Brexit again...

[geosname]

6 hours ago, Fosse69 said:

Priority is to stop no-deal, then a referendum or election with Lab and Lib etc going for remain, (would get a further extension  from the EU), assuming the mood of the country changes as reality dawns. Who leads the caretaker govt does not really matter, the nation comes first not any party.

It wouldn't stop it sage..... only delay it, it's still the default position.

The priority would have to be a vote.... either election or referendum..... I doubt Jez would be able to get a referendum through so election it is and I doubt he would win it outright.... so we are then left in the same mess as now.

The referendum is anyone's guess..... Labour seem to want a Labour brexit...... the Tories and brexit party want any brexit.... the rest don't want any brexit.... unless it's a 2 choice option again we go around in circles.

[geosname]

If jezza , or anyone else, doesn't command the majority of the house after winning a vote of no confidence...... Boris stays on as PM.

Boris then has 14 days to win a confidence vote...... if he doesn't it reverts back to the above..... if that fails again a general election is called at least 7 weeks after 2nd no confidence vote.

2 weeks before the motion can be tabled..... 2 weeks for Boris to win second vote...... minimum 7 weeks for general election.... 11 weeks minimum.... past the Halloween deadline.

Jezza might have a chance if he scrapped the Labour brexit option and backed remain..... but even that would be tight.

 

[geosname]

The interesting question is......

If leavers won the 2nd in out referendum..... what then?

[Paul6754]

2 hours ago, geosname said:

The interesting question is......

If leavers won the 2nd in out referendum..... what then?

It will have been a much more informed vote than the 1st referendum and there's a greater chance people will unite and pull for Britain. If Remain won, especially by a wider margin, it could be argued people didn't know and/or understand what leave meant or it's consequences.

By leaving the UK is digging a hole for itself, I wish the digging would stop.

The are so many MP's who are against Leave in any of it's forms, what is it these MP's know that staunch Leavers on OVF and Leavers in general don't know.

[geosname]

20 minutes ago, Paul6754 said:

It will have been a much more informed vote than the 1st referendum and there's a greater chance people will unite and pull for Britain. If Remain won, especially by a wider margin, it could be argued people didn't know and/or understand what leave meant or it's consequences.

By leaving the UK is digging a hole for itself, I wish the digging would stop.

The are so many MP's who are against Leave in any of it's forms, what is it these MP's know that staunch Leavers on OVF and Leavers in general don't know.

The digging should stop?....... what a nice thought..... stability.

I don't think they know much more than anyone else to be honest..... I think a lot are influenced by de selection, not being returned at an election etc.

[Heatwave]

8 hours ago, geosname said:

The digging should stop?....... what a nice thought..... stability.

I don't think they know much more than anyone else to be honest..... I think a lot are influenced by de selection, not being returned at an election etc.

I think it goes deeper than that - this is an existential crisis for the Conservatives and less so for Labour.

If Labour were to replace Corbyn with, say, Tom Watson then their crisis would be over. But the Conservatives can't and won't hang together under any leader. I suppose that means they'll hang separately.

[geosname]

39 minutes ago, Heatwave said:

I think it goes deeper than that - this is an existential crisis for the Conservatives and less so for Labour.

If Labour were to replace Corbyn with, say, Tom Watson then their crisis would be over. But the Conservatives can't and won't hang together under any leader. I suppose that means they'll hang separately.

I can see your point, and agree jezza going would aleviate some of the problems,  but I don't think Watson would pull them together enough, I'm not convinced anyone could without some strong policy commitments 

[tommytunstall]

13 hours ago, geosname said:

The interesting question is......

If leavers won the 2nd in out referendum..... what then?

The interesting question is deal or no deal, massive difference between the two. Despite what that Numpty Raab stated no deal was not mentioned or envisaged during the run up to the Referendum. I am a Remainer, but would be happy to leave with a negotiated deal.  There is a massive difference in leaving with a deal or no Deal.

[For Us All]

1 hour ago, geosname said:

I can see your point, and agree jezza going would aleviate some of the problems,  but I don't think Watson would pull them together enough, I'm not convinced anyone could without some strong policy commitments 

Not to worry,leader of the Lib.Dumbs Jo Swinson has nominated Harriet Harman for caretaker PM.

 

[geosname]

9 minutes ago, For Us All said:

Not to worry,leader of the Lib.Dumbs Jo Swinson has nominated Harriet Harman for caretaker PM.

 

And Ken Clarke I believe?

[Regal Beagle]

3 hours ago, tommytunstall said:

The interesting question is deal or no deal, massive difference between the two. Despite what that Numpty Raab stated no deal was not mentioned or envisaged during the run up to the Referendum. I am a Remainer, but would be happy to leave with a negotiated deal.  There is a massive difference in leaving with a deal or no Deal.

Sorry tommy but it was mentioned a lot in the run up to the campaign by the most influencial people in the country.

We knew what we voted for.

Not only is there a mandate for no deal, it's part of the biggest political mandate this country has ever seen.

 

[Regal Beagle]

Here's another one:

 

The default....where we will end up if we leave without a deal....for anyone who wants to leave with a clean break the WTO is the only honest model.

 

 

[TheSage]

No. That's more of your usual selective, edited nonsense, ignoring totally what others were saying at the time.

We can all post clips to suit our agenda. For every one you can post I can post ten, illustrating a different proposition. Editing and selecting 20 second clips is disingenuous and a misrepresentation of what happened. I won't spam the the thread but we all know that the words no deal were never on the ballot paper.

You know and we all know that the only thing on the ballot paper was remain or leave. The various options for leave were discussed endlessly and the public got confused and bemused by it all. Norway? Canada Plus? A customs union? No deal, yes, was mentioned by some cranks in the ERG, but was one of only several options/ideas/plans. 

In addition to that we had ministers telling us we could cut a good deal, we'd hold all the cards, it'd be the easiest deal in history, and on and on and on. You forgot to mention all that. I can't think why.

There is no majority amongst voters for a crash and burn No Deal Brexit. There never was. 

 

 

 

[For Us All]

53 minutes ago, TheSage said:

No. That's more of your usual selective, edited nonsense, ignoring totally what others were saying at the time.

We can all post clips to suit our agenda. For every one you can post I can post ten, illustrating a different proposition. Editing and selecting 20 second clips is disingenuous and a misrepresentation of what happened. I won't spam the the thread but we all know that the words no deal were never on the ballot paper.

You know and we all know that the only thing on the ballot paper was remain or leave. The various options for leave were discussed endlessly and the public got confused and bemused by it all. Norway? Canada Plus? A customs union? No deal, yes, was mentioned by some cranks in the ERG, but was one of only several options/ideas/plans. 

In addition to that we had ministers telling us we could cut a good deal, we'd hold all the cards, it'd be the easiest deal in history, and on and on and on. You forgot to mention all that. I can't think why.

There is no majority amongst voters for a crash and burn No Deal Brexit. There never was. 

 

 

 

There's no majority among voters to be held hostage by the EU either because that's what the Maybot's withdrawal agreement does.

[Regal Beagle]

2 hours ago, TheSage said:

No. That's more of your usual selective, edited nonsense, ignoring totally what others were saying at the time.

We can all post clips to suit our agenda. For every one you can post I can post ten, illustrating a different proposition. Editing and selecting 20 second clips is disingenuous and a misrepresentation of what happened. I won't spam the the thread but we all know that the words no deal were never on the ballot paper.

You know and we all know that the only thing on the ballot paper was remain or leave. The various options for leave were discussed endlessly and the public got confused and bemused by it all. Norway? Canada Plus? A customs union? No deal, yes, was mentioned by some cranks in the ERG, but was one of only several options/ideas/plans. 

In addition to that we had ministers telling us we could cut a good deal, we'd hold all the cards, it'd be the easiest deal in history, and on and on and on. You forgot to mention all that. I can't think why.

There is no majority amongst voters for a crash and burn No Deal Brexit. There never was. 

 

 

 

[Cathy Newman]So what you're saying is, there was no "Leave with a deal" on the ballot paper and thefore we must leave without a deal? [/Cathy Newman]