SNP in Scotland and a lot of urban marginals to Lib Dems. They'll have to make some awesome gains at the expense of Labour for that to happen. They might end with the most MPs, but it's very doubtful they'll end up with a majority. And it'll be harder to form coalitions this time.
 
Where does Sinn Fein stand in this debate? Will they put forward candidates in a GE as normal? Any Northern Irish know?

If they are interested in peace and harmony in NI they should not stand in the GE and endorse another party (traditionally closer to Labour) that would be committed to keeping the border fully open. Those seats matter and their abstentionism could end up being damaging for both NI and Ireland in this case.
 
sun_tzu said:
yeah the brexiteers cheering on the european courts whilst maintaining our parliament should be soverign above the ECJ... there would be some backtracking and squirming but i suspect peoples principals would be excused away if it got the result they wanted
Click to expand...

This actually applies to both sides now, we are almost into the 'no quarter asked, or given' phase.

Its any trick in the book time, get down and dirty etc. can't help thinking this is what Cummings has played for all along, but not sure Boris realises just how dirty he's got to get to win! I think Boris will bail (possible it would be Cumming's Plan B) i.e. to throw the DUP under the bus and go for a Canada + deal just for GB.

It will be the DUP who is then complaining to the UN and its interest in the USA that the GFA has been breached.

Anything can happen in the next two months!
 
sun_tzu said:
not sure... they would move for a confidence motion on 20th and they would almost certainly defeat him... then technically he has 14 days to return to the house and show he can command a majority (of course he wont be able to but legally I think he can make a (tenuous) case for not standing down in that period... which leaves either a court case or the queen to dismiss him (i think she would rather avoid that)
Click to expand...

Indeed. This (the implications of the govt losing a vote of confidence) was covered by Cabinet Secretary Sir Mark Sedwill yesterday, while being questioned by MPs at the Commons public administration and constitutional affairs committee. It was covered live by The Guardian:

Sedwill has just said the prime minister is under a duty to resign only when he, or she, can make a recommendation to the Queen as to who is most likely to be able to command the confidence of the House of Commons.

That is a political judgment the PM must exercise, with advice from the cabinet secretary.

Q: Does the PM need to test that, with a sitting House of Commons?

No, says Sedwill.

He says when Boris Johnson was appointed there was talk of having a vote of confidence in the house. But that did not go ahead.

The SNP’s Ronnie Cowan asks if, in the event of a vote of no confidence, the PM could just run down the clock for 14 days without recommending an alternative PM to the Queen.

Sedwill confirms that that is the case.

Sedwill suggests that, following a vote of no confidence, the prime minster would not be obliged to suggest an alternative PM to the Queen.
Click to expand...
 
Maticmaker said:
This actually applies to both sides now, we are almost into the 'no quarter asked, or given' phase.

Its any trick in the book time, get down and dirty etc. can't help thinking this is what Cummings has played for all along, but not sure Boris realises just how dirty he's got to get to win! I think Boris will bail (possible it would be Cumming's Plan B) i.e. to throw the DUP under the bus and go for a Canada + deal just for GB.

It will be the DUP who is then complaining to the UN and its interest in the USA that the GFA has been breached.

Anything can happen in the next two months!
Click to expand...

Why and how would the GFA be breached by the backstop? It's there precisely to protect the GFA.

Throwing the DUP under the bus however is not the same as throwing NI under the bus. They should really have put the backstop as a referendum to NI only to see if people are OK with staying in the Single Market indefinitely. Since the country is pro-remain and SM access guarantees no borders which is essential, there's a fairly good chance it'd get voted by all remainers as well as moderate brexiteers and get majority. Then DUP would be snookered and would be branded as undemocratic for opposing it.
 
Mr Pigeon said:
I edited this so it made me feel better and ramped it up to the parody that it should be. That way I can pretend the original article is just one big joke from the Guardian and nobody really thinks this way.

Although not all the small towns and villages that make up the traditional Conservative constituency of Royston Vassey in south Cheshire are strangers to economic hardship, Tarapolygamous, at its heart, looks like a model railway with every stop being filled with trolls half the size and twice as fat as their Hobbit counterparts.

In normal times the Conservative Association, situated in a quaint "British only" gated community, would busy itself with events such as burlesque lunches with Edwina Currie – as happened earlier in the year to a sellout crowd of three. But these are not normal times. The local MP, Antoinette Sandbach, is one of the 21 “rebels” who have been expelled from the parliamentary party for understanding what democracy means. On Friday the association’s doors are locked, its blinds closed and its guard poodle has been forced to chow down on abandoned sardines and Bombay Bad Boy Pot Noodles.

If a kind of interspecies warfare has broken out within the Conservative party, then Royston Vassey Conservatives appear, in mafia parlance, to have gone to their mistress's homes to wait out the storm.

The only official who’ll speak is a councillor and former deputy chairman of the association, John Leather.

“I have literally no fecking clue what's going on,” he says, referring to the withdrawal of the whip from Sandbach and the other 20 Tory MPs.

Does he think it has damaged Boris Johnson, a man who had few qualms about voting against his predecessor Theresa May’s government?

“I can’t really give you a view on that,” he says, diplomatically. “but I'm going to anyway and say that we must, at all costs, defeat the giant lizard Jeremy Corbyn before he stomps over our town's award winning rose beds". Leather says he’s in favour of men marrying their cats, but that others in the locality may think differently.

They certainly do.

“They’re all traitors,” says 80-year-old Brian Gale, outside Ginger and Pickles tea rooms on the high street. “I’m pleased all of them were kicked out. Some of them were good MPs but they let the side down with their interspecies malarkey and pandering to political correctness.”

Those good MPs include the former chancellor Philip Hammond, father of the house and also a former chancellor Ken Clarke, and several other household names. Yet there seems to be precious little sympathy for these accomplished Tories, let alone the local MP, in this genteel English village.

A married couple, who ask for their names to be withheld because “it’s a small community and a contentious issue”, say that Sandbach has paid the price for going against her constituents – in the referendum Eddisbury was marginally in favour of Leave. Her more serious sin was more likely going against Johnson.

“She wanted a deal for leaving, which I understand,” says the husband. “But it didn’t say anything about that on the ballot paper.”

He’s a little troubled by the mention that most of the promises made by the Leave Campaign have turned out to be utter bullshit and that people were sold a lie, but he is defiant.

“I think what the country needs is some middle ground that everybody can agree on.” he says, unsure of how to answer and instead resorting to a response that adds nothing to the debate. What, then, had they thought about May’s withdrawal agreement, which, after all, was an attempt to find a middle way?

“Defeat Jeremy Corbyn before he tries to suck my brains through my nose with his tentacled arms” he says, no longer sounding in the mood for compromise.

Another couple, Diana and Peter Ouseley are, if anything, more strident. Diana describes the rebels as “despicable” and is happy that Sandbach, Clarke et al have been lined up against a wall and shot. She doesn't like that this is causing delays in removing EU nationals from the country, she says.

“These are the people I call black people,” says Peter. “I don’t like them.”

Most Conservative voters I speak to in Tarapolygamous express the belief that Johnson is doing a good job in difficult circumstances. The fact that he has forced out MPs for doing the same as he did, by voting against the government, is seen not as a sign of hypocrisy but rather as a mark of strength.

“Whether or not one understands what's going on,” says one, “maybe it’s the way forward. I don't know. DEFEAT JEREMY FECKING CORBYN"

Just two Tories veer from whole-hearted endorsement of Johnson. Mandy Nickson, a sweat shop owner, says it’s “all a mess”. She is keen for the country to get out of the EU but she’s ambivalent about the prime minister’s strategy.

Retired businesswoman Elizabeth Lindop is the sole voice of outright dissent. “It’s disgraceful that the MPs were expelled,” she says. She thinks the Conservatives, as she puts it, have shat the bed. “They don’t have enough MPs for a majority but it's never been their attitude to let facts get in the way of their delusion."

As a consequence, she says she will no longer vote Conservative, and will settle for a more liberal party like the BNP or Charlie and his Orchestra.

But the unavoidable fact remains that in places such as Tarapolygamous there is an increasingly desperate desire among many voters to leave the EU as soon as possible. Although few understand what it means, they shout alot and ignore anyone who tries to get them to calm down, put their shirts back on, and quietly leave the Masonic Lodge.

Among them there is a common belief that, once the UK is out of the EU, the UK will remain the fourth biggest economy in the world despite losing the trade agreement with our biggest buyer or services. But at the moment the rift both within the Tory party and the country at large feels too wide, and almost any resolution too divisive, for that to happen. As Lindop says: “Some say he comes out at nights and steals the ring around your arse. And he's using the rings to build a big arse stealing machine. And then he's going to steal everyone's arse and use them to build some sort of socialist country where people have to give up their arse rings to some nasty tyrant like Groucho Marx or Rita Repulsa from the Power Rangers. I don't know if it's true or not but I definitely don't want Jeremy Corbyn getting the slightest opportunity to take MY arse ring.”

And if the past week is anything to go by, they’re bound to get stranger.
Click to expand...
:lol::lol::lol:

Just got around to seeing this.
 
MadMike said:
Why and would the GFA be breached by a backstop? It's there precisely to protect the GFA.
Click to expand...

As I understand it, the DUP will complain that such changes i.e. NI remaining in some sort of Customs/SM arrangement, separate from the rest of the UK, would have to be agreed by Stormont, since Stormont is not sitting, its not valid and this seems to be the basis of their argument that they would be forced into something they haven't agreed to, and whilst still (technically at least) under Direct Rule from Westminster.

To be honest I don't know the specific reasons but DUP spokesman Dodd was on News-Night last night and he seemed to be making this point!
 
WensleyMU said:
I see Corbyn is now saying Labour will be campaigning for another referendum.
Click to expand...
Thats been the policy for a long time
but unless things have changed first they want to negotiate a new deal to include in the referendum... although some say they would not negotiate a new deal and include mays deal (that will have at least 2 but possibly more options) and some MP's say they will have a free vote in that referendum, some say they the logic is they would back their own deal which will meet all 6 tests as they still want to respect the result of the first referendum and some say they will campaign for remain

its that part of the policy they need to put some clarity to as its a total mess
 
Infra-red said:
Indeed. This (the implications of the govt losing a vote of confidence) was covered by Cabinet Secretary Sir Mark Sedwill yesterday, while being questioned by MPs at the Commons public administration and constitutional affairs committee. It was covered live by The Guardian:
Click to expand...

I read that and i believe he's being misleading. Boris would be under no obligation to resign but if the commons give their confidence to an alternative government it's not for Boris to recommend in that situation, the queen would call for the leader of the new government.
 
sun_tzu said:
Thats been the policy for a long time
but unless things have changed first they want to negotiate a new deal to include in the referendum... although some say they would not negotiate a new deal and include mays deal (that will have at least 2 but possibly more options) and some MP's say they will have a free vote in that referendum, some say they the logic is they would back their own deal which will meet all 6 tests as they still want to respect the result of the first referendum and some say they will campaign for remain

its that part of the policy they need to put some clarity to as its a total mess
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure it matters what their individual MP's back. If some want to push a 'renegotiated' deal and others want to campaign for remain it's the public who would have the final say in either case. They only need to show unity in opposing crashing out with no deal which a few MP's aside, they are.
 
Blair:
"It is wrong as a matter of principle to mix the general election up with the specific Brexit question.

If the British people end up having a general election on Brexit you are going to mix up issues that should be kept separate.

What Boris Johnson thinks is: if I fight a Brexit general election, I can say to people: ‘Look it’s no deal or you get Jeremy Corbyn.’

You could end up with the bizarre situation where, let’s just suppose the Conservatives manage to win a majority with 35% to 40% of the vote, they will claim a mandate for no-deal when, if you add the votes for all the parties opposed to no-deal together, they will come to more than 50% of the vote. It is a completely undemocratic way of deciding it."

I think this is a strong point. The parliamentary deadlock is specifically regarding Brexit and will dominate any election. This is related to the challenge I've seen people make to those who voted Labour at the last GE and yet are remain in ideology: a general election should not be decided by a single issue.
 
Fingeredmouse said:
Blair:
I think this is a strong point. The parliamentary deadlock is specifically regarding Brexit and will dominate any election. This is related to the challenge I've seen people make to those who voted Labour at the last GE and yet are remain in ideology: a general election should not be decided by a single issue.
Click to expand...

It is a strong point but it's inevitable and that's where we are now which is why the opposition parties need to get on the same page or face a Tory/Farage no deal Brexit.
 
Fingeredmouse said:
Blair:
"It is wrong as a matter of principle to mix the general election up with the specific Brexit question.

If the British people end up having a general election on Brexit you are going to mix up issues that should be kept separate.

What Boris Johnson thinks is: if I fight a Brexit general election, I can say to people: ‘Look it’s no deal or you get Jeremy Corbyn.’

You could end up with the bizarre situation where, let’s just suppose the Conservatives manage to win a majority with 35% to 40% of the vote, they will claim a mandate for no-deal when, if you add the votes for all the parties opposed to no-deal together, they will come to more than 50% of the vote. It is a completely undemocratic way of deciding it."

I think this is a strong point. The parliamentary deadlock is specifically regarding Brexit and will dominate any election. This is related to the challenge I've seen people make to those who voted Labour at the last GE and yet are remain in ideology: a general election should not be decided by a single issue.
Click to expand...

Blair has spoken a lot of sense on Brexit. Sadly people just shout Iraq whenever he speaks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.