lawred2 wrote: » is it? while it gives them free reign in Parliament - it's not exactly a winner in the old PR stakes... they have the numbers to defeat the Tories when the Tories are actually present and sitting so why be seen (rightly or wrongly) to be pulling such a 'stunt' to achieve the same result? I'd like to hear the SNP's reasoning really..
Zubeneschamali wrote: » David Gauke (one of the expelled rebels) published an article today suggesting that Brexit won't happen on October 31st and Johnson will get the blame, which is probably true. At the bottom, he suggests: If all of the leaders of the Leave campaign had had the courage to set out the trade-offs, faced up to reality and argued for a position based on the real costs and benefits, we could have concluded this process much earlier by leaving with a deal. I think this is wrong, and it is why we are facing either No Deal or No Brexit. If Leave had championed a Norway deal (as the Telegraph suggested they should before the referendum), everyone would have seen immediately that Brexit is worse than Remain, and they would never Brexit at all. In fact possible every deal, when spelled out as costs and benefits, is worse than Remain. The only option left is No Deal.
An Ciarraioch wrote: » This lengthy thread (starting with the tweet below) on the Alternative Arrangements Commission event at the Tory conference has to be read to be believed, if only to illustrate the yawning gap that would need to be bridged by Friday, at the latest:https://twitter.com/ConHome/status/1178671507523985408
prawnsambo wrote: » I'm not sure a VONC is a good idea anyway. It puts the pressure back on the opposition parties and takes it off Johnson. They have 14 days to come up with an alternative government with the brexit clock ticking louder and louder. Wouldn't be the best strategy imo. And they would be risking an election that would take things entirely out of their hands. I think Jo Maugham had come up with an alternaive to a VONC that gives them control without the danger of an election. The danger from an election (for those unaware) is that the PM can set the date regardless of what parliament agrees.
A Dub in Glasgo wrote: » An election cannot take place before 31 October in any event so not sure why the reluctance
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » https://twitter.com/ConHome/status/1178687541773553670 Or in the Irish sea...
They’re openly, shamelessly talking about forcing out Boris Johnson and creating a ‘government of national unity’ whose job would be to delay Brexit – again – and then hold a second referendum or a General Election. That the political class is casually chatting about taking such a drastic, emergency, anti-democratic measure as setting up an unelected government to stop Brexit is the most worrying sign of the times yet.
J Mysterio wrote: » New poll! Bad results for government!https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1178709695785312258
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: » The poll findings also show:https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/1178709437281918977https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/1178709442713587713 As bad as the current government is, the UK electorate seems to believe Corbyn would be worse.
prawnsambo wrote: » Because parliament is dissolved 25 days before polling day. So Boris can get his prorogation by setting the polling day close enough to b-day as that 25 days allows.
CelticRambler wrote: » Either he "gets Brexit done" (I really hate that phrase :mad:) with a crash-out and reality will hit home as time passes; or he doesn't deliver on his "do or die" promise, and his base will pick the "die" option for him.
jimmycrackcorm wrote: » Brexiteers sense of illogic is quite dining in its idiocy. I quote below from a blog that popped up on my radar. Not understanding how parliment elects a government or even that MPs actually represent all people not just the 51percent...
maebee wrote: » I heard a lady MP on with either Pat Kenny or Sean O'Rourke this morning complaining that the wifi password in parliament has now been changed to "getbrexitdone". I didn't catch it all but I think she meant that it was now configured in such a way that every MP has to log in with this password. More childish pettiness from BoJO and Cummings.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » That's amazing. Surely such a decision should/would be made by a civil servant?
Deleted User wrote: » Most likely, one with a sense of humour, but "getbrexitdone" can be taken both ways, do something to get it off the agenda and get back to all the other stuff that is piling up to be done.
schmittel wrote: » Anybody know of any UK forums with decent reasoned Brexit debate? Have had a browse but most of the ones I have seen are a bit shouty, on both sides.
ambro25 wrote: » I'd been posting on Sheffield Forum for years, and the Brexit megathread (on its 8th or 9th inception, just like here) was long a worthy discussion. Not on this thread's level, for sure, but a couple of semi-worthy Brexiteer posters, and mostly civil tone (very strict moderating in that respect). I just gave it up last week. Ever since Johnson arrived in no.10, there's just nothing left from Brexiteers but handwaving and bad faith to rival Johnson's Ministers. Any commenting by the Remain side based on news, and it's an insta-dead cat drop with an Express or Daily Mail linky, followed by Schrödinger EU (fat cats globalist EU / socialist EU) haranguing, and then the same debating points looping around (due to intellectual dishonesty/said bad faith, I'll give you one guess about which side). It's just not healthy or stimulating to frequent anymore. Very happy to let them wallow in their biased ignorance now, until they're turned into soylent green.
An Ciarraioch wrote: » As I've mentioned here before, both the Digital Spy politics forum and the EU Referendum blog tend to have fairly intelligent debates.
J Mysterio wrote: » lol, facepalm etc. "Customs Centres" 5-10 miles from the border.https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1178760377678618626Genius.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d96cd5eb793ec44f833dd8d0bb2a52ac.svg)
