ThePanjandrum wrote: » Brits often have long fuses but they do not like being told what to do. I'm always mystified by the way that the Irish had the guts to stand up against the treaty of Lisbon being foisted upon them but then, a mere 16 months later, you caved in. Why?
mickoneill31 wrote: » Its common for foreigners to be mystified as the way its reported abroad its frequently said that we were made to vote twice. During the campaign there were "exaggerations" on the no side. The Irish government went back to the EU and got some guarantees to alleviate these. Then they went back to the people. The people, being adults, have the capacity to change their minds and did so. It's something you can do when stuff is clarified or fixed for you. Most Irish people don't really ideologically stick to a position and will vote for the way that benefits them most.
Russman wrote: » I'm just wondering, despite all the statements and declarations, if the EU might "cave" at the last minute, just as DD, IDS etc are banking on / expect to happen.
Just a quick post on why we are where we are, lets have a look and see how Tory MPs think no-deal will shake out for the UK.
Water John wrote: » Parliament are about to force TM to act within 3 days if she loses the vote next week, no drifting.https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/09/brexit-pm-may-be-forced-to-come-up-with-new-deal-three-days-after-commons-defeat She has to return to HoC with a Plan, forcing her hand.
seamus wrote: » Not a chance. The only thing worse from an EU perspective than a no-deal Brexit, is caving in to UK demands. That would be the end of the EU and the beginning of decades of economic turmoil and civil and military conflict in Europe. One thing to consider is that house prices in the UK may not actually be affected that badly. A devalued pound doesn't necessarily follow that the price of property drops. The UK will still be a largely westernised, civilised, stable-ish nation. A cheap pound could see an influx of foreign money buying up houses and propping up house prices. It does go to show though why house prices are not a measure of the health of an economy.
lawred2 wrote: » a plan for what? all that's left at that stage is cancellation or extension right? If the plan is going back to Brussels for another mass then I give up
Enzokk wrote: » Seems to me that there is a chess game happening now. They are trying to prevent Theresa May from delaying the next vote on her deal for long enough that she scares MPs into voting for it. I believe the intention of those who will vote for this is to get a second referendum but you can only get that if May is out of options and they are trying to prevent one of her options being to run down the clock to 28 March 2019.
seamus wrote: » More bluster and posturing. "If we don't like your plan, you have to go back and get a new one in 3 days without any direction on what we want". I'm not sure what hand is being forced; she has no other hands to play. After 3 days, she'll come back with exactly the same plan, maybe with some assurances from the EU that are meaningless in reality (i.e. are already in the agreement), but are enough to call it "different".
Tell me how wrote: » They know that. They know Europe is going to give her the don't call us, we'll call you. They will want her to resign. Many in her party already do. The opposition do if it means a GE.
Thomas_IV wrote: » Just another term to describe this Brexit Charade. A chess game it was all along to me, but I always chose to see it like a third rate play in a shabby theatre.
Enzokk wrote: » Undoubtedly, but when has politicians ever really as a whole been in touch with their voters? They don't go through the same struggles and fears that their voters do day to day and in most cases they are much better off than their voters ever will be as well. For them politics is a game that is played, but for us voters it is our livelihoods.
seamus wrote: » If it goes this way, then I'm just going to give up trying to guess what happens next. Not that I've been right even once through this whole farce, but if they vote down the WA and send May back for "more", then anything could happen next. The collapse of Great Britain as a sovereign state? You know, it's not impossible.
Nody wrote: » Of course it will be to go back to Brussels as a plan; it's the only "plan" that she can do without having to actually do anything in practice and let the clock run down for a second vote.
Tell me how wrote: » Labour have said today that they will forward a motion of No Confidence if she loses the Brexit vote. I'm not holding my breath that his will happen until they actually do so but if it does proceed, could we see enough conservatives vote for Theresa May's government just to retain power? If not, then GE it is. I imagine the DUP haggling will be immense between the declaration of the motion and the actual vote if it goes this way.
Leroy42 wrote: » I still do not see how a second vote is going to happen. There is simply not the numbers, or the will, to do it.
Leroy42 wrote: » No way any Tory or DUP will vote in favour of a Labour No confidence motion. It would quite likely see them out of power for the next 10 years. Better to be in power making a mess of things than out of power.
Leroy42 wrote: » I would agree Seamus, except for the extension of A50. I think the EU would be open to such an idea based on a 2nd ref (which I don't see happening, at least not with a remain option) or a GE. If the 2nd ref is purely on the basis of Mays Deal or No deal I don't see the EU agreeing to an extension as that has been available for a few months now and extending A50 actually creates quite a few issues for the EU and they probably won't see it as worth it. In terms of the EU seeing an extension as allowing them more time to prepare for No Deal themselves, they have already issues their No Deal planning for items such as airtravel etc so there really isn't a need for a few weeks extension. I think I might actually be arguing with my own point at this stage, that is the effect all this is having on me!
Peregrinus wrote: » Given the government's majority, 20 pragmatic tories willing to vote against the government could well be a game-changer. The particular issue at stake in this vote is not hugely significant in itself, but what the vote does mean is that there is a majority in the house willing to vote against the government in order to avert a no-deal Brexit, even if they don't know what the alternative is. In short, there is a majority who would rule out no-deal Brexit a priori, and require whatever is eventually delivered to be drawn from the menu of options that remain. And that should give the ERG pause for thought. For, if we rule out no-deal Brexit, what remains is (a) Brexit on May's terms, or (b) no Brexit. (Any other possibility is just a fantasy at this point, and refinements like "ask for an A50 extension" dont' change the options, just the date on which the choice has to be made.) And this in turn means that if the ERG are successful in torpedoing May's Brexit, the likely upshot is no Brexit at all. Which should make them think twice about torpedoing May's Brexit.
