Not inconceivable that she even asked them for this response, to scare the shit out of MPs into accepting the deal on offer.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Fluctuation0161
Full Member
Also, the Tory government called the referendum, failed to plan for leave, left everything until last few weeks having 2 years to plan after the vote, then imploded.Of course there is. It was Tory government with a Tory PM. That's fairly sufficient, do you expect a sudden in-depth understanding of the issues by the public ?
The Firestarter
Full Member
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28,494
" ...was a bad deal" etc..“The Conservatives voted for a deal, Labour voted for No Deal” is not a complex take.
It certainly crossed my mind, several days ago!Not inconceivable that she even asked them for this response, to scare the shit out of MPs into accepting the deal on offer.
EwanI Ted
Full Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2018
- Messages
- 1,755
Doesn’t change anything how bad the deal is, if it’s a binary choice." ...was a bad deal" etc..
The Firestarter
Full Member
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28,494
That being said, Corbyn looks like exactly the person to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.Also, the Tory government called the referendum, failed to plan for leave, left everything until last few weeks having 2 years to plan after the vote, then imploded.
I think they've said they'll agree an extension if a deal is agreed haven't they?They'll probably give a short extension if the UK agree the deal.
The vote will probably happen for the third time , somehow or other.
But, guess what, it'll be voted down again and ERG will get what they want , probably with Labour's help.
Almost certainly the case. The EU and TM have exactly the same end goal - getting the WA through Parliament.Not inconceivable that she even asked them for this response, to scare the shit out of MPs into accepting the deal on offer.
This is the final roll of the dice.
When it comes to politics and the average voter, everything is approached with a bit of bias and lack of in-depth analysis." ...was a bad deal" etc..
It's as easy for a Tory supporter to blame it on Labour for not voting the deal and wanting unicorns, as is for a Labour voter to blame it on Tory incompetence and a bad deal put on the table. It depends on which side you're sitting.
Paul the Wolf
Full Member
Probably, has to be confirmed.I think they've said they'll agree an extension if a deal is agreed haven't they?
Just saw this:
France, Spain and Belgium are ready to veto a Brexit extension, the Press Association understands. The PA report goes on:
Sources have said France, Spain, Belgium and maybe Italy stand prepared to reject an extension without evidence Parliament is now ready to accept a deal and “the deadlock can be broken”.
Some member states worry there is no point to an extension as, even after 1,000 days of negotiation, Theresa May’s deal keeps being rejected and the EU cannot move any further towards the UK.
One source said: “We’re not against an extension per se but we need to have two things - first a demonstration that the situation has changed and there is a guarantee the extension is for something and second that an extension won’t be detrimental to the EU.
“Yes, a no-deal Brexit would be damaging and it’s absolutely not what we want but I think we’re ready to go to this situation because there are only two solutions - either a deal is accepted or there is no deal.
“The deal has been rejected and it keeps being rejected so if we come to no-deal then so be it.”
It is understood French president Emmanuel Macron believes Brexit is holding up his plans for radical reform of the EU and needs to be brought to a conclusion.
No, Tusk said that he was favorable to it under certain conditions. EU leaders will talk about it tomorrow.I think they've said they'll agree an extension if a deal is agreed haven't they?
11101
Full Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2014
- Messages
- 21,423
Rumours in Italy are that the UK government has asked the Italian government to reject an extension.Not inconceivable that she even asked them for this response, to scare the shit out of MPs into accepting the deal on offer.
If, and only if, a deal is agreed.I think they've said they'll agree an extension if a deal is agreed haven't they?
Judging by what Tusk did not say, however, this likely only applies to a short extension.
A long extension is presumably still possible without the WA passing through Parliament (but would be contingent on a GE/2nd Ref being agreed by Parliament before March 29th instead).
Those rumours have probably come about from that cnut Aaron Banks lobbying the deputy PM to veto an extension.Rumours in Italy are that the UK government has asked the Italian government to reject an extension.
Isn't that more or less what Tusk has said, they will oppose an extension unless the deal's agreed?Probably, has to be confirmed.
Just saw this:
France, Spain and Belgium are ready to veto a Brexit extension, the Press Association understands. The PA report goes on:
Sources have said France, Spain, Belgium and maybe Italy stand prepared to reject an extension without evidence Parliament is now ready to accept a deal and “the deadlock can be broken”.
Some member states worry there is no point to an extension as, even after 1,000 days of negotiation, Theresa May’s deal keeps being rejected and the EU cannot move any further towards the UK.
One source said: “We’re not against an extension per se but we need to have two things - first a demonstration that the situation has changed and there is a guarantee the extension is for something and second that an extension won’t be detrimental to the EU.
“Yes, a no-deal Brexit would be damaging and it’s absolutely not what we want but I think we’re ready to go to this situation because there are only two solutions - either a deal is accepted or there is no deal.
“The deal has been rejected and it keeps being rejected so if we come to no-deal then so be it.”
It is understood French president Emmanuel Macron believes Brexit is holding up his plans for radical reform of the EU and needs to be brought to a conclusion.
Which is what I said isn't it? I'm not getting why you and Paul keep repeating back to me what I've said. I suppose I must have worded it badly.If, and only if, a deal is agreed.
Judging by what Tusk did not say, however, this likely only applies to a short extension.
A long extension is presumably still possible without the WA passing through Parliament (but would be contingent on a GE/2nd Ref being agreed by Parliament before March 29th instead).
Adebesi
Full Member
For all the many, many criticisms you can legitimately throw at May, you have to admire the size of her balls.
Though then you remember that if it all goes wrong, the little people suffer and she retires into obscurity to live out her days in comfort, her wealth presumably squirreled away offshore in various currencies. Its actually everyone else's future she is playing chicken with, not her own.
Still. Balls.
Though then you remember that if it all goes wrong, the little people suffer and she retires into obscurity to live out her days in comfort, her wealth presumably squirreled away offshore in various currencies. Its actually everyone else's future she is playing chicken with, not her own.
Still. Balls.
Paul the Wolf
Full Member
More or less, but the EU leaders will be discussing it tomorrow.Isn't that more or less what Tusk has said, they will oppose an extension unless the deal's agreed?
Thanks.More or less, but the EU leaders will be discussing it tomorrow.
Maybe not just a deal. The EU would expect a clear direction, like why does she need an extension for?. They are basically asking "What is going to change in the next two months?"I think they've said they'll agree an extension if a deal is agreed haven't they?
How is she ballsy? When you’re being stubborn and determined about something that has 0 personal risk of repercussions, it’s not brave or ballsy in any way.For all the many, many criticisms you can legitimately throw at May, you have to admire the size of her balls.
Though then you remember that if it all goes wrong, the little people suffer and she retires into obscurity to live out her days in comfort, her wealth presumably squirreled away offshore in various currencies. Its actually everyone else's future she is playing chicken with, not her own.
Still. Balls.
She will go on to become a non-executive board member to a handful of firms and earn anywhere from a few hundred thousand to a few millions per year for doing little more than giving said businesses access to politician’s she acquainted with. She’s set for a wealthy life without drama while the rest of us pay for the chaos caused by the her “balsiness”.
Her husband is a senior executive of an investment firm which manages nearly £1.5trn of investments. I think she will be ok in retirement.How is she ballsy? When you’re being stubborn and determined about something that has 0 personal risk of repercussions, it’s not brave or ballsy in any way.
She will go on to become a non-executive board member to a handful of firms and earn anywhere from a few hundred thousand to a few millions per year for doing little more than giving said businesses access to politician’s she acquainted with. She’s set for a wealthy life without drama while the rest of us pay for the chaos caused by the her “balsiness”.
I don't think Italy will veto. Reading around the topic, it's a fact that the League's core heartlands in the north of Italy would be the biggest Italian losers in the event of a no-deal Brexit, in terms of exports lost.Those rumours have probably come about from that cnut Aaron Banks lobbying the deputy PM to veto an extension.
Adebesi
Full Member
Yeah I did acknowledge that in my post. All that is on the line is her reputation, now and through history, which I imagine is a big motivator for her. But you are right, it is hardly worrying about feeding your kids.How is she ballsy? When you’re being stubborn and determined about something that has 0 personal risk of repercussions, it’s not brave or ballsy in any way.
She will go on to become a non-executive board member to a handful of firms and earn anywhere from a few hundred thousand to a few millions per year for doing little more than giving said businesses access to politician’s she acquainted with. She’s set for a wealthy life without drama while the rest of us pay for the chaos caused by the her “balsiness”.
CA_vampire
New Member
So, what do you think she would do if she didn't "have balls"? What was the "no-balls" option?For all the many, many criticisms you can legitimately throw at May, you have to admire the size of her balls.
Though then you remember that if it all goes wrong, the little people suffer and she retires into obscurity to live out her days in comfort, her wealth presumably squirreled away offshore in various currencies. Its actually everyone else's future she is playing chicken with, not her own.
Still. Balls.
(Edit: In my opinion, what May is doing is the most cowardly choice of them all: basically she is doing nothing and she blames all others, the parliament, the EU... )
Last edited:
dogrob
Full Member
I am hoping that they do Veto the extension, enough is enough for me.Probably, has to be confirmed.
Just saw this:
France, Spain and Belgium are ready to veto a Brexit extension, the Press Association understands. The PA report goes on:
Sources have said France, Spain, Belgium and maybe Italy stand prepared to reject an extension without evidence Parliament is now ready to accept a deal and “the deadlock can be broken”.
Some member states worry there is no point to an extension as, even after 1,000 days of negotiation, Theresa May’s deal keeps being rejected and the EU cannot move any further towards the UK.
One source said: “We’re not against an extension per se but we need to have two things - first a demonstration that the situation has changed and there is a guarantee the extension is for something and second that an extension won’t be detrimental to the EU.
“Yes, a no-deal Brexit would be damaging and it’s absolutely not what we want but I think we’re ready to go to this situation because there are only two solutions - either a deal is accepted or there is no deal.
“The deal has been rejected and it keeps being rejected so if we come to no-deal then so be it.”
It is understood French president Emmanuel Macron believes Brexit is holding up his plans for radical reform of the EU and needs to be brought to a conclusion.
Adebesi
Full Member
Not call a vote on a deal that has been rejected twice already the week before leaving day with no extension on the table when you know perfectly well that no deal will spell catastrophe for the country.So, what do you think she would do if she didn't "have balls"? What was the "no-balls" option?
CA_vampire
New Member
That's the "no-balls" choice? That's nothing.Not call a vote on a deal that has been rejected twice already the week before leaving day with no extension on the table when you know perfectly well that no deal will spell catastrophe for the country.
After two years of failed negotiations, the "huge balls" decision would be to cancel article 50, call for new elections, and retire ... since she was incapable of finding a solution. What she is doing all this time is what any coward would be doing.
Adebesi
Full Member
Yeah, you're right. About the first bit I mean. That would be braver.That's the "no-balls" choice? That's nothing.
After two years of failed negotiations, the "huge balls" decision would be to cancel article 50, call for new elections, and retire ... since she was incapable of finding a solution. What she is doing all this time is what any coward would be doing.
LuisNaniencia
Sky Sports called my bluff
What the feck is he doing with her.Her husband is a senior executive of an investment firm which manages nearly £1.5trn of investments. I think she will be ok in retirement.
devilish
Juventus fan who used to support United
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2002
- Messages
- 61,882
I can understand each point of view.Yes, I can see that, but a lot of our leavers believe that we're not the US, and we will have to trade with the EU and them with us, so let's 'clear the decks' with a 'no deal' if necessary and then come at it a fresh! In my experience, which I admit is limited, this view is getting stronger, not weaker, as a way to move past Brexit!
For Brexiteers the UK would be giving away its major card (39b) for a mere withdrawal agreement. Thus it would be better for them to go on a no deal brexit and try to negotiate something better. However that argument has 2 major flaws. First of all a no deal Brexit would literally cripple the UK's economy. The UK would be desperate to sign trade deals at that point as WTO rules are pretty shit. Secondly if the UK crush out with a no deal Brexit then the EU will have to re-arrange its budget to accommodate that 39b hole. Once that happens (and it will be painful for some) all there will be is a group of very pissed off countries who'll be expected to negotiate a trade deal with an unreliable country who had placed them in this shit in the first place and is in now desperate for a trade deal with little to offer in exchange. At that point, the best course of action for the EU would be to make Brexit as painful as possible, so UK based companies leave, they go to the EU country and someone else picks up the tab.
CA_vampire
New Member
Cheers mate, I am glad we agree.Yeah, you're right. About the first bit I mean. That would be braver.
A Prime Minister should take responsibility for the situations, not pass the buck. If she cannot find a solution, then she should resign, not blame others. She is being paid to do a job, nobody forced her to take this job. If she can't do the job, she should retire.
devilish
Juventus fan who used to support United
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2002
- Messages
- 61,882
A remainer would want a people's vote. If that goes tits up then he'll prefer an orderly Brexit were he can negotiate a deal with the EU on friendly terms. By offering them a people's vote in exchange of them supporting a withdrawal agreement, the remainers will get what they want + a second chance to influence negotiations if they lose again.I dont understand this. If MPs vote for May's deal there is no need for a referendum. And even if there was a referendum, why would we negotiate another deal with the EU (option C) if MPs backed May's deal?
Ivor Ballokov
Full Member
Statement at 8.15
The most powerful lady in the country? Not sure. He's made an absolute fortune out of our arms deals in the middle east though.What the feck is he doing with her.
Guy Incognito
Full Member
I do strangely think history will treat her kindly. Took on the impossible job and despite what anyone said, she managed to get a deal on the table, which was considered the hardest bit of the negotiations. Regardless whether the MPs agreed with it or not, good or bad.Yeah I did acknowledge that in my post. All that is on the line is her reputation, now and through history, which I imagine is a big motivator for her. But you are right, it is hardly worrying about feeding your kids.
Cameron meanwhile shirked responsibility.
LuisNaniencia
Sky Sports called my bluff
Coincidence.The most powerful lady in the country? Not sure. He's made an absolute fortune out of our arms deals in the middle east though.
He thinks that she is sexy, she could be a good cook, great lover or have a good sense of humour.What the feck is he doing with her.