Seth Brundle wrote: » So I presume that Farage will amend his tweet then Separately, the Economist don't appear to have much faith in the new agreement...https://twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/1184779166576795648
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Why would they? It looks like May's deal reformatted with a new cover and Johnson to sell it.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Seriously? If he goes to the public, he'll be annihilated. The way to stop this is cancelling it. Even if the deal passes, we'll be back to this nonsense when it comes to negotiating the FTA.
Tea Shock wrote: » That‘s why I said some other trick. They can request the extension but ask the EU not to give an answer on it til they try pass WA II a second, and maybe a third time. They will leave with no deal if WA II passes and I’m certain they’ve thought of a way to also bring about no deal in the other eventuality
moon2 wrote: » I wonder if this is the loophole which people kept alluding to. The intention of the bill, from all reading, was that either a motion approving an agreement needed to be passed, or a motion approving departure without a deal needed to be passed. What Boris is proposing now is a single motion which has two options: vote for this deal or no deal. By proposing this choice in the first place the Benn act would then be nullified as no extension request would be needed.
Frosty Perception wrote: » i agree but BJ is a salesman unlike poor old TM. that said if this does go through (with or without an GE), she'll be spluttering into her Welsh whisky.
ToBeFrank123 wrote: » Sinn Fein support the deal. If only there was some mechanism for them to vote for it in the HoC and hopefully kill off the prospect of a Hard Border.
ToBeFrank123 wrote: » Corbyn and Labour will be annihilated and definitely lose all the Leave Labour seats, unless the Brexit Party splits the vote and even then. People are sick of Brexit and Corbyn wants to keep it going at least another year at least and even then with no guarantee of a resolution.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Settle the head.https://twitter.com/mattholehouse/status/1184833950193213441?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1184833950193213441&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boards.ie%2Fvbulletin%2Fshowthread.php%3Ft%3D2058016732%26page%3D160
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Juncker looks to have added more than what was reported according to Adam Boulton:https://twitter.com/adamboultonSKY/status/1184830781581074434
Frosty Perception wrote: » it's much easier to harp (pun intended) on about the Queen, and their glorious 32 county republic, tweet pics of victims of the troubles than actually engage in real politics. the people get the politicians they deserve.
ArmaniJeanss wrote: » This is nonsense and not a chance of this happening. Labour will hold the bulk of their seats in 'their areas' like the North East or Welsh ex-mining towns. Voting for Brexit against the wishes of Labour was one thing, but these constituencies are generations away from actually voting Tory. And on the other side of the Pennines the leave voting suburb constituencies of Liverpool are just not going to ever vote for Boris.
boggerman1 wrote: » Nigal will support whatever Arron banks tells him to support
ToBeFrank123 wrote: » Agreed if there is no election, it would be farcical.
Joe_ Public wrote: » Labour definitely have an issue in their old northern heartlands. That was already clear from 2017 election where their lead among working class voters shrunk significantly. Corbyn is clearly trying his best to hold onto them but it will be a struggle. They might not necessarily vote Tory but they could go brexit party or simply not turn out at all.
prawnsambo wrote: » I would say BP would get the votes more than any other party in Leave constituencies among leave voters. Which probably wouldn't amount to seats. But it could weaken the Labour vote substantially and that could benefit another party like the Tories. And the same could happen in Labour remain constituencies like Corbyn's own one or Kate Hoey's.
Rjd2 wrote: » Hoey is in the safest of safest seats I think. From what I have read while Lib Dems will target many seats, realistically their is only a few Labour seats they have a realistic chance in. However Tory held seats at least 20 or so vulnerable ones.
Joe_ Public wrote: » Hoey is history, stepping down cos she'd have been deselected anyway.
threeball wrote: » The UK got their victory in these talks. Despite dealing with some very unscrupulous people the EU/Ireland caved. The very idea of the form of consent being a vote by two of the most hard line and unreliable parties in politics somehow not conspiring to use this process as petty points scoring is remote to say the least. Any invester would be mental to put money in to NI with such an arrangement. We in the south now have to watch the unending soap opera of a mini brexit in the north forever more whilst the threat of a hard border returning will ensure the republican and unionist terrorist types have a reason to stick around forever. They were so desperate for a deal they came up with one of the sh1ttiest imaginable.
prawnsambo wrote: » Last time I checked, I thought Hoey's seat in Vauxhall was one that voted remain.
RickBlaine wrote: » If we get to a situation where the UK requests an extension, I still cannot see the EU refusing it. If they do, they will be seen to have been a cause of a no-deal crash out.
prawnsambo wrote: » Yeah, I know. I just brought her up as being in a remain constituency. Unless Labour select a strong remain candidate for that seat, it could go elsewhere.
Varta wrote: » So having bent over backwards for three years and finally saying enough is enough, you think the EU is to blame. Really?
Professor Genius wrote: » Paddypower odds on deal passing is 5/6. Also 5/6 on not passing
ArmaniJeanss wrote: » I don't think this is allowed. All acts must have a status quo option so you vote Yes or No where No implies nothing changes. You can't have a Change 1 v Change 2 vote in the HoC.
