Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

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

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
Irish Jet said:
I don’t think anyone’s accused him of being honest. Taking a decisive stance on such a divisive issues could be electoral suicide.

And for what? He can’t call a second referendum, he can’t reverse the decision to trigger article 50. He doesn’t have any power. All of those asking him to be strong in his opposition to Brexit don’t realise the damage that could do him. He has enough smears coming his way as it is – The Murdoch press would never let the people forget that he betrayed their vote.

He’s taken the wait and see approach so the current or previous poll figures are as irrelevant as Tony Blair. The entire point is to allow the Tories to tear themselves apart – Which they are kindly doing. They have the power, the responsibility and they’ve botched it spectacularly from Cameron to now. It will be open season on their party come the general election, whenever that is – That is when the polls will shift. Brexit was Labour’s major weakness in the last campaign as there was pressure to commit – That will not be an issue next time. They will win IMO.
Click to expand...

If we win and the economy isn't in such a foul shape so that we can invest properly, then it will have been worth it.

Just like Miliband in 2015 we are waiting to take advantage of the Government's weakness. Hopefuly history won't repeat itself.

Whether we have a decent economy, heaven knows.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
But... but... sovereignty.

You hear that a lot from Brexiteers. What does it even mean? The stumbling blocks to Brexit are about aligning regulatory and trade legislation to allow the UK to continue to operate effectively on the margin of a massive network of countries that have already solved these issues.

What the feck does sovereignty have to do with anything? Can someone please come up with one hypothetical scenario where the Uk will benefit from this hypothetical future sovereignty? Because I’m stumped. If the way your government has handles this whole Brexit SNAFU is an example of how effectively the Uk can operate in isolation when it comes to complex, challening situations then god help you all.
Click to expand...
You sound like a man who actually enjoys straight bananas. I want my bananas British - grown here, eaten here, bent here.
 
Bury Red said:
I don't think Corbyn is the reason people are disenfranchised with politics, his staying power is probably a result of that disenfranchisement as they are sick of the long line of Oxford PPE graduates like Cameron, Miliband, Campbell, Hunt, Hague etc all the way back to Heath and Wilson as well as the press who cover them from Peston to Murdoch.

I'm not a fan of Corbyn's stance on the EU but in general he's still refreshingly honest and unwavering for a modern politician.
Click to expand...
So is Mogg
 
diarm said:
What is it about modern British politicians that leads you to believe you would be better off with more sovereignty?

I'm sure you understand that even if you go it entirely alone, there will be rules you will be expected to adhere to? If you want to trade with the EU or anyone else you will have to meet certain regulations - only if you go it alone, you will have less influence on setting those regulations.

I've heard quite a few people claim they are better than the racists/xenophobes because they voted Brexit for sovereignty. But at least the racist feckers understand what it is they wanted when they were voting. The poor unfortunates who seem to think Britain is still an empire and should still be writing one set of rules for themselves to live by and another set for the rest of the world are truly lost.
Click to expand...

The issue is that some people actually think that there are more legal acts coming from the EU than coming from national legislate organs. Then you have people that don't understand that EU members are one of 28, they have a voice but since everyone is sovereign their voice isn't louder than the other 27, in the parliament though there is a pro rata based on population which means that even then the UK are one of the big boys.
 
Frosty said:
I assume he is saying that sovereignty wasn't lost in any real sense from Parliament when we joined the EU.

On that note though - if we do crash out on WTO rules, then we will be subject to WTO rules and regulations and subject to the decisions of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body. Honest question - how does the sovereignty objection toward the EU not also apply to the WTO and the myriad of other multinational organisations and agreements the UK is party to?
Click to expand...

The WTO is not comparable to the EU - which has political and administrative arms. You're talking about the EU like it was still the EEC. It's been a completely different beast since Lisbon.


diarm said:
What is it about modern British politicians that leads you to believe you would be better off with more sovereignty?

I'm sure you understand that even if you go it entirely alone, there will be rules you will be expected to adhere to? If you want to trade with the EU or anyone else you will have to meet certain regulations - only if you go it alone, you will have less influence on setting those regulations.

I've heard quite a few people claim they are better than the racists/xenophobes because they voted Brexit for sovereignty. But at least the racist feckers understand what it is they wanted when they were voting. The poor unfortunates who seem to think Britain is still an empire and should still be writing one set of rules for themselves to live by and another set for the rest of the world are truly lost.
Click to expand...

That argument doesn't correspond with reality. The EU has trade deals with loads of nations and they don't de facto assume other nations have to have regulatory alignment with EU rules.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
But... but... sovereignty.

You hear that a lot from Brexiteers. What does it even mean? The stumbling blocks to Brexit are about aligning regulatory and trade legislation to allow the UK to continue to operate effectively on the margin of a massive network of countries that have already solved these issues.

What the feck does sovereignty have to do with anything? Can someone please come up with one hypothetical scenario where the Uk will benefit from this hypothetical future sovereignty? Because I’m stumped.
Click to expand...

I honestly think in their heads it is:
  • We should be the worlds governing body and write the rules everyone else lives by.
  • We should be allowed to operate outside these rules because we are the greater and wiser power.
  • Everyone should be made to trade with us on our terms because we are the greater and wiser power.
  • Savages from abroad exist to serve the Empire.
Click to expand...

Centuries of patting each other on the back over the glory of the empire has left them completely oblivious to even the notion that the rest of the world might not think they are wise and wonderful as they themselves do.
 
Andrew~ said:
That argument doesn't correspond with reality. The EU has trade deals with loads of nations and they don't de facto assume other nations have to have regulatory alignment with EU rules.
Click to expand...

EU members aren't third countries, they are the ones who built these rules for themselves, the UK being a leading member when it comes to trade rules.
 
Bury Red said:
I don't think Corbyn is the reason people are disenfranchised with politics, his staying power is probably a result of that disenfranchisement as they are sick of the long line of Oxford PPE graduates like Cameron, Miliband, Campbell, Hunt, Hague etc all the way back to Heath and Wilson as well as the press who cover them from Peston to Murdoch.

I'm not a fan of Corbyn's stance on the EU but in general he's still refreshingly honest and unwavering for a modern politician.
Click to expand...
He and Mcdonnell are gobsmackingly dishonest. We all know both have been anti-EU for their whole careers and still are, but they won't admit it. Witness their stance on a second referendum at the last party conference, trying desperately to avoid calling for one, and after intense pressure from demonstrations eventually said 'we haven't ruled one out'. Through gritted teeth, I'm sure.
 
Michael Gove leaves his home ahead of press conference



ReutersCopyright: Reuters


Environment Secretary Michael Gove, who is understood to be in line for the job of Brexit secretary, has just left his home.

The prime minister is due to give a press conference in around 20 minutes.

The BBC understands that Mr Gove has been offered Dominic Raab's job, following his resignation earlier today.

But Mr Gove will only consider it if he can renegotiate the deal, it is understood.
Click to expand...

Good luck with that one Mr Gove...
 
711 said:
He and Mcdonnell are gobsmackingly dishonest. We all know both have been anti-EU for their whole careers and still are, but they won't admit it. Witness their stance on a second referendum at the last party conference, trying desperately to avoid calling for one, and after intense pressure from demonstrations eventually said 'we haven't ruled one out'. Through gritted teeth, I'm sure.
Click to expand...

Anti-EU and pro-Brexit are not mutually exclusive.
 
Irish Jet said:
I don’t think anyone’s accused him of being honest. Taking a decisive stance on such a divisive issues could be electoral suicide.

And for what? He can’t call a second referendum, he can’t reverse the decision to trigger article 50. He doesn’t have any power. All of those asking him to be strong in his opposition to Brexit don’t realise the damage that could do him. He has enough smears coming his way as it is – The Murdoch press would never let the people forget that he betrayed their vote.

He’s taken the wait and see approach so the current or previous poll figures are as irrelevant as Tony Blair. The entire point is to allow the Tories to tear themselves apart – Which they are kindly doing. They have the power, the responsibility and they’ve botched it spectacularly from Cameron to now. It will be open season on their party come the general election, whenever that is – That is when the polls will shift. Brexit was Labour’s major weakness in the last campaign as there was pressure to commit – That will not be an issue next time. They will win IMO.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying he should back remain. I disagree strongly that he should be called an 'honest' politician when Labour have claimed when pushed (they've hid as much as they can from the issue) that their Brexit would protect jobs whilst fulfilling the democratic mandate to leave. They've claimed that they'd win an impossible deal the same as the Tories, that's when they'e not been in hiding on the most important British issue since World War 2.

If he was honest he'd lay the cards on the table and tell the electorate that they would fulfill the democratic mandate to leave but it will hurt and that people will lose their jobs. That would be honest.

Labour might well win the next election but you'd get short odds on a garden gnome beating the Tories next time round.
 
Andrew~ said:
The WTO is not comparable to the EU - which has political and administrative arms. You're talking about the EU like it was still the EEC. It's been a completely different beast since Lisbon.
Click to expand...

I think on the first point I would see it differently from yourself but that is open to argument and discussion.

However, surely you mean to say that the EU has been a different beast earlier than Lisbon? Maastricht and the Single European Act involved a greater consolidation of functions and powers at the European level than Lisbon, which basically was a consolidating treaty?
 
What the hell is the conference if not a resignation? Is she about to u-turn and go for another round of negotiation?
 
Un4givableB said:
Is Gove dumb enough to take that hospital pass ?
Click to expand...
he is slimey enough...
its either the PM admits she needs me to re-negotiate a better deal and although I dont like the deal Ill do it for the good of the country
(knowing the PM is toast before any negotiations can take place)
Or the PM wont let me re-negotiate it - its currently not good enough so Ive got to go as I believe in Brexit
 
afrocentricity said:
Either the EU wants to work with us or they don't, if they want us to stay then what's the worth in forcing us to leave with no deal?

All this talk of how UK will get concessions, how much the EU need us. Is that leave date is set in stone with no room to maneuver?
Click to expand...
"Forcing" :lol:

They didn't cause this, you did. You're forcing yourselves to leave.

And they (a) need you less than you need them and (b) certainly need you less than they need every other country who would certainly (and rightfully) demand similar concessions if they were to just bend over for all of your demands. The onus is on you to come up with a deal they'll accept and if you can't it's your fault. (By you I mean your politicians and Leave voters, not you personally, unless you voted Leave.)

Massive Spanner said:
Yeah it's just given it back to most of the countries it took it from :)
Click to expand...
:lol::lol:
 
JPRouve said:
EU members aren't third countries, they are the ones who built these rules for themselves, the UK being a leading member when it comes to trade rules.
Click to expand...

I don't see what your point is? After enacting A50, the UK is negotiating as a third country. Which is why accepting regulatory alignment doesn't make sense.

Frosty said:
I think on the first point I would see it differently from yourself but that is open to argument and discussion.

However, surely you mean to say that the EU has been a different beast earlier than Lisbon? Maastricht and the Single European Act involved a greater consolidation of functions and powers at the European level than Lisbon, which basically was a consolidating treaty?
Click to expand...

Sure. I said Lisbon because it's the most recent one.
 
I love this argument about the EEC - EU . More drivel.
I voted in the 1975 referendum and I wasn't voting to have a supply chain for my Nissan car in Sunderland.
The same arguments were around then about FoM, sovereignty etc. Same old crap recycled 40 years later.
 


won't be a resignation, Gove announced? People seem to think he won't take the role.
 
I'm guessing she just lays out her timeline on a parliamentary vote.
 
Andrew~ said:
I don't see what your point is? After enacting A50, the UK is negotiating as a third country. Which is why accepting regulatory alignment doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

You said that Brexit was about sovereignty. Which means that you expected to gain more sovereignty, the issue is that you didn't lose any sovereignty as a member of the EU. As members of the EU, the UK were decision and policy makers.
 
I'm hoping for sod this for a game of soldiers,May resigns, to spend more time running through wheat fields.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I'm not saying he should back remain. I disagree strongly that he should be called an 'honest' politician when Labour have claimed when pushed (they've hid as much as they can from the issue) that their Brexit would protect jobs whilst fulfilling the democratic mandate to leave. They've claimed that they'd win an impossible deal the same as the Tories, that's when they'e not been in hiding on the most important British issue since World War 2.

If he was honest he'd lay the cards on the table and tell the electorate that they would fulfill the democratic mandate to leave but it will hurt and that people will lose their jobs. That would be honest.

Labour might well win the next election but you'd get short odds on a garden gnome beating the Tories next time round.
Click to expand...

I’d use the term principled more than honest with Corbyn – Relative to most politicians that is. He’s definitely learning to play the game now though.

Everything you’ve described is simply politics. He’s playing to the fantasy land that the Brexit deal was knowing it’s not a deal he’ll ever be accountable for. He knows taking a hard stance either way would alienate 50% of the country and potentially destroy any chance of beating the Tories down the line.

Why would he take the honest approach? That is literally what May has just done and 90% of the country is tearing into her.

To be honest would be for him to say “I’ll honour the wishes of the British people but I would also add that you’re a bunch of stupid c*nts.”
 
Charlie Foley said:
"Forcing" :lol:

They didn't cause this, you did. You're forcing yourselves to leave.

And they (a) need you less than you need them and (b) certainly need you less than they need every other country who would certainly (and rightfully) demand similar concessions if they were to just bend over for all of your demands. The onus is on you to come up with a deal they'll accept and if you can't it's your fault. (By you I mean your politicians and Leave voters, not you personally, unless you voted Leave.)
Click to expand...
afrocentricity said:
Yea I know, it was rhetorical. Decent summary tho ;)
Click to expand...

I often forget sarcasm etc gets lost on the internet. I wasn't being serious...
 
Paul the Wolf said:
I love this argument about the EEC - EU . More drivel.
I voted in the 1975 referendum and I wasn't voting to have a supply chain for my Nissan car in Sunderland.
The same arguments were around then about FoM, sovereignty etc. Same old crap recycled 40 years later.
Click to expand...

I suspect that a lot of people don't know the chronology. They only recently learned about the commission(administrative arm) and think that it's a new thing when in reality it's there since the early 50s. The preamble of the Treaty of Rome(1957) makes it clear, not only it stipulates that the members are determined to lay the foundations for an ever-closer union but also mentions the ambition to develop and strengthen the union economically and socially.

The EU has never been a secret.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.