Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
Steerpike said:
I do believe the Irish border is a very specific issue, and I don't think many people have Ireland in mind when they talk about "taking control of our borders".

You are right though if you suggest that the absence of a border in Ireland would present a back door for migration from the EU to the UK. Personally I don't see that as a big problem as I'm not sure there would be a huge incentive for EU nationals to move to the UK post-Brexit. The bigger problem would arise from the movement of goods, but this looks to me to be much more of an issue for the EU than for the UK.
Click to expand...

That's the problem, innit?

What you personally don't see is a fecking huge issue in reality.
 
Sassy Colin said:
He never imagined the British people were so utterly idiotic as to actually vote to leave the EU. He over estimated the British people.
Click to expand...
This is the worst argument i have ever heard regarding brexit. Did you borrow it from Paul?

This is what happens when you become so far out of touch with voters. Did he do any research by talking to joe bloggs? No because he is a bellend.

Oh no, my horse lost in a 2 horse race, who'd have thought. What a wanker.
 
Steerpike said:
I wish I shared your confidence. I predict that the Article 50 declaration will be reversed by parliament quite early in the new year, initially on the pretext of allowing more time for negotiations (which is pointless), but in reality as a prelude for a second referendum.
Click to expand...

I don't see how A50 will be reversed. May will probably survive today but even if she didn't her replacement will probably be an arch Brexiter and the Tories will do anything rather than let Corbyn become PM.
 
Stanley Road said:
This is the worst argument i have ever heard regarding brexit. Did you borrow it from Paul?

This is what happens when you become so far out of touch with voters. Did he do any research by talking to joe bloggs? No because he is a bellend.

Oh no, my horse lost in a 2 horse race, who'd have thought. What a wanker.
Click to expand...

No I didn't overestimate the British people;)
 
SquishyMcSquish said:
There's a difference between 'get rid of anything unprofitable' and looking at Northern Ireland as a part of the UK with a unique, more troubling past compared to the rest, and a part which in particular is difficult to maintain and costs billions as a result.

If there is will to join with the Rep. of Ireland, I don't think that should be resisted too much in the way that we did with Scotland.
Click to expand...
You do realise that there are more teenagers being killed in violent attack’s in London every year then in any other city in the rest of the uk right?
Northern Ireland might have a troubled past as you put it but we have a troubled present.
 
Steerpike said:
The EU has not, as far as I know, had any detrimental effects on my life, and may even have had some positive ones (in terms of convenience, and perhaps materially).

My objections to it are more political and philosophical. I don't see the EU's direction of travel as being compatible with my views of what a nation state should be, or my views on how we should be governed by democratic institutions that are accountable to the people they serve. To me, the economic arguments are secondary.
Click to expand...

So really your answer is but but sovernty.........

So really you have no actual real except a vague thought of patriotism.
 
I can’t stand May for many reasons.

But if I was a Tory wanker - I’d still back her over the alternatives.
Think she’ll be fine.
 
If she is offering to step down before the next election then she must be worried the vote tonight will be closer than people are assuming.
 
Steerpike said:
I do believe the Irish border is a very specific issue, and I don't think many people have Ireland in mind when they talk about "taking control of our borders".
Click to expand...

It's a huge sticking point and one the EU can use. Who wants to be responsible for putting back the hard border in NI?

Would you be prepared to dissolve the UK and lose Gibraltar in order to leave the EU? It would be much easier to leave if it was just England alone.

You want to view NI as a EU problem but it's an old UK English problem as well. You should check out the Poland Ukraine border.
 
Massive Spanner said:
What views are these?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure the purpose of this thread is to completely reopen the debate on whether or not we should leave the EU, and most of us are probably quite fixed in our views on that anyway.

But to your question; -

- The EU is about further political integration. To be fair, it has never particularly tried to hide this, and it would have been known to anyone who took the time to look back in the early '70's when we chose to join (I wasn't old enough to vote then). UK style membership of the EU is now the exception rather than the rule: in theory at least all new members have to commit to joining the single currency at some point in the future. The UK isn't obligated to make such a commitment, but one result of that is that the EU will most likely gravitate towards being a two-tier organisation with those outside the Eurozone becoming increasingly marginalised. The Euro is the EUs main project precisely because it is seen as an irreversible step towards political integration. There is a very real danger that the UK would find itself having to pay to support this project even though it had no wish to be a part of it, and despite the fact that the existence of the Eurozone diminishes the UK's influence. It is therefore highly likely that we would in any case be faced eventually with a choice between leaving the EU and joining the Eurozone.

- In line with its objectives regarding integration, the EU is essentially a centrist organisation (i.e. decision making is concentrated at the centre). This is incompatible with the concept of independent nation states, and there have already been examples of the EU taking actions which conflict with the wishes of individual states (most obviously Greece). The Greek people did not give their assent to these actions, and indeed had voted in a government which had promised to do virtually the opposite of what the EU required (please note that this isn't a defence of Syriza policies, but rather a comment on the irrelevance of the democratic process to the EU). Large centrist organisations are not compatible with local democracy, particularly where there is such a divergence of interests across the member states. To make matters even worse, there seems to be very little opportunity for the populations of member states to exert influence over EU actions.
 
Adisa said:
Bored of the whole thing to be honest. We look like a bunch of clowns for electing these lot.
Click to expand...

Come on, getting more interesting and farcical the closer we get to 29th March. There are plenty more amazing things , some which you couldn't possibly imagine, even now, which are sure to happen in the next three months or so.
 
Steerpike said:
It's not ideal, and it probably wouldn't have happened, but it certainly isn't the doomsday scenario is is often made out to be. From my perspective, the worst possible outcome is one that sees us remaining in the EU - all other outcomes are better.
Click to expand...

*criticise the post not the poster*
*criticise the post not the poster*
*criticise the post not the poster*

Nope can't do it, I'm out
 
SquishyMcSquish said:
There's a difference between 'get rid of anything unprofitable' and looking at Northern Ireland as a part of the UK with a unique, more troubling past compared to the rest, and a part which in particular is difficult to maintain and costs billions as a result.

If there is will to join with the Rep. of Ireland, I don't think that should be resisted too much in the way that we did with Scotland.
Click to expand...

Even if NI did reunite with the Republic, it's not like the UK's problems with NI would suddenly go away. Aside from the fact that the UK's financial commitment to the region wouldn't immediately cease, they would also almost certainly have a vicious paramilitary conflict occuring miles from their border in which their government and citizens are heavily targeted. After all, the people of NI would also almost certainly remain UK citizens as well as being citizens of the new UI. The security implications (and costs) of a push for a United Ireland would be pretty damn bad from the UK's perspective.
 
Steerpike said:
I'm not sure the purpose of this thread is to completely reopen the debate on whether or not we should leave the EU, and most of us are probably quite fixed in our views on that anyway.

But to your question; -

- The EU is about further political integration. To be fair, it has never particularly tried to hide this, and it would have been known to anyone who took the time to look back in the early '70's when we chose to join (I wasn't old enough to vote then). UK style membership of the EU is now the exception rather than the rule: in theory at least all new members have to commit to joining the single currency at some point in the future. The UK isn't obligated to make such a commitment, but one result of that is that the EU will most likely gravitate towards being a two-tier organisation with those outside the Eurozone becoming increasingly marginalised. The Euro is the EUs main project precisely because it is seen as an irreversible step towards political integration. There is a very real danger that the UK would find itself having to pay to support this project even though it had no wish to be a part of it, and despite the fact that the existence of the Eurozone diminishes the UK's influence. It is therefore highly likely that we would in any case be faced eventually with a choice between leaving the EU and joining the Eurozone.

- In line with its objectives regarding integration, the EU is essentially a centrist organisation (i.e. decision making is concentrated at the centre). This is incompatible with the concept of independent nation states, and there have already been examples of the EU taking actions which conflict with the wishes of individual states (most obviously Greece). The Greek people did not give their assent to these actions, and indeed had voted in a government which had promised to do virtually the opposite of what the EU required (please note that this isn't a defence of Syriza policies, but rather a comment on the irrelevance of the democratic process to the EU). Large centrist organisations are not compatible with local democracy, particularly where there is such a divergence of interests across the member states. To make matters even worse, there seems to be very little opportunity for the populations of member states to exert influence over EU actions.
Click to expand...

See this is the problem. Most people are not informed on their beliefs. Most of the rules and regulations you would even bring up are fully in our control. We have full sovernty anyway. We make our own rules and laws. So what really is your point? Should we disband that united kingdom? Should we disband England and only have counties?

The only time a centralist organisation is bad is if it is actively making the states worse.
 
I have a feeling this is a plot from the hardest of Brexiteers in the Tory party.

They’re forcing a vote of no confidence and will then vote in favour of May.

May will then be granted immunity for the next 12 months. This means that it will be her deal or no deal and they know that no deal is likely to win over her deal.

So they’re effectively forcing a no deal Brexit.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Click to expand...


Democratically speaking, change of leadership after a leader was elected and ruled for some time is ok

Cancelling a result before it was even implemented is not. A state can't keep calling for referendums till it gets the result it wants

A second referendum should only be possible after Brexit materializes. Rigid and hence a bit stupid? Yes..but that's the problem of any formal system based upon rules.
 
Pexbo said:
I have a feeling this is a plot from the hardest of Brexiteers in the Tory party.

They’re forcing a vote of no confidence and will then vote in favour of May.

May will then be granted immunity for the next 12 months. This means that it will be her deal or no deal and they know that no deal is likely to win over her deal.

So they’re effectively forcing a no deal Brexit.
Click to expand...

There is not a majority in parliament for No Deal, not even close. Whether that means a majority can be found for a solution that avoids it is another question, but parliament is hardly going to sit on its thumbs as the clock ticks down.
 
mancan92 said:
See this is the problem. Most people are not informed on their beliefs. Most of the rules and regulations you would even bring up are fully in our control. We have full sovernty anyway. We make our own rules and laws. So what really is your point? Should we disband that united kingdom? Should we disband England and only have counties?

The only time a centralist organisation is bad is if it is actively making the states worse.
Click to expand...
I think the people of Greece might argue that is precisely what is happening to them. It will be intersting to see how the EU deals with Italy though - it may be too big to be subjected to the same level of disdain.
 
IS this really Mrs May?

“Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have pointed out we can revoke article 50 and not actually carry out this suicidal shitshow, and that in failing to do so we may fall into the grip of the Blonde-Haired Idiot and all the odious apparatus of ERG rule, we shall not flag or fail.

We shall go on to the end, we shall fight ourselves, we shall fight ourselves in private members clubs and at Eton reunion piss ups, we shall fight ourselves with growing misplaced confidence and growing strength in the hot air we expel, we shall defame our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight ourselves on the beaches and the benches of parliament, we shall fight ourselves on national television.

We shall fight ourselves in the fields of social media and in the streets, we shall fight ourselves in the hills; we shall never surrender to logic, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and given prosperity in the Customs Union via a backstop, then our austerity Empire within our land and sea borders, armed and guarded by the Universal Social Credit, tax breaks for the rich and food banks, would carry on the pointless arguments, until, in God’s good time, the ERG, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and liberate bendy bananas from the EU.”

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/20...fD8oIbqRs-p6enOHwTMy4-ge2CsCQcC6cfEKFHu-3pWEo
 
Avatar said:
Democratically speaking, change of leadership after a leader was elected and ruled for some time is ok

Cancelling a result before it was even implemented is not. A state can't keep calling for referendums till it gets the result it wants

A second referendum should only be possible after Brexit materializes. Rigid and hence a bit stupid? Yes..but that's the problem of any formal system based upon rules.
Click to expand...

There’s nothing undemocratic about asking the nation again. In business, the last two years would have been considered a discovery phase.

Do you want to leave? - Yes.
Ok let’s look into that and see what sort of position that will leave us in.
Ok, here’s what you will get. Do you still want to leave?


It’s far more undemocratic to force the people to vote from a completely uninformed and misinformed position and then to refuse them a vote when that position is clarified.
 
alsabi said:
There is not a majority in parliament for No Deal, not even close. Whether that means a majority can be found for a solution that avoids it is another question, but parliament is hardly going to sit on its thumbs as the clock ticks down.
Click to expand...

There will be a majority when the choice is No Deal or May’s Deal. Even as a remainer I can see that.
 
alsabi said:
There is not a majority in parliament for No Deal, not even close. Whether that means a majority can be found for a solution that avoids it is another question, but parliament is hardly going to sit on its thumbs as the clock ticks down.
Click to expand...
Parliament is predominantly pro-EU, and this will become clear in the event of a looming no deal scenario.
 
Steerpike said:
I think the people of Greece might argue that is precisely what is happening to them. It will be intersting to see how the EU deals with Italy though - it may be too big to be subjected to the same level of disdain.
Click to expand...
Basically, the EU are bastards too, look what they did here with Lisbon, but they aren’t as bad as the Tories who will have free reign to do as the please in the UK if a full on Brexit goes ahead.
 
I'm not sure I understand how this Tory election works. Suppose May gets 49% support, then she has to quit as leader. Then six candidates stand with 15% or so support each. MPs have no choice but to keep voting until there's only two left, and then the party members choose one of them. So you end up with a party leader supported by 15% of MPs instead of one supported by 49%, less than a third. Hopefully I've misunderstood something or it's a load of bollocks.
 
Pexbo said:
There will be a majority when the choice is No Deal or May’s Deal. Even as a remainer I can see that.
Click to expand...
Not even the Tory hard Brexiteers who support a No Deal believe it would win a vote in Parliament against an alternative proposition. Their entire strategy is avoiding a vote entirely and just allowing it to happen. The reason May's Deal doesn't have majority support in Parliament is not that everyone who opposes it would favour No Deal if those were the only two options (only a minority think that), it's that they think there are other options.
 
Pexbo said:
There’s nothing undemocratic about asking the nation again. In business, the last two years would have been considered a discovery phase.

Do you want to leave? - Yes.
Ok let’s look into that and see what sort of position that will leave us in.
Ok, here’s what you will get. Do you still want to leave?


It’s far more undemocratic to force the people to vote from a completely uninformed and misinformed position and then to refuse them a vote when that position is clarified.
Click to expand...

Disagree with the bold part. That's what happens in all democratic elections. You elect politicians thinking they will do so and so , and then you realize only post-election that you were misinformed. Positions are usually clarified after election results, not before that.

I agree though that a couple of chaotic years may provide a justification somehow for a second referendum without violating democratic principles. But from following the news, I understand that like 40%+ of the British people are still pro-Brexit. That's a lot even if not a majority. A second referendum may seriously divide your country more and risk distrust in democratic values, as well as a sense of apathy towards participation in any future referendums or elections.
 
Avatar said:
Disagree with the bold part. That's what happens in all democratic elections. You elect politicians thinking they will do so and so , and then you realize only post-election that you were misinformed. Positions are usually clarified after election results, not before that.
Click to expand...

Right and then in 4/5 years time, or before if deemed necessary, a new election is called and the people vote once again with a clearer picture.
 
alsabi said:
Not even the Tory hard Brexiteers who support a No Deal believe it would win a vote in Parliament against an alternative proposition. Their entire strategy is avoiding a vote entirely and just allowing it to happen. The reason May's Deal doesn't have majority support in Parliament is not that everyone who opposes it would favour No Deal if those were the only two options (only a minority think that), it's that they think there are other options.
Click to expand...

the only other option is another referendum/people's vote. the EU aren't renegotiating anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.