Brexit slowly becoming a Farce.

[Granny Danger]

This is from Theresa May; one of the stupidest statements ever:

"And the Withdrawal Agreement has a legal duty on both sides to use best endeavours to avoid the backstop ever coming into force. 

“ a legal duty to use best endeavours”

[Billy Jean King]

WTF would be the point of any televised debate now. It's not the public making the decision so what purpose would it serve ? 

[welshbairn]

"I would strongly advise you not to use the backstop." TBF, her withdrawal plan and future arrangement plan doesn't rule out anything. If the EU insist the backstop carried on there would be nothing to stop the UK saying GTF, we're out, WTO if they'll have us. The EU wouldn't want the backstop going for long anyway as we'd get all the benefits of the single market but without freedom of movement, as I understand it.

[welshbairn]

5 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

WTF would be the point of any televised debate now. It's not the public making the decision so what purpose would it serve ? 

Sneakily educating them about what a shite idea Brexit is and preparing them for another vote. Maybe.

[Granny Danger]

2 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

"I would strongly advise you not to use the backstop." TBF, her withdrawal plan and future arrangement plan doesn't rule out anything. If the EU insist the backstop carried on there would be nothing to stop the UK saying GTF, we're out, WTO if they'll have us. The EU wouldn't want the backstop going for long anyway as we'd get all the benefits of the single market but without freedom of movement, as I understand it.

You sound like an apologist for May and her absolutely shit proposal.

 

On another note; May should do a ‘back me or sack me’.  I wonder why she hasn’t?

 

[welshbairn]

16 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

You sound like an apologist for May and her absolutely shit proposal.

 

On another note; May should do a ‘back me or sack me’.  I wonder why she hasn’t?

 

2. It could mean Boris taking over from the membership vote.

1. Kicking it into touch which is what her deal does is probably the safest option at the moment. Calling another referendum at the moment or postponing Brexit would create fucking mayhem, and nothing would be done about all the other things that need doing. A second vote a couple of years down the line and a smooth transition in March is what I'm after, given the alternatives.

P.S. Her red lines were exactly the same as Labour. No freedom of movement, no rule taking from Brussels, no jurisdiction from European Courts. 

Edited November 26, 2018 by welshbairn

[RedRob72]

If May is so sure that this is what voters decided upon in leaving the EU, and the hard line Brexiteers plus opposition parties are so certain this isn’t what people voted for, surely there’s only one solution?
Request an extension on article 50, with the EU (which they would grant you would expect) and put the deal back to the public to decide upon. Seems the only thing EVERYONE agrees upon, is that WM is completely unable to manage this process. Both sides claim they have the support of the electorate, let’s see them put this confidence into practice.

[O'Kelly Isley III]

2. It could mean Boris taking over from the membership vote.
1. Kicking it into touch which is what her deal does is probably the safest option at the moment. Calling another referendum at the moment or postponing Brexit would create fucking mayhem, and nothing would be done about all the other things that need doing. A second vote a couple of years down the line and a smooth transition in March is what I'm after, given the alternatives.

If May insists it's this deal or no deal, and Parliament votes it down then by all means let mayhem ensue. La Kuenssberg nailed her last night with the (obvious) observation that what is proposed is patently inferior to the status quo - she received pish about 'opportunity' in return.

May is fixated with satisfying the outcome of a referendum with a flawed prospectus and has dishonestly blinded herself to the realitiesof any form of Brexit.

There is only one decent outcome, and that is the withdrawal of Article 50.

[Granny Danger]

Twice in recent weeks May has undergone a grilling in Parliament  and on both occasions hardly any MP has asked her a supportive question.

 

[welshbairn]

22 minutes ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:

If May insists it's this deal or no deal, and Parliament votes it down then by all means let mayhem ensue. La Kuenssberg nailed her last night with the (obvious) observation that what is proposed is patently inferior to the status quo - she received pish about 'opportunity' in return.

May is fixated with satisfying the outcome of a referendum with a flawed prospectus and has dishonestly blinded herself to the realitiesof any form of Brexit.

There is only one decent outcome, and that is the withdrawal of Article 50.

And what will the 52% nutters do (it hasn't changed as much as I thought it would) if that happens? Or what happens if they win a Popular Vote again? I'm beginning to think the only way to avoid political chaos and possibly violence is to carry on pretty much as before for a couple of years with May's deal, by which time it will hopefully have sunk into even the thickest, most racist Brexiteer skulls how stupid and mislead they were in 2016.

[Granny Danger]

15 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

And what will the 52% nutters do (it hasn't changed as much as I thought it would) if that happens? Or what happens if they win a Popular Vote again? I'm beginning to think the only way to avoid political chaos and possibly violence is to carry on pretty much as before for a couple of years with May's deal, by which time it will hopefully have sunk into even the thickest, most racist Brexiteer skulls how stupid and mislead they were in 2016.

I dont give a f**k about what they would do because they will do nothing.

If they win the popular vote again then we all live with the consequences because there could be no question of the democracy of it this time around.

 

[JamieThomas]

31 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

And what will the 52% nutters do (it hasn't changed as much as I thought it would) if that happens? 

 

12 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

I dont give a f**k about what they would do because they will do nothing.

Tbf the chip shop woman threatened civil war, so I imagine at least 12 of them would descend upon Downing Street heavily armed with spatulas.

[welshbairn]

Sending out a load of blaziered Tommy fans to the European Parliament after the May elections would be a bit of a worry, if UKIP revitalises.

[O'Kelly Isley III]

And what will the 52% nutters do (it hasn't changed as much as I thought it would) if that happens? Or what happens if they win a Popular Vote again? I'm beginning to think the only way to avoid political chaos and possibly violence is to carry on pretty much as before for a couple of years with May's deal, by which time it will hopefully have sunk into even the thickest, most racist Brexiteer skulls how stupid and mislead they were in 2016.

Remember who shat themselves the morning after ? That's right, the very shocked Gove and Johnson. That 52% contains quite a few others who shat themselves - don't be fooled by the sound and fury, we can't cave in to them and just accept the first pig in a poke that appears.

[pandarilla]

I dont give a f**k about what they would do because they will do nothing.
If they win the popular vote again then we all live with the consequences because there could be no question of the democracy of it this time around.
 

It's fairly undemocratic to ignore a result because some folk didn't like the result.

Imagine if the same was used in the event of a yes vote in the Scottish referendum.

[Granny Danger]

2 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

It's fairly undemocratic to ignore a result because some folk didn't like the result.

Imagine if the same was used in the event of a yes vote in the Scottish referendum.

If not liking the result was the only argument for ignoring it I would agree.  

Do you think that’s the only reason?  Have you heard any other reasons?  Do you think that any of these other reasons have any validity?

 

[pandarilla]

If not liking the result was the only argument for ignoring it I would agree.  
Do you think that’s the only reason?  Have you heard any other reasons?  Do you think that any of these other reasons have any validity?
 

Of course I have, and I agree with many of them. But I don't think any are big enough to justify another vote.

[John Lambies Doos]

Trump says deal is shit for UK, so must be good

[Granny Danger]

12 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

Of course I have, and I agree with many of them. But I don't think any are big enough to justify another vote.
 

Fair enough but your earlier post implied that people only wanted a second vote because they disagreed with the result.  That is clearly not the case.

 

[John Lambies Doos]

Do you want to leave the EU? 52% yes. Not sure what's so difficult about this tbh. A second vote because of 18months of Tory infighting would seem quite undemocratic to a lot of people.