Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[That'sHernandez]

Feck in hell it was a tongue in cheek bolt on because of how triggered you were being

If you're offended by being called a snowflake then god help ya, can't say i care either way

It's funny how riled the gammon gets when the table has turned.

(tongue also in cheek)

 

[redshaw]

Barnier suggests EU might not grant long article 50 extension unless May proposing new approach
Barnier says an orderly withdrawal has been the EU’s objective, not least because of the need for talks in the second stage.

The UK will remain a friend, partner and ally, he says.

He says, ahead of tomorrow’s summit, they have examined the way forward.

He says the EU needs a timeline or roadmap from the UK.

A new element is the start of cross-party discussions in London.

He says at today’s meeting they all expressed their hopes in respect of these talks. They all want a positive result, he says, that might allow a positive majority to emerge for a deal.

If the UK wants to leave the EU in an orderly fashion, the only way to do so is on the basis of the withdrawal agreement.

He says the withdrawal agreement will not be reopened. That continues to be the case.

The political declaration (PD) can be improved, he says, if the UK wants.

He says the UK and the EU could add to the free trade agreement already proposed in the PD a customs union. This could be added rapidly, “within a few hours or days”, he says.

• Barnier says the EU could rewrite the political declaration “within hours or days” if the UK chose a customs union.

But the request they await from the UK will have to respect that the EU is. He says he is talking about the integrity of the single market, the autonomy of the EU27 and the indivisibility of the four freedoms.

He says the EU is not willing to compromise on the ecosystem behind the single market.

Why is is stressing that the PD could be rewritten? Because that would provide meaning to an extension, he says.

He says he does not want to say more, because this is a matter for EU leaders at the summit tomorrow.

He says the duration of an extension has to be in line with the purpose behind it.

• Barnier suggests the EU might not grant a long article 50 extension unless May is proposing a new approach.

He says a no-deal Brexit would never be the responsibility of the EU.

If the UK wants to stop no-deal, it can, by revoking article 50.

Glad he's been clear on it. EU aren't going to budge, they have 27 countries and the union to protect. If the UK really wants to leave then it has to do just that. Best option right now is to remain, have a say.

If UK wants to honour the vote but not crash out then they could do what Yanis Varoufakis described which is go to the Norway option temporary, make your trade deals (5-7 years) then leave.

 

[Maticmaker]

I don't believe May has got the guts to revoke A50.

Where I think the EU is being naïve is that they somehow still have faith that the UK will ever come to an agreement between themselves.

No, but she will have to 'spill her guts' by revoking, then leaving the scene herself.

The one thing May has left is her personal legacy, she wants desperately to be the PM who carried out the will of the People on Brexit, but when eventually (and its taking a long time) she realises it can only happen through a 'no deal', then her remainer' nature will cut in and if she can't be known as the PM who led the UK to Brexit, she will go down as the one who saved the UK from Brexit!

The EU cannot afford now, under a revocation of A50, to have Farage and his hordes returning to the EU Parliament and linking up with the right in other countries, because together they will, as the Italian's have recently vowed 'take down the EU from the inside'. Macron for once is right, they have to cut the UK loose now or go down with them!

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Glad he's been clear on it. EU aren't going to budge, they have 27 countries and the union to protect. If the UK really wants to leave then it has to do just that. Best option right now is to remain, have a say.

If UK wants to honour the vote but not crash out then they could do what Yanis Varoufakis described which is go to the Norway option temporary, make your trade deals (5-7 years) then leave.

There never has been any doubt from day one that the EU will protect the EU27, it's an invention/hope stirred up in the UK.
Norway is not a viable option without a custom's union because it doesn't solve the GFA and the ports will be clogged up etc. And if they're in a CU they can't do their trade deals.
PS I don't rate Mr Yanis very highly.

Remain is the only sensible solution but sensible has long gone out the window.

 

[RedChip]

Unpleasant certainty is better than uncertainty.

How so?

 

[Buster15]

Unbelievable.

The country voted to leave, and you see it as a backfired policy. How democratic. Cameron was forced to include the referendum in his manifesto because EU skepticism was gaining so many votes for UKIP, and he wanted to win them over.

Correction.
Cameron was not forced to do anything. He did it because he was far too weak and at no time actually explained the benefits of the EU.
How could he when he had spent years shifting the blame for all of his failed policies on the EU. This in a vain attempt to look strong with all those Brexiteers in his party.

And when he finally conceded to hold the referendum, he gave two tenths of zero planning for the outcome.

And just remember. Everybody keeps going on about the 17.4m who voted for Brexit.
A significant number did that based upon the LIES that they were constantly fed by the corrupt leave campaign.
If the truth had been told, that number may well have been smaller.

 

[Buster15]

It wasn't a backfired policy. It was a backfired political bribe to keep the hard right of the Tory party onside. He wasn't forced to do anything. He made a gamble that looked like a sure thing and he was horribly wrong.

Correct.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

No, but she will have to 'spill her guts' by revoking, then leaving the scene herself.

The one thing May has left is her personal legacy, she wants desperately to be the PM who carried out the will of the People on Brexit, but when eventually (and its taking a long time) she realises it can only happen through a 'no deal', then her remainer' nature will cut in and if she can't be known as the PM who led the UK to Brexit, she will go down as the one who saved the UK from Brexit!

The EU cannot afford now, under a revocation of A50, to have Farage and his hordes returning to the EU Parliament and linking up with the right in other countries, because together they will, as the Italian's have recently vowed 'take down the EU from the inside'. Macron for once is right, they have to cut the UK loose now or go down with them!

But I see May as having only one mission in her eyes which is to deliver Brexit. If she revoked A50 she would have failed. I think there is another fallacy, that May or Corbyn have ever truly ever been remainers, only when it suited them.

Personally looking from the EU's point of view,and looking further than the short term I think the EU would be better off without the UK.

 

[MadMike]

Whoever is asking/hoping for May to revoke on her own accord, aside from the wishful thinking, they are asking for trouble. You can't just throw away the referendum result now without long term consequences about how the country views its democratic institutions.

The best we can hope for is a confirmatory referendum where the 3 only real options on the table are given to us in an indicative vote: no deal, WA ratification, revocation.

And then hoping that revocation wins.

 

[redshaw]

There never has been any doubt from day one that the EU will protect the EU27, it's an invention/hope stirred up in the UK.
Norway is not a viable option without a custom's union because it doesn't solve the GFA and the ports will be clogged up etc. And if they're in a CU they can't do their trade deals.
PS I don't rate Mr Yanis very highly.

Remain is the only sensible solution but sensible has long gone out the window.

Yes I've said that from day one as well.

One thing Yanis knows from experience is how tough the EU is. It's their way or the highway on everything and he did warn folk you won't get anything and UK hasn't even started trade talks yet. It's leave, stay or stay over a barrel probably.

 

[Maticmaker]

But I see May as having only one mission in her eyes which is to deliver Brexit. If she revoked A50 she would have failed. I think there is another fallacy, that May or Corbyn have ever truly ever been remainers, only when it suited them.

In fifty years from now however she would be venerated

Personally looking from the EU's point of view,and looking further than the short term I think the EU would be better off without the UK.

Yes they are coming aroud to that view now and if the 'no deal' contingency plans the EU have made are as solid as they suggest then it would be the better option for the EU

 

[Buster15]

Leavers were not deceived and misinformed. The remainers were misinformed with project fear, which didn't happen.

Leavers were not deceived...
You obviously took no notice at all of their campaign promises.
Either that or the red battle bus with a very well known lie on the side was a figment of everybody else's imagination.
Come on. Wake up.

 

[Buster15]

I see the WA as a stepping stone to the next stage whereas I have the impression that large parts of the UK see it as the final deal and it's not good enough for them.

That is right. Because the WA and the Political Declaration were supposed to go hand in hand.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

That is right. Because the WA and the Political Declaration were supposed to go hand in hand.

Yes, but who knows what's going to happen in five years time when the EU and UK are probably still discussing a FTA, government's will have changed and so on.
One thing is for certain is that the UK will be in deep trouble if it's no deal and it's not going to help the rest of Europe or the world either to varying degrees.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Understatements of the day:

In the Brexit debate Owen Paterson, the Tory Brexiter, says that the government should listen to the extraordinary anger of people who voted leave, and that the UK should leave the EU at 11pm on Friday.

He says there might be some disruption. But that would not be as damaging as having people feel that their vote has been ignored, he says.



Arlene Foster, the DUP leader, has told the BBC that Theresa Mayhas not shown proper leadership over Brexit. She said:

[Theresa May] needed to show leadership and I’m sorry to say that hasn’t been evident in these past couple of months.

 

[Kentonio]

Got to love the brexiters and their cunning plan to be as obstructive as possible if we organize a delay. No matter that in any leave scenario we need to be able to negotiate hugely complex and delicate trade talks. No, it’s clearly wise to piss off the other side as much as possible..

 

[vidic blood & sand]

EU law dictates that the EU cannot negotiate a future relationship with a country while that country is still part of the block. Hence the WA is about the UK leaving, after which we can negotiate the future relationship.

The option FTA or no deal, never existed in the real world.

Which is what Cameron was alluding to.

 

[horsechoker]

Got to love the brexiters and their cunning plan to be as obstructive as possible if we organize a delay. No matter that in any leave scenario we need to be able to negotiate hugely complex and delicate trade talks. No, it’s clearly wise to piss off the other side as much as possible..

I wonder how long before a senior Brexiteer suggests war

 

[vidic blood & sand]

Apparently? Based on what?

Triggering article 50 can be reversed by government, but it would be political suicide.

What does "out" mean? In your words.

And if it means no-deal Brexit then:
a) Why not call it that?
b) What happens to the border in Ireland and..
c) Why not give the people the option to choose May's deal?

People might want compromise even if you don't.

a) Why not indeed.
b) That ball is in the EU's court. A soft border is ok with us. Goods do not have to be declared at the border.

I'm sure the sterling losing >10% of its value to the dollar, the Japanese carmakers pulling out, the deals EU had with other parties that were so easy to get rolled over yet we haven't... and all of that before we have actually exited..were not exactly part of the Leave promises. Closer in-line with project fear, I would argue. Although that was exaggerated as well.

This is what you call doom and gloom?

 

[vidic blood & sand]

Many leavers are and were both misinformed (blatantly lied to) and deceived. That many still cling to the bullshit is depressing but hardly unexpected.

And it is already an economic car crash. But the main economic damage will be long term as we become increasingly isolated and irrelevant.

This is completely untrue.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

I wonder how long before a senior Brexiteer suggests war

Gammon at war

https://www.indy100.com/article/bre...-group-speech-westminster-priti-patel-8762171

 

[vidic blood & sand]

The reality of their vote is that they believed the lies, propaganda and mythical £350m per week being pumped into the NHS, which, no doubt would filter down to them.

The problem with some of the posts in here is they are anachronistic and do not consider those old Brexiters were sold so many lies they bought into as to completely make the here and now reality redundant - at the time, what they were duped with was a promised land that would appeal to them the most of all demographics, if you think about it, almost to the point of it being a no-brainer to leave. How many of those, if they're even still alive, would now either abstain or vote against leaving with the information in front of them and clarity of how their actions would directly, and negatively, impact them?

A corrupted referendum that pilfered so many leave votes it otherwise wouldn't should be revoked and the whole thing either done over again or tossed out entirely.

Great posts @Penna you've echoed my sentiments exactly over the last few pages.

Is this all you've got?

 

[MadMike]

Which is what Cameron was alluding to.

That's your interpretation of it. The UK can leave with a temporary deal (instead of no deal), that's what the WA agreement is, before it negotiates its future relationship.

After that it can sign an FTA if it wants. But it has to leave first. What you suggested contradicts reality, again. And you're side-stepping that.

The FTA or no-deal choice doesn't exist. It's WA or no-deal. Then FTA comes later

Triggering article 50 can be reversed by government, but it would be political suicide.

Oh I don't disagree. Hence I don't see anyone doing that.

a) Why not indeed.
b) That ball is in the EU's court. A soft border is ok with us. Goods do not have to be declared at the border.

b) No it's not on EUs court. Declaring goods on the Irish sea (backstop) ,which would enable a soft border, is exactly what brexiteer MPs are opposing. And it's what we chose to negotiate for, then reject.

where's your opinion on C?

This is what you call doom and gloom?

You realise Brexit hasn't even happened yet, right?

 

[vidic blood & sand]

Can I ask what you mean here? As in, there was no project fear in the first place, or said project fear hasn't occurred?

It hasn't occurred yet because you are still in the EU.

They were predicting disaster after the vote. Osbourne warned of an emergency budget after the referendum if the decision was leave.

 

[vidic blood & sand]

@Fortitude, I reckon in years to come the whole Brexit mass deception issue will be the subject of many university theses. Mind-boggling lies and hyperbole from the leave campaign, and they got away with it.

Name them.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

They were predicting disaster after the vote. Osbourne warned of an emergency budget after the referendum if the decision was leave.

Is that all you've got? It's the only thing that is continuously repeated. But it's pointless warning people because until Brexit happens they won't believe that there will be a problem, unfortunately for them.

 

[vidic blood & sand]

Absolute bollocks.

Anyone with a working cell knew leaving wouldn't be as straightforward or easy as suggested. They also knew what chaos and expense it would cost. The same knew how difficult Europe would make leaving for us.

So why would you want to be associated with them?

Over the last 3 years since the vote all that has been accomplished is billions has been spent, the country has become more divided and the Tory government has been allowed to cripple the NHS, the Police force, pensions and benefits systems and give as little as possible to infrastructure. Meanwhile they have got away with this because all they have had to do is argue about Brexit. The country has been decimated while it's been distracted. Where if we had voted remain, then the government may have actually had to govern and the focus would have actually been on them doing their job.

So you're saying the government is incompetent? I agree.

I also suggest you speak to the fishermen who are now incandescent with rage after finding out they were conned over fishing rights. Mind you, most remainers knew they were being lied too, but their cause was jumped upon by leave who must have known full well they couldn't effect the fishing rights if we voted out.

It's not the leavers who lied to them. We all want to come out of the CFP.

BTW, how are you physically these days? Good to see you again.

 

[Coxy]

Name them.

You mean the lies that the campaign told? The ones that May's own lawyer stood up in court and admitted? that if the vote had been legally binding - it would have been declared void because of said lies / wrongdoing?

 

[Shinjch]

Name them.

'The money saved from leaving the EU will result in the NHS getting £350m a week'
'A free-trade deal with the EU will be 'the easiest thing in human history'
'Turkey is going to join the EU and millions of people will flock to the UK'
'Brexit does not mean the UK will leave the single market'

Are those ok?

 

[Maticmaker]

Revocation is the least likely outcome in my opinion, unless it is due to a people's vote. Which I also consider unlikely at the moment.

Yes, its true revoking A50 does seem like the least likely option, but set against 'No deal' which is realistically the only other 'deal' in town its the only possible one that will avoid the UK leaving the EU with a bad deal (Mays) or a really bad deal. (No deal). A second vote, or People's vote, or second referendum or whatever they call it can only have two binary choices , like the first one (if it is to have any credibility) and those two choices are a)to leave with May's deal or b) to leave with No deal, there can be nothing about 'Remain' on the ballot paper because that option has already lost on the first (people's) ballot/referendum.

Therefore the only way to remain and to avoid 'No deal' (for both parties) is to revoke A50, yes, there will be a political price to pay in the UK and even possibly in the EU for all this messing about just to finish up were we are, but does anyone seriously believe that any other result would be any different in terms of its aftermath.

At least with revocation the problems will be confined to Politics and business etc can carry on as before!

 

[vidic blood & sand]

I mean, you have to laugh. Don't you?

I know I am. This thread throws up a lot of humour from the institutionalized.

 

[Buster15]

They were predicting disaster after the vote. Osbourne warned of an emergency budget after the referendum if the decision was leave.

Just goes to show what the arch idiot Osbourne knew then.
He was the architect of Austerity.
He told everyone that he was going to balance the books by 2018.
Then his replacement Hammond did his famous spreadsheet and realised that was completely impossible and promptly kicked that promise into touch.

 

[MadMike]

They were predicting disaster after the vote. Osbourne warned of an emergency budget after the referendum if the decision was leave.

Osborne's proposed emergency budget was to deal with the fallout from Brexit, the "£30bn hole in it will leave in our finances" as he called it. Not the fallout from the referendum result. I still understand the same reading back his statements.

At the time of the referendum result, nothing long term would obviously happen. As the government had the legal option to completely disregard it too, if it wanted. At huge political cost admittedly.

 

[MadMike]

Just goes to show what the arch idiot Osbourne knew then.
He was the architect of Austerity.
He told everyone that he was going to balance the books by 2018.
Then his replacement Hammond did his famous spreadsheet and realised that was completely impossible and promptly kicked that promise into touch.

He mostly did though. We went from 9.3% deficit in 2010 when he took over to 1.9 in 2017
He did it more by harsh austerity rather than growth, but he largely did it.

Source: ONS

 

[vidic blood & sand]

Correction.
Cameron was not forced to do anything. He did it because he was far too weak and at no time actually explained the benefits of the EU.
How could he when he had spent years shifting the blame for all of his failed policies on the EU. This in a vain attempt to look strong with all those Brexiteers in his party.

And when he finally conceded to hold the referendum, he gave two tenths of zero planning for the outcome.

And just remember. Everybody keeps going on about the 17.4m who voted for Brexit.
A significant number did that based upon the LIES that they were constantly fed by the corrupt leave campaign.
If the truth had been told, that number may well have been smaller.

So I keep seeing, but haven't seen the so called lies and corruption explained

 

[vidic blood & sand]

Leavers were not deceived...
You obviously took no notice at all of their campaign promises.
Either that or the red battle bus with a very well known lie on the side was a figment of everybody else's imagination.
Come on. Wake up.

With the money we pay the EU, it would be available for other things. However, it is down to an established government to make those decisions.
Gove, johnson etc were just suggesting that the money could be used elsewhere. The NHS could certainly do with some of it.

 

[Silva]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Has Mark Francois not yet grasped the concept that he can p!ss off any time he likes.

 

[Tarrou]

@vidic blood & sand I'll ask again as you ignored it a few times yesterday

What was the brexit plan for the Irish border at the time of the vote?

 

[MadMike]

Has Mark Francois not yet grasped the concept that he can p!ss off any time he likes.

He's just a living parody of the hard Brexiteer. He's not any more harmful then the next hard Brexiteer, but at least he's at least funny.