Brexit!

[Buce]

12 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

As was said soon after the vote - there ain’t likely to be any easy answers to this .....Gina miller and her team screwed us over re any ‘clean outcome’ (whether democratic or not) and that merely made sure we definitely wouldn’t leave whilst parliament was hung. 

 

i think corbyn will be unable unable to stop a GE (he can’t run away forever) - a GE on 31/10 would be very symbolic from boris’ perspective as Europe would have to give some kind of extension well before that 

 

cannot conceive of anything other than a messy hung outcome unless Farage swallows his pride and backs the Tories - otherwise he risks a second ref and no brexit at all (mind you, that keeps him relevant for years to come and you know how egotists work ........)

 

The smart move, from Corbyn's perspective, is to delay an election as long as possible; Bozo is waaaaaay out of his depth, which becomes more apparent with every time he opens his mouth. He was shielded from public scrutiny during the leadership contest but now he is exposed to the full glare as PM. Give him enough rope to hang himself would be my strategy.

[Nick]

4 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

The smart move, from Corbyn's perspective, is to delay an election as long as possible; Bozo is waaaaaay out of his depth, which becomes more apparent with every time he opens his mouth. He was shielded from public scrutiny during the leadership contest but now he is exposed to the full glare as PM. Give him enough rope to hang himself would be my strategy.

Mine too.

 

Hes lovably bumbling into a depth of scrunity he has not had before and doesn’t have the knowledge or skills to play at this level of debate.

 

Its got to the point that if Kenneth Clark led the Tories I’d probably vote for him just out of sheer delight of seeing a competent politician despite disagreeing with his manifesto.

[Dames]

22 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

As was said soon after the vote - there ain’t likely to be any easy answers to this .....Gina miller and her team screwed us over re any ‘clean outcome’ (whether democratic or not) and that merely made sure we definitely wouldn’t leave whilst parliament was hung. 

 

i think corbyn will be unable unable to stop a GE (he can’t run away forever) - a GE on 31/10 would be very symbolic from boris’ perspective as Europe would have to give some kind of extension well before that 

 

cannot conceive of anything other than a messy hung outcome unless Farage swallows his pride and backs the Tories - otherwise he risks a second ref and no brexit at all (mind you, that keeps him relevant for years to come and you know how egotists work ........)

Farage does not want Brexit. Brexit actually happening will make him irrelevant. If he was so against Europe, he'd donate his hefty European funded wage to a veterans charity (god knows how many points that would score him on a political scale) but no he still turns up to Brussels, takes his wage/pension all whilst building a profile for himself and taking Arron Banks millions. There is no way he would want off this gravy train and he will stand against the Tories because he knows he'll split the Brexit vote and keep himself relevant.

[Rob1742]

9 hours ago, BlueSi13 said:

Erm, we'll still be a member of NATO?  That's a rather silly suggestion Rob.

Not really. If we are exiting Europe, relationships could sour and dynamics can change. 

[The Guvnor]

So John Mcdonnell wants to see what progress Boris has made after the European Council before making a decision about an election. 

Well John probably not much my old mucker. It's now as likely as a bank robber walking into a bank with a gun against his head threatening to shoot himself unless they hand over the cash.

Jo Swinson this morning worried that Boris might not honour the bill and leave anyway but still not wanting an election to remove that happening.Bizarre.

 

Edited 5 September 2019 by The Guvnor

[surrifox]

10 hours ago, Rob1742 said:

One thing for sure, Putin will be rubbing his hands seeing us lose our close relationship with Europe. 

 

If we dont get a deal there will be clear conflict with Europe, and that will please Putin no end 

The bigger threat is a Corbyn administration . He has already pledged to withdraw from NATO and it’s pretty obvious that the US wouldn’t get involved with him on security and defence issues 

[Cheeseontoast]

1 hour ago, Swan Lesta said:

Mine too.

 

Hes lovably bumbling into a depth of scrunity he has not had before and doesn’t have the knowledge or skills to play at this level of debate.

 

Its got to the point that if Kenneth Clark led the Tories I’d probably vote for him just out of sheer delight of seeing a competent politician despite disagreeing with his manifesto.

Let's not get carried away!

[Jon the Hat]

If Boris just doesn't ask for the extension then what can Parliament do about it?  They are playing a very dangerous game not allowing him to call an election.  Really they have take control away from the government and then refuse to allow the government to call a general election.  It is not only unprecedented it is completely undemocratic.  I personally don;t believe anyone other than the executive should be able to pass laws.  If you want to do something against a government you have to remove that government.  Truly shocking, and much more damaging than the lack of competence on either side of the house.

[Jon the Hat]

Just now, Cheeseontoast said:

Let's not get carried away!

Ken would get my vote if we weren't in the middle of Brexit.

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, Rob1742 said:

Not really. If we are exiting Europe, relationships could sour and dynamics can change. 

Nato isn't going anywhere, unless Germany and France fancy standing up to Russia in Eastern Europe on their own.

[StanSP]

[Wortho]

Boris knew he was going to lose those votes, he has set Liebour and Libdems a trap and they have fallen for it.

 

Let's face it who would vote for the terrorist's friend Corbyn.

[WigstonWanderer]

1 hour ago, The Guvnor said:

So John Mcdonnell wants to see what progress Boris has made after the European Council before making a decision about an election. 

Well John probably not much my old mucker. It's now as likely as a bank robber walking into a bank with a gun against his head threatening to shoot himself unless they hand over the cash.

Jo Swinson this morning worried that Boris might not honour the bill and leave anyway but still not wanting an election to remove that happening.Bizarre.

 

Isn’t that what Boris was doing anyway?

Edited 5 September 2019 by WigstonWanderer

[Voll Blau]

2 hours ago, The Guvnor said:

So John Mcdonnell wants to see what progress Boris has made after the European Council before making a decision about an election. 

Well John probably not much my old mucker. It's now as likely as a bank robber walking into a bank with a gun against his head threatening to shoot himself unless they hand over the cash.

Jo Swinson this morning worried that Boris might not honour the bill and leave anyway but still not wanting an election to remove that happening.Bizarre.

 

This whole "we're losing our strongest negotiating tool by losing the threat of No Deal" shtick is really getting on my tits. It's such a flawed analogy.

 

We're threatening to "walk away" from our original starting point, which was being a member of the EU - not having No Deal with the EU, which is something we've not yet (and hopefully never will) experience.

[Ali Begbie]

26 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

If Boris just doesn't ask for the extension then what can Parliament do about it?  They are playing a very dangerous game not allowing him to call an election.  Really they have take control away from the government and then refuse to allow the government to call a general election.  It is not only unprecedented it is completely undemocratic.  I personally don;t believe anyone other than the executive should be able to pass laws.  If you want to do something against a government you have to remove that government.  Truly shocking, and much more damaging than the lack of competence on either side of the house.

Surely it's the opposite of undemocratic. Our democratically elected representatives had an open and completely transparent vote. You can't really get any more democratic than that.

 

Plus, I thought Parliament passed laws? It's the Governments (executive) job to implement the laws passed by Parliament... I think??

[Dames]

8 minutes ago, Wortho said:

Boris knew he was going to lose those votes, he has set Liebour and Libdems a trap and they have fallen for it.

 

Let's face it who would vote for the terrorist's friend Corbyn.

The Conservatives aren't exactly clean either - they've been supplying the Saudis with weapons for years who in turn have been supplying and arming terrorists which the Conservative Government knows but still presses ahead with sales anyway.

 

The reality of this sad situation is that Boris will get the votes he needs from the public because he said derogatory remarks about Muslims, if he hadn't have written that column he would not be getting the hero worship he is from some quarters.

Edited 5 September 2019 by Dames

[Lionator]

1 hour ago, surrifox said:

The bigger threat is a Corbyn administration . He has already pledged to withdraw from NATO and it’s pretty obvious that the US wouldn’t get involved with him on security and defence issues 

He has not pledged such a thing, that's an outright lie. He is no admirer of NATO however he has publicly stated that he would stay in due to public opinion and secondly no viable alternative at present.

 

10 minutes ago, Wortho said:

Boris knew he was going to lose those votes, he has set Liebour and Libdems a trap and they have fallen for it.

 

Let's face it who would vote for the terrorist's friend Corbyn.

I mean we could play this game if you want? The tories have no leeway over this when they're in bed with the Saudi regime. 

[SemperEadem]

11 minutes ago, Wortho said:

Boris knew he was going to lose those votes, he has set Liebour and Libdems a trap and they have fallen for it.

 

Let's face it who would vote for the terrorist's friend Corbyn.

'Liebour' 

[Ali Begbie]

1 minute ago, Voll Blau said:

This whole "we're losing our strongest negotiating tool by losing the threat of No Deal" shtick is really getting on my tits. It's such a flawed analogy.

 

We're threatening to "walk away" from our original starting point, which was being a member of the EU - not having No Deal with the EU, which is something we've not yet (and hopefully never will) experience.

Agreed. It doesn't make a lot of sense. 

 

Our strongest negotiating tool would be to remain, but disrupt all EU proceedings and votes due to the number of Brexit Party MEPs

 

We can do this indefinitely until they gave us what we want. Admittedly we'd need to know what it is that we want first!  

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, surrifox said:

The bigger threat is a Corbyn administration . He has already pledged to withdraw from NATO and it’s pretty obvious that the US wouldn’t get involved with him on security and defence issues 

 

Here's the 2017 Labour manifesto on NATO: 

"As the security threats and challenges we face are not bound by geographic borders, it is vital that as Britain leaves the EU, we maintain our close relationship with our European partners. Alongside our commitment to NATO, we will continue to work with the EU on a range of operational missions to promote and support global and regional security. The last Labour government consistently spent above the NATO benchmark of 2 per cent of GDP. Conservative spending cuts have put Britain’s security at risk, shrinking the army to its smallest size since the Napoleonic wars. The scrapping of Nimrod, HMS Ark Royal and the Harrier jump-jets have weakened our defences and cost British taxpayers millions".

 

Here's Corbyn on NATO in 2015, before he became leader: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11829048/Jeremy-Corbyn-backtracks-on-calls-for-Britain-to-leave-Nato.html

"Having called in the past for Britain's withdrawal from Nato, he admitted there wasn't "an appetite as a whole for people to leave" and so would argue for Nato to "restrict its role." Mr Corbyn said: "I have criticisms of Nato, it’s a Cold War organisation and it should have been wound up in 1990 along with the Warsaw pact. "I think there has to be a debate about the powers of Nato, the democratic accountability of Nato and why its given itself a global role."

 

Years ago, as an unknown backbencher, Corbyn did call for NATO withdrawal. But are we going to judge the policies of party leaders by what they said years ago, before they took office?

If so, presumably we have to Boris by that old video in which he praises Turkey as a great Muslim nation and calls for it to be allowed to join an expanded EU....

[David Guiza]

24 minutes ago, Wortho said:

Boris knew he was going to lose those votes, he has set Liebour and Libdems a trap and they have fallen for it.

 

Let's face it who would vote for the terrorist's friend Corbyn.

Ahh, I do enjoy the 'X person has played a blinder' rhetoric that keeps being wheeled out at the moment. As though any major political individual in this country has the knowledge and foresight to plan this mess and manipulate it in their favour.

 

Major political commentators the country over have been slamming Boris for his ineptitude over the past few days and remarked about how out his dept he is (and Corbyn), but according to some it's all part of the tactics.  

[hackneyfox]

31 minutes ago, Wortho said:

Boris knew he was going to lose those votes, he has set Liebour and Libdems a trap and they have fallen for it.

 

Let's face it who would vote for the terrorist's friend Corbyn.

Warning!!!!!

Sun reader

[The Guvnor]

Andrew Neil on tv yesterday talking to John Healey, who spelled out Labours position on a second referendum. So they would go back to Brussels get a much better deal (intetesting) then put that back to the 'people' for a confirmatory vote (ok, with you so far) Andrew Neil then asks 'would you then ask the British people to vote for their 'better deal' or remain you would have thought yes back our 'better deal'. 

John whats the fcuking point of spending time to get a better deal if you don't support it.

FFS.

 

 

 

[foxy boxing]

really wanted another general election just so we could see loads of clips of Brenda from Bristol say "not another one". so really disappointed we don't get one yet!.

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, The Guvnor said:

So John Mcdonnell wants to see what progress Boris has made after the European Council before making a decision about an election. 

Well John probably not much my old mucker. It's now as likely as a bank robber walking into a bank with a gun against his head threatening to shoot himself unless they hand over the cash.

Jo Swinson this morning worried that Boris might not honour the bill and leave anyway but still not wanting an election to remove that happening.Bizarre.

 

 

As @WigstonWanderer says, this sounds very much like the Govt's policy in the first place.

 

Every reliable analyst says that, while No Deal will harm the EU27, it will harm the UK much more. That's logical as the EU27 account for almost 50% of UK trade, whereas the UK only accounts for about 12% of EU27 trade (looking only at trade).

 

The strategy of threatening No Deal in those circumstances sounds very much like walking into a bank, shouting "Give me your cash or I'll blow my head off, damaging the bank walls and scaring your customers!"

 

Of course, some EU27 countries (notably Ireland - & Germany, Holland, France to a lesser extent) will suffer more harm than others, but still less than us, with the possible exception of Ireland.

The EU seems to be seeking to counteract this by declaring No Deal an official emergency, allowing those countries worst affected access to extra EU funds.

 

Anyway, it's perfectly clear that the Govt has made no new proposals to the EU. Boris hasn't answered questions about this rom parliament or his own MPs - & EU leaders are clear nothing new (e.g. alternative to backstop) has been proposed.

If untrue, the Govt could easily disprove this by announcing its alternative proposals.....but it hasn't. It's running down the clock, happy to risk No Deal & to use the crisis to try to get a 5-year majority by blaming the "Remainer parliament" & the EU for the crisis.

 

If Boris doesn't honour the bill (as Gove implied on Marr) and runs down the clock to No Deal, there will be other routes to challenge that in parliament and the courts.

But if an election were approved, there is a known risk that Boris could set/shift the date to after 31st October, keep parliament suspended during the campaign & run down the clock to No Deal.

Tactically & morally, it would also be stupid to play into his hands by agreeing to a toxic, divisive pre-Brexit "patriotic election" allowing Boris to make all sorts of false promises & to whip up his troops against "the enemy within" (48%+ of the nation).

He said that there was only a "one in a million risk" of No Deal, so I look forward to his great new deal......Brexiteers have always claimed that we were in a strong negotiating position due to German car exports etc......