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.
Sam Russell wrote: » You missed the point that Cameron went to the EU to get a better deal for the UK but the EU said you already have a better deal than anyone else - and No - you cannot cherry pick the four freedoms the single market depends on. This allowed the Brexiteers to claim the EU are bullies and not open to democracy and is run by undemocratic, faceless, un-elected bureaucrats. Of course, the UK is run by un-elected faceless Civil Servants, ruled over by Governments that have not enjoyed majority single party governments since 1932.
That was a strategic mistake that cost him the referendum. If he did not go to Brussels cap in hand, he could have claimed the the UK enjoyed the best deal of any EU states. He also tried 'project fear' instead of 'peerless privileged' to win.
serfboard wrote: » And who is the largest? The EPP, a grouping that also includes Silvio Berlusconi's Forza Italia and the Hungarian Far-Right party Fidesz. In fact: Barosso's political party, the Social Democrats, are actually a centre-right party, so I don't know where you're getting Socialist from. They are also in the EPP as well, by the way, which is another indication. Barosso also disgracefully intervened in the Scottish Independence Referendum, but that's probably for another thread.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » Sam Russell wrote: » You missed the point that Cameron went to the EU to get a better deal for the UK but the EU said you already have a better deal than anyone else - and No - you cannot cherry pick the four freedoms the single market depends on. This allowed the Brexiteers to claim the EU are bullies and not open to democracy and is run by undemocratic, faceless, un-elected bureaucrats. Of course, the UK is run by un-elected faceless Civil Servants, ruled over by Governments that have not enjoyed majority single party governments since 1932. That was a strategic mistake that cost him the referendum. If he did not go to Brussels cap in hand, he could have claimed the the UK enjoyed the best deal of any EU states. He also tried 'project fear' instead of 'peerless privileged' to win. It did not work. Not sure who you are blaming here, the EU or the UK. Can’t see that changing too many leave voters minds.
Sam Russell wrote: » You missed the point that Cameron went to the EU to get a better deal for the UK but the EU said you already have a better deal than anyone else - and No - you cannot cherry pick the four freedoms the single market depends on. This allowed the Brexiteers to claim the EU are bullies and not open to democracy and is run by undemocratic, faceless, un-elected bureaucrats. Of course, the UK is run by un-elected faceless Civil Servants, ruled over by Governments that have not enjoyed majority single party governments since 1932. That was a strategic mistake that cost him the referendum. If he did not go to Brussels cap in hand, he could have claimed the the UK enjoyed the best deal of any EU states. He also tried 'project fear' instead of 'peerless privileged' to win. It did not work.
Sam Russell wrote: » The fault lies with Cameron for thinking the EU needs the UK more than the UK needs the EU. It would only need to change the minds of 2% or 3% of the voting public to change the result. It is the attitude it presented to the electorate that the EU was a bully that would not listen.
igCorcaigh wrote: » 11 December for the parliament vote
11 December for the parliament vote
serfboard wrote: » Via a torturous metaphor, Philip Boucher Hayes on DriveTime (Radio 1) put the Parliamentary arithmetic as follows: For the Deal: 230 Against: 400 Anyone care to hazard their own guesses or dispute those numbers?
Tell me how wrote: » Not sure that was the case. He tried to put the Brexit thing to bed for at least another generation but it failed spectacularly. He made plenty of errors but I suspect he always knew the importance of the EU to the UK but still couldn't silence the Brexiteers, due in part to the influence which the media still has on public opinion there.
Inquitus wrote: » 11th December it gets voted down, there are then 10 days til Parliament recesses until the 7th Jan, wonder if it will get to a 2nd vote before the recess, or if they will keep sitting given the circumstances.
Imreoir2 wrote: » Quite possible May just lets them stew over Christmas, let them all go back to their constitutiencies and explain to business people, NHS staff etc etc how No-Deal is supposed to work.
Strazdas wrote: » Crikey....there's no guarantee even a second vote on the deal would be passed at this rate. It would require 90 or so MPs to do a dramatic u-turn. I think it's more likely we might be into GE, second referendum or extending A50 territory.
McGiver wrote: » I think Labour, or rather Corbyn mostly, are betting on: 1. WA voted down in HoC 2. GE called 4. HMG will ask the EU for an extension to facilitate the GE Now, EU may be willing to grant an extension (how exactly?) but would need some promises, which obviously cannot be made before the GE if the outcome isn't known. Thin ice.
BonnieSituation wrote: » What would be the reasoning for the EU to grant an extension? Bar the revocation of A50 there really is none.
listermint wrote: » New Fledgling political party in the UKhttps://www.renewparty.org.uk/
Rjd2 wrote: » https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1067126406050664448 This sounds amazing. For those who don't want to click, some in Downing Street want a TV debate with May v Jez. I want to see May pretend to support Brexit and Jez pretend to oppose it with a zillion cliches floating about. Over/Under "will of the people" shout outs.:p May though will probably bottle it last minute and send Rudd again though.:(
Imreoir2 wrote: » The suggestion is that the EU would allow an extension for a referendum in the hopes that Brexit would be cancelled. I don't see this as being a very likely outcome though.
Imreoir2 wrote: » If May does not want to grant a GE, and I can't see why she would, then there won't be one. There is no time for anyone other than May to take Brexit through, a leadership challenge would take to long, a GE would take to long and the only person that can ask for an extension to A50 is May herself. The looming deadline is her biggets ally now, an extension only gives her enemies more time to move against her.
Akrasia wrote: » If she refuses to budge on her 'deal' and refuses to allow a 2nd referendum despite mounting pressure to do so, then if the UK ends up crashing out of the EU without a deal it will be 100% her fault.
Eric Cartman wrote: » true, but a second referendum would see most of the tories out of a job, the motions of no confidence would be insane. I am absolutely not a fan but a crash out Brexit is less dangerous for Britain than PM Corbyn.
Eric Cartman wrote: » Akrasia wrote: » If she refuses to budge on her 'deal' and refuses to allow a 2nd referendum despite mounting pressure to do so, then if the UK ends up crashing out of the EU without a deal it will be 100% her fault. true, but a second referendum would see most of the tories out of a job, the motions of no confidence would be insane. I am absolutely not a fan but a crash out Brexit is less dangerous for Britain than PM Corbyn.
