kuro68k wrote: » The British government is going to take it right to the cliff edge and hope that someone else compromises. Of course they have their excuses already lined up if no-one does, only real question is who they will blame.
Folkstonian wrote: I don’t think they anticipated that the PM would agree to the country being bound to the same relationship with Europe’s institutions as it is now for an undefined number of years.
Folkstonian wrote: » I absolutely agree that Britain is going to lose its voice in Europe regardless of the type of Brexit we end up with, that is unless the SMCU option gains more traction in the coming weeks But I think Brexiters probably envisaged that when they lost their influence in Europe, it would be a price worth paying for leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ, customs union and so on I don’t think they anticipated that the PM would agree to the country being bound to the same relationship with Europe’s institutions as it is now for an undefined number of years. It is quite funny that in such a politically divided country, people are now united in confusion, disappointment and even amusement at quite how badly Mrs May has done! I found this blog post from the spectator eye-opening and baffling in equal measurehttps://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/11/the-top-40-horrors-lurking-in-the-small-print-of-theresa-mays-brexit-deal/ I mean, when it’s spelled out so plainly, I begin to admire May’s audacity to actually bring it to the house and ask them in a vote whether it’s any good!
Folkstonian wrote: » I absolutely agree that Britain is going to lose its voice in Europe regardless of the type of Brexit we end up with, that is unless the SMCU option gains more traction in the coming weeks But I think Brexiters probably envisaged that when they lost their influence in Europe, it would be a price worth paying for leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ, customs union and so onI don’t think they anticipated that the PM would agree to the country being bound to the same relationship with Europe’s institutions as it is now for an undefined number of years. It is quite funny that in such a politically divided country, people are now united in confusion, disappointment and even amusement at quite how badly Mrs May has done! I found this blog post from the spectator eye-opening and baffling in equal measurehttps://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/11/the-top-40-horrors-lurking-in-the-small-print-of-theresa-mays-brexit-deal/ I mean, when it’s spelled out so plainly, I begin to admire May’s audacity to actually bring it to the house and ask them in a vote whether it’s any good!
LeinsterDub wrote: » Leaving the EU always meant no MEPs etc. I would agree that May's deal means losing it's voice. But every deal would. Perhaps in context her point would seem less silly but it's still silly to be talking about MEPs etc.
Folkstonian wrote: » No MEPs and no voice on the european council whilst still required to adhere to European law and regulation was her actual point. She argued that May’s current deal is worse than remaining because the only thing that changes for Britain is the loss of its voice I don’t think it’s necessary to wilfully manipulate the points made by brexiters to successfully debate them. But I think that’s twitter politics in a nutshell.
LeinsterDub wrote: » https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1063737676455653376 Words have completely failed me.
cryptocurrency wrote: » Britain have been humiliated on the world stage by the communist EU. The UK is a permanent seat holder of the UN Security Council and is getting humiliated like this. They have only one real course of action to save face here and the credibility as a power on the world stage and that’s to get rid of May, go for a no deal and severe security ties with the EU citing the unfriendly threats they’ve made to them. A few months of military brinkmanship would seen see the EU offer a simple free trade deal.
Rjd2 wrote: » https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/mars-bars-brexit-no-deal-gove Wickham the author would be very much in the know when it comes to the Tories. Basically its a report of why Raab and Esther left and ultimately why Gove decided to stay. Highlight....:pac: Has Gove ever eaten a Mars bar? Absolute muck. :pac:
correct horse battery staple wrote: » A falling currency is not a good thing (ask people of Venezuela) especially if your country is a net importer (and the UK is). A falling pound literally makes everyone holding pounds poorer, its a stealth brexit tax on top of the 500 million a week the UK economy is already haemorrhaging.
According to an industry insider present, the environment secretary was left reeling by a briefing from the Food and Drink Federation that of the 21 ingredients that make up a Mars bar manufactured at their factory in Slough, two imported products go off within a few days. In the event of no-deal, gridlock at the port of Dover would effectively shut down one of the country’s main routes for food imports. The ingredients couldn’t be stockpiled. The experts told Gove the UK’s entire supply of Mars bars would run out within two weeks. The striking case study helps explains the former Vote Leave campaigner’s decision to stay in the government on Friday.
DOCARCH wrote: » https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/foster-annoyed-at-ni-business-leaders-support-for-brexit-deal-1.3700531Ms Foster privately told chamber members she was unhappy with the attitude taken by business, and that they did not understand the threat the agreement posed to the union of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. You can't eat flags! Ideology vs. reality....
BonnieSituation wrote: » I know what your point was. The reason that this happened was because FPTP entrenched your vote. Why would anyone in Larne vote for the UUP candidate knowing that Sammy Wilson will romp home? So you have moderates on both sides voting for the extremes to ensure their vote counts. So yes, the DUP share went up but don't forget that was after the bloody nose they got at the last Stormont elections. So of course wavering Unionists would back the winning horse; it's a tough one to properly quantify. There's no doubt that the unionist vote is going down. But let them have it...
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » In NI recording religious persuasion is a mandatory requirement for any business with more than 10 employees. British as Finchley don't cha know. In the assembly elections the DUP got 28.1% of the vote last time out, just 0.2% more than SF. The days of full on Gerrymandering have gone but the recent boundary changes aid the Tories and the DUP. Yes FPTP and Safe Seats means there is no room in the centre for politicians or voters. All centrist voters can do is vote against the worst extremist by voting for the lesser of two evils. Centrist politicians who want to get in to power have to choose a side. In the US the choice is between two right wing parties. And the scary thing there is how little overlap there is now, you could imagine the moderates on both sides agreeing on many things. Here and on the continent parties have significant overlaps. So voters and politicians have choices. We don't really have safe seats. A poor candidate parachuted in can loose out to someone from the same party.
Rhineshark wrote: » The last ten pages or so is like a flashback to 2016. It is remarkable that the oft-debunked arguments really don't seem to have changed a bit.
Donald Trump wrote: » As clearly stated, posters suggestion is ludicrous. I merely asked what they based their suggestion on rather than jingoistic nonsense. Because even if one was of the crazy thought that military force was way to go, they'd have to have some "facts" to justify their own logic of how a favourable outcome would be attainable And I further posted a satirical video that his position reminded me of. Just in case people thought I was of the opinion that it was a seriously debatable topic So if you took my position/reply as being something to do with internet spreadsheets then I apologise for not making it more clear. At the same time, you criticized me for thinking I was doing something, and continued it on yourself by adding more details so I'm not too sure what to make of it. Posters suggestion of using military to force EU to concede some terms in a deal should be rightly treated with contempt
RobMc59 wrote: » Yes,I am one of the people from across the water and correct me if I'm wrong but the DUP is the largest political party in NI so there is obviously significant support for them-i do of course realise there is animosity between unionist and republicans which doesn't exist across the water as what religious persuasion a person is doesn't exist except perhaps in Scotland.
BonnieSituation wrote: » I know what your point was. The reason that this happened was because FPTP entrenched your vote. Why would anyone in Larne vote for the UUP candidate knowing that Sammy Wilson will romp home? So you have moderates on both sides voting for the extremes to ensure their vote counts.
cryptocurrency wrote: » Britain have been humiliated on the world stage by the communist EU.
Folkstonian wrote: » I hope you realise you come across as poorly in your little tit-for-tat exchange as the poster you’re replying to? Britain and Europe aren’t going to war. Wars, when they are fought, aren’t won by comparing values found on internet spreadsheets. They tell nothing of the real world frictions that every nation faces. It comes across as infantile and petty The French military has serious mechanical reliability problems at the moment especially amongst it’s helicopter fleet, it’s one of the main reasons the RAF has become a key ally in West Africa for them with chinooks doing a substantial amount of their heavy lifting Britain, similarly has gaps in its defence capabilities (not least a total reliance on the US navy in anti submarine patrol aircraft) that the MoD are scrambling to patch up That’s the real world
Donald Trump wrote: » Show me some sources that claim UK is stronger? UK is 5th ranked in terms of standing soldiers. It's not the 1800's any more
