nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Rhineshark

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.

1. The EU
2. Remainers
3. Ireland
4. Corbyn

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

prawnsambo

I still don't think another referendum is a good idea. There still isn't anything like an overwhleming majority in favour of remaining evident in opinion polls and that could easily mean another tight decision that I wouldn't be brave enough to call.

Revoke the Article 50 notice and take the medicine. It's coming anyway, so may as well head it off at the pass. Or alternatively, jump off the cliff and show the people who would still prefer the long fall, that it's not the fall that hurts, but the sudden stop.

Professor Moriarty

prawnsambo wrote: »

I still don't think another referendum is a good idea. There still isn't anything like an overwhleming majority in favour of remaining evident in opinion polls and that could easily mean another tight decision that I wouldn't be brave enough to call.

Revoke the Article 50 notice and take the medicine. It's coming anyway, so may as well head it off at the pass. Or alternatively, jump off the cliff and show the people who would still prefer the long fall, that it's not the fall that hurts, but the sudden stop.

That would be fine except we'd be heading off the cliff too. Personally, I think a binary referendum would be won by Remain albeit not by a great margin. Similarly, a vote on three options would definitely see Remain win but probably not with a 50% majority.

Akrasia

cml387 wrote: »

Maybe the referendum would be between this deal or no deal.

May could say, the will of the people is still being upheld in that the vote to leave the EU is being followed up, now it's just the terms to be decided.

Having a 2nd referendum to decide between two options that each have less than 50% popular support would be an absolute kick in the teeth and a total affront to democracy especially when both options would guarantee that the UK would be worse off economically and diplomatically than the status quo (which like it or not, is to remain)

Econ__

mickoneill31 wrote: »

I find podcasts are a good way of educating myself on the subject.
I listen to more than this but these two are pretty good.

Tony Connellys Brexit Republic.

Fog in the Channel is also good from a French persons point of view.

Cakewatch - This is from the perspective of a couple of anti Brexit beaureaucrats. But they know their stuff as to how the EU works and they've worked in drafting agreements.

There's also "3 Blokes in a pub" on Youtube. They take a different topic each week and try to have an expert on the subject so they're not just waffling on about it.

I know the last two are anti Brexit. I tried listening to the pro Brexit side of the podcasts but they don't typically try to get any expert opinion. You'll have somebody from the Telegraph or a Brexiter telling you how it's all going to be a land of milk and honey or it's the EUs fault. If somebody has any suggestions of a pro Brexit podcast that tries to present the Brexit side with some evidence or facts I wouldn't mind listening to it.

BBC Brexitcast

FT Politics

Coffee House Shots

The above are all really good if you want to understand the domestic situation in Britain. The last two are not exclusively about Brexit but probably cover it 70-80% of the time.

If you want to learn about it from scratch, I'd recommend the BBC's 'Brexit: A Guide for the Perplexed'

Akrasia

I like the Remaniacs podcast. It features Ian Dunt from politics.co.uk and he seems to know what he's talking about

Econ__

Akrasia wrote: »

I like the Remaniacs podcast. It features Ian Dunt from politics.co.uk and he seems to know what he's talking about

Yeah it’s good for a laugh. Ian Dunt is generally the only who delivers cutting edge analysis in it though, the rest are more interested in taking the piss out of all things Brexit.

demfad

Akrasia wrote: »

I like the Remaniacs podcast. It features Ian Dunt from politics.co.uk and he seems to know what he's talking about

He has been by far the best, most accurate, knowledgable all round commentator on the politics and economics around Brexit. He's funny too!

Leroy42

They can't cancel art 50 as this would effectively be going against the ref result.

People want to leave the EU. The problem, as I see it, is that HMG has never taken the decision to truthfully lay out the options that vote gave them and more importantly the costs or benefits associated with the different scenarios.

Even last week the government won't fully take ownership and back the reports from DOF and BoE. Is there any wonder why so many people still deem Brexit a good idea, as they haven't been shown that it isn't?

If TM wants to win the vote it is actually pretty easy. Simply lay out the real costs of no deal. The job losses, the fall in investment, Stu falling. Basically what the BoE said last week. Lay out the cost in terms of average per household and the impact of fall off in foreign nurses in the NHS.

So I have no time for all those you try to paint TM as somehow being a sane voice in the wilderness. This should be the easiest vote in the history of the Hoc not anything like it is being painted.

josip

Bigus wrote: »

It might be May's clever plot to stay in the EU after all , we've been speculating here since article 50 was invoked what the hell was the logic , perhaps she knew what she was doing all along as a remainer. No deal , no Brexit , crashing out shoved off the table next week by consensus ?

I've believed that for some time now, it would explain a lot.
But I get the feeling that most people think this idea belongs in the Conspiracy Forum?

bamayang

Probably off topic, but could someone recommend a couple of good pro-brexiteers on Twitter to follow? Over time my following has fallen towards remain people and I often wonder am I in an echo chamber of 'lets laugh at those brexiteer ejits'.

Will try have a listen to the podcasts mentioned above, but if anyone could recommend a couple of good twitterers, I would appreciate it.

Sam Russell

josip wrote: »

Bigus wrote: »

It might be May's clever plot to stay in the EU after all , we've been speculating here since article 50 was invoked what the hell was the logic , perhaps she knew what she was doing all along as a remainer. No deal , no Brexit , crashing out shoved off the table next week by consensus ?

I've believed that for some time now, it would explain a lot.
But I get the feeling that most people think this idea belongs in the Conspiracy Forum?

Occam's Razor would suggest otherwise.

Why assign cunning motives and long term planning to a situation where a complete cockup and gross incompetence is a good enough explanation.

prawnsambo

Leroy42 wrote: »

They can't cancel art 50 as this would effectively be going against the ref result.

People want to leave the EU. The problem, as I see it, is that HMG has never taken the decision to truthfully lay out the options that vote gave them and more importantly the costs or benefits associated with the different scenarios.

Even last week the government won't fully take ownership and back the reports from DOF and BoE. Is there any wonder why so many people still deem Brexit a good idea, as they haven't been shown that it isn't?

If TM wants to win the vote it is actually pretty easy. Simply lay out the real costs of no deal. The job losses, the fall in investment, Stu falling. Basically what the BoE said last week. Lay out the cost in terms of average per household and the impact of fall off in foreign nurses in the NHS.

So I have no time for all those you try to paint TM as somehow being a sane voice in the wilderness. This should be the easiest vote in the history of the Hoc not anything like it is being painted.

They can certainly do it on the basis that the only options available are either hugely damaging to the economy or merely badly damaging to the economy. This is a government decision. Are they so far down the rabbit hole that they can't actually take a decision that prevents serious economic harm to the country?

That's a rhetorical question btw. Of course I wouldn't put it past this government to willingly pull the trigger on a mass economic suicide. But it's their mess, their decision and of course the referndum was advisory and not binding as we were told right from the start. They'll probably have to do it without Theresa May, but as has been stated time and again on this thread, parliament can't bind itself.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

They can't cancel art 50 as this would effectively be going against the ref result.

The referendum is neither here nor there, it was not binding, just advisory. Parliament can ignore it if they decide to.

A question does arise if the UK want to withdraw A50 - can they do it alone, do they need unanimous support to withdraw it from the other 27?

kowtow

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The referendum is neither here nor there, it was not binding, just advisory. Parliament can ignore it if they decide to.

A question does arise if the UK want to withdraw A50 - can they do it alone, do they need unanimous support to withdraw it from the other 27?

I think that question is to be answered by the ECJ this week?

oscarBravo

Sam Russell wrote: »

Occam's Razor would suggest otherwise.

Why assign cunning motives and long term planning to a situation where a complete cockup and gross incompetence is a good enough explanation.

That's Hanlon's Razor, actually: never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity.

FreudianSlippers

kowtow wrote: »

I think that question is to be answered by the ECJ this week?

Tomorrow - I have heard that it's likely that the ruling will be that they can unilaterally withdraw Art. 50 notification.

Econ__

josip wrote: »

I've believed that for some time now, it would explain a lot.
But I get the feeling that most people think this idea belongs in the Conspiracy Forum?

I personally don't buy it but you will enjoy this thread - https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1039194312221896704

briany

What are the chances of organised and persistent political violence on UK streets if no Brexit is to be had?

You must figure that No Brexit is the outcome Nigel Farage secretly wants because it would enable his party to take so much of the Brexit vote that he could find his party doing an electoral performance similar to the Lib Dems in 2010, and going into coalition government.

Leroy42

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The referendum is neither here nor there, it was not binding, just advisory. Parliament can ignore it if they decide to.

A question does arise if the UK want to withdraw A50 - can they do it alone, do they need unanimous support to withdraw it from the other 27?

Well, yes, from a purely legal (or is that constitutional?) POV you are correct but TM, the MPs and the media have painted this as the will of the people for so long that whether it is doable or not in terms of legality it certainly isn't in terms of political standing.

The ref have been allowed to be considered as the only voice ever to be listened to, with anybody even attempting to state that it was clear, based on correct information or even should be revisited is shouted down as antidemocratic.

So TM could reverse A50, it would see her lose the PM straight away though.

In terms of not going ahead with something that is damaging, therein lies the problem. Even now, the UK public are being denised the real information. They are still being told that whilst things may be tricky, the great future is worth it.

This falls completely at the feet of TM and the government. They have not only allowed, but actively embraced, the notion that anything that doesn't back your view can simply be dismissed.

Even now, TM is fighting against giving full legal advice to the HoC. If she was more concerned about the UK, rather than getting what she wants through she would be opening this to everyone and letting them all decide with the best info.

Zubeneschamali

briany wrote: »

What are the chances of organised and persistent political violence on UK streets if no Brexit is to be had?

Zero.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

Well, yes, from a purely legal (or is that constitutional?) POV you are correct but TM, the MPs and the media have painted this as the will of the people for so long that whether it is doable or not in terms of legality it certainly isn't in terms of political standing.

So what will all the enraged Brexiteers actually do, politically?

Vote for Corbyn? I don't think so. UKIP are entirely useless.

Econ__

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Zero.

Agree. Threats of violence on the streets is the real project fear.

Laois_Man

briany wrote: »

What are the chances of organised and persistent political violence on UK streets if no Brexit is to be had?

You must figure that No Brexit is the outcome Nigel Farage secretly wants because it would enable his party to take so much of the Brexit vote that he could find his party doing an electoral performance similar to the Lib Dems in 2010, and going into coalition government.

UKIP isn't really his party anymore and he has disassociated himself from the party since they started teaming up with the likes of Tommy Robinson!

I think he'll wait to see what happens next year and he'll set up a new party in protest against it unless it is a hard Brexit!

CelticRambler

briany wrote: »

What are the chances of organised and persistent political violence on UK streets if no Brexit is to be had?

Up to now, I've considered the spectre of violence on the streets of Britain as one of the more valid exaggerations of "project fear" (whether it's forecast by Leavers if the country remains, or Remainers if leaving triggers a period of worse austerity than up to now)

But having seen how quickly a directionless protest in France has degenerated into pure, meaningless vandalism, I'm beginning to change my opinion. While the French have always been somewhat Brexity in their negotiating strategy ("Raise my wages or I'll burn down the factory and put myself out of a job") I don't believe for one minute that the hoodlums who trashed the Arc de Triomphe gift-shop and museum care too hoots about the price of diesel.

It might be just the same kind of feckineejitery that used to infect English football, but it feels like there's something (or someone) else at work in the background; and if that's the case, then I can see how grumbling public discontent arising from a chaotic Brexit could be hijacked by this same "social influencer". I doubt that the strength of feeling amongst Leavers (even if they come across as more radical than Remainers) would be sufficient to bring the general public onto the streets in sufficient number, so I don't think a cancelled Brexit would be exploitable in the same way.

Chips Lovell

Mod Note

Hi folks, don't forget the charter rule about posting links and videos:

Please remember that we are not a blog, a news feed nor an announcement forum - if you are not willing to discuss what you post, then please don't post it.

When posting or linking to a video please provide a summary of the content as not everybody has access to video sites or the time to view them.

Long story short, you need to make your own arguments, not just post up other people's.

An Ciarraioch

Unlikely NI will have any of the Irish MEPs next year:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/irish-citizens-in-north-unlikely-to-have-vote-in-european-elections-1.3717747

RobMc59

Tell me how wrote: »

What is your opinion on this?
Do you think we should?

https://www.irishnews.com/opinion/letterstotheeditor/2017/09/20/news/ireland-should-be-reunited-by-rejoining-the-united-kingdom-1140831/
I hope the link works.(please excuse my limited internet skills!)

VinLieger

RobMc59 wrote: »

https://www.irishnews.com/opinion/letterstotheeditor/2017/09/20/news/ireland-should-be-reunited-by-rejoining-the-united-kingdom-1140831/
I hope the link works.(please excuse my limited internet skills!)

That's not an article its a letter from a "reader" with very dubious conclusions based of quite a blatant hardcore unionist bias

steddyeddy

RobMc59 wrote: »

I read an interesting article on Irishnews.com suggesting Ireland should be reunited by rejoining the UK-I wondered if anyone else has read it?

No I haven't. I just have to look to Northern Ireland to see how that would work out. We'd lose out culturally, economically and on the world stage by leaving the EU and jonknv thd sinking ship across the sea.

blanch152

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Unlikely NI will have any of the Irish MEPs next year:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/irish-citizens-in-north-unlikely-to-have-vote-in-european-elections-1.3717747

A bit ironic to see Sinn Fein criticising the lack of representation in Stratsbourg seeing as they are responsible for the lack of representation in Stormont and Westminister.