[Politics] Brexit

[pb21]

If only May had built as big a consensus in Parliament as possible before issuing her red line dictats.

The DUP would now be nobodies. And we'd have a deal done.

*sigh*

Or not called and lost a GE, thereby ushering in the DUP.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Wonder who has authorised the Brexit Broadcasting Corporation to finally highlight this ?


https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/technology-47538021


Although they do try to under play it a bit even now. They'll catch up one day, I suppose. *sighs again*.

 

[nicko31]

If only May had built as big a consensus in Parliament as possible before issuing her red line dictats.

The DUP would now be nobodies. And we'd have a deal done.

*sigh*

Problem is she hasn't just favoured leavers but also alienated remainers.

The use of the term losers and silly gimmicks like blue passports and Brexit 50p's have just driven tribes apart. She has never acknowledged it was a close vote and only half the countries in the Union voted Brexit.

Who can put Britain back together again?

 

[A1X]

Basically May now has two ultimate solutions. Neither is easy.

Option 1 is to pursue No Deal. If it is even half as catastrophic as many claim this will lead to deaths and hardship among a large part of the country, has the potential to unravel the Union and cause major social unrest. BUT it is likely to keep the Tory rank-and-file onside and she might be able to stay on as PM for a bit to "take the heat".

Option 2 is to revoke Article 50. This will destroy her career within the party and might well cause irreparable damage to the Tory party itself, she would become the most hated leader of a party by that party in modern political history. But the impact outside Westminster would be largely negligible and things would carry on as they do now, although Britain's input in Brussels will no longer carry the weight it did. The only major change would be that Britain would have to participate in the European Elections in May. There may be an outside chance of civil unrest, but I think this is not as high as the risk under No Deal, and for all the blather about "undermining democracy" the sky won't suddenly fall in.

Neither option is easy. It really is whether May is more concerned for her own future or that of the people of the country. Which side will she go?

 

[A1X]

Problem is she hasn't just favoured leavers but also alienated remainers.

The use of the term losers and silly gimmicks like blue passports and Brexit 50p's have just driven tribes apart. She has never acknowledged it was a close vote and only half the countries in the Union voted Brexit.

The "Citizens of nowhere" and "Crush the saboteurs" rhetoric was, I think, the final straw for many, and those were right at the very start of the process. And it's not just May, almost nobody on the Leave side has sought to build bridges, it's been a constant barrage of "will of the people" or "you lost, get over it". So is it any wonder Remainers turned around and said "fine, up yours"?

But the problem ultimately stems from the Tory party, which already had only a very small majority, deciding it should negotiate the biggest change to Britain in the years since the war entirely alone. The arrogance of that decision is what has led us here more than anything else.

 

[pearl]

Where's Boris?

He's undergoing potty training

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Basically May now has two ultimate solutions. Neither is easy.

Option 1 is to pursue No Deal. If it is even half as catastrophic as many claim this will lead to deaths and hardship among a large part of the country, has the potential to unravel the Union and cause major social unrest. BUT it is likely to keep the Tory rank-and-file onside and she might be able to stay on as PM for a bit to "take the heat".

Option 2 is to revoke Article 50. This will destroy her career within the party and might well cause irreparable damage to the Tory party itself, she would become the most hated leader of a party by that party in modern political history. But the impact outside Westminster would be largely negligible and things would carry on as they do now, although Britain's input in Brussels will no longer carry the weight it did. The only major change would be that Britain would have to participate in the European Elections in May. There may be an outside chance of civil unrest, but I think this is not as high as the risk under No Deal, and for all the blather about "undermining democracy" the sky won't suddenly fall in.

Neither option is easy. It really is whether May is more concerned for her own future or that of the people of the country. Which side will she go?

She can't admit it, but must secretly want Parliament to take it out of her hands ?

 

[Baldseagull]

Or, they had invested in converting their UK facility, when Japan then did a deal with the EU, allowing them to build in Japan instead.

If it really was about Brexit, why not wait just a few weeks until we know what's happening on the 29th March?

I don't think we will know what is happening by then. All options lead to years of uncertainty, if we go No Deal, it is the start of permanent negotiations with the EU, if we take Mays deal, it's 2 years of negotiation towards a trade deal, with a General Election in the middle that might change the direction of talks, if we extend then we have to find an alternative tack or hold a referendum on remaining, Mays deal and/or any other realistic relationship model. A second referendum will be dirty as hell.

By announcing now, it allows them to leave gracefully without needing to openly criticise their hosts.

 

[Triggaaar]

I don't think we will know what is happening by then.

We'll have a better idea.

By announcing now, it allows them to leave gracefully without needing to openly criticise their hosts.

They're not going to make a poor business decision just to avoid criticising their ex-hosts. The blame doesn't go on them anyway, and if we don't have a good deal plenty of others will leave too.

 

[Baldseagull]

[tweet]1105425152052027393[/tweet]

It's the muthafukkin EMM, OH, double GEE, Rees-Mogg Muthafukkas!

 

[ManOfSussex]

Basically May now has two ultimate solutions. Neither is easy.

Option 1 is to pursue No Deal. If it is even half as catastrophic as many claim this will lead to deaths and hardship among a large part of the country, has the potential to unravel the Union and cause major social unrest. BUT it is likely to keep the Tory rank-and-file onside and she might be able to stay on as PM for a bit to "take the heat".

Option 2 is to revoke Article 50. This will destroy her career within the party and might well cause irreparable damage to the Tory party itself, she would become the most hated leader of a party by that party in modern political history. But the impact outside Westminster would be largely negligible and things would carry on as they do now, although Britain's input in Brussels will no longer carry the weight it did. The only major change would be that Britain would have to participate in the European Elections in May. There may be an outside chance of civil unrest, but I think this is not as high as the risk under No Deal, and for all the blather about "undermining democracy" the sky won't suddenly fall in.

Neither option is easy. It really is whether May is more concerned for her own future or that of the people of the country. Which side will she go?

Anything could happen now frankly. She could revoke A50, resign as she'd have to, Tory party leadership contest, then GE. Accidental no deal is possible, but I still think with all the additional primary legislation required and the Good Friday Agreement at risk and the further damage to our diplomatic reputation, let alone the practical realities, or lack of them, she wont pursue it.

I was just watching Sky News live a little while back and one of their political correspondents Kate McCann quoted an unnamed Tory saying once no deal is ruled out, May might just have one more chance at The Withdrawal Agreement, dependent on the size of defeat later today, in the hope of bringing the ERG and DUP onside.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

The "Citizens of nowhere" and "Crush the saboteurs" rhetoric was, I think, the final straw for many, and those were right at the very start of the process. And it's not just May, almost nobody on the Leave side has sought to build bridges, it's been a constant barrage of "will of the people" or "you lost, get over it". So is it any wonder Remainers turned around and said "fine, up yours"?

But the problem ultimately stems from the Tory party, which already had only a very small majority, deciding it should negotiate the biggest change to Britain in the years since the war entirely alone. The arrogance of that decision is what has led us here more than anything else.

This.

 

[Pavilionaire]

The path should be very straightforward: May's Deal voted down > No Deal Voted down > Article 50 extended > People's Vote > General Election.

If Labour had any sense it would force Corbyn to resign, appoint Starmer as leader, kick out McDonnell, Abbott and other Corbyn loyalists, declare war on anti-Semitism, extend an olive branch to The Independent Group and the Lib Dems to build an anti-Tory consensus.

 

[ManOfSussex]

I don't think we will know what is happening by then. All options lead to years of uncertainty, if we go No Deal, it is the start of permanent negotiations with the EU, if we take Mays deal, it's 2 years of negotiation towards a trade deal, with a General Election in the middle that might change the direction of talks, if we extend then we have to find an alternative tack or hold a referendum on remaining, Mays deal and/or any other realistic relationship model. A second referendum will be dirty as hell.

By announcing now, it allows them to leave gracefully without needing to openly criticise their hosts.

Quite. As I said on Honda when it was announced:

The things is though, Brexit is such a toxic issue it's frankly best not to mention it as a factor at all. They need to stay out of it. It just saves on the inevitable backlash and denials from populist, English nationalist oddballs. It's far better to just make their decisions and relocate as quietly as possible and leave this moribund, divided, political basket case of a country to it.

 

[Baldseagull]

We'll have a better idea.

They're not going to make a poor business decision just to avoid criticising their ex-hosts. The blame doesn't go on them anyway, and if we don't have a good deal plenty of others will leave too.

We will still be arguing about our relationship with the EU in five years, this is not getting sorted on the 29th. I left a party last week because I could see trouble brewing between a couple of guys, I didn't say that when I left, it might have caused the issues to get worse if I had, I said I had things to do early next day. I think Honda is just acting graciously, you don't have to tell half your employees it's their fault they are losing their jobs.

 

[Two Professors]

Excellent.ERG reject the 'new deal'.May's husband in the audience to hear her resignation speech,General Election,all remainers de-selected,Leave with no deal,marvellous scenes!

 

[Bold Seagull]

Anyone listening to May address Parliament? She sounds ill, you can’t help sensing she is being crushed by all this.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Excellent.ERG reject the 'new deal'.May's husband in the audience to hear her resignation speech,General Election,all remainers de-selected,Leave with no deal,marvellous scenes!

It's 1933 all over again.

 

[Triggaaar]

I left a party last week because I could see trouble brewing between a couple of guys, I didn't say that when I left, it might have caused the issues to get worse if I had, I said I had things to do early next day.

Congrats on the weirdest comparison ever.

 

[Hastings gull]

The "Citizens of nowhere" and "Crush the saboteurs" rhetoric was, I think, the final straw for many, and those were right at the very start of the process. And it's not just May, almost nobody on the Leave side has sought to build bridges, it's been a constant barrage of "will of the people" or "you lost, get over it". So is it any wonder Remainers turned around and said "fine, up yours"?

But the problem ultimately stems from the Tory party, which already had only a very small majority, deciding it should negotiate the biggest

I have largely kept out of this debate, as I am not too sure of all the intricacies -unlike others who know it all! - but your assertion is surely far too one-sided and biased. I assume you are new here as you obviously have never read any accusation of leavers being thick, racist, not knowing what they are doing, and whole host of isms as well heaped on to them. Neither side has really made any effort.