The Politics Thread 2019

[WhiteHorseRam]

6 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

Why this bizarre talk of a hard border? The UK government sure as hell won't put one up. I'd be amazed if the Irish government decided too. It's total scaremongering. 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/video/2019/aug/08/belfast-riot-police-and-youths-clash-in-standoff-over-republican-bonfire-video

 

Any kind of 'border' will be a disaster.

The past and present in NI are entirely intertwined and the whole thing remains a tinder box. 

The Good Friday Agreement was so carefully glued together by politicians so much better than the buffoons we have right now - mess with it in any way at your peril.

[G STAR RAM]

17 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

I think most of these are using supposed opposition to "no deal" as a veneer to coat their opposition to Brexit. If you can't leave unless there's a deal, you effectively give the EU a veto on us ever leaving. Most of the country seems to have accepted that and there's been a running majority to leave on 31st October for months in the regular Opinium survey when that question is asked:

Nail on head.

This isnt about trying to stop No Deal, it's about trying to stop Brexit.

Even these MPs didnt want No Deal, why have they not managed to put together a deal that was acceptable to both sides? They have had 3 years to do so.

Of course the reason is because both sides want what is best for themselves.

At no point during this process does there appear to have been any negotiable, just a simple surrender from us, although that was kind of inevitable after we stupidly agreed to the sequencing suggested by the EU.

As Remainers are keen to point out, things change over time, therefore I am sure they will understand that No Deal is very unlikely to be a permanent situation. 

Let's get out, get a deal agreed without a gun to our head and then see how it goes.

If things go badly I am sure a Remainer party will be in charge of the country soon enough and then put in action plans for a Referendum to rejoin the EU.

[GboroRam]

6 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Nail on head.

This isnt about trying to stop No Deal, it's about trying to stop Brexit.

Even these MPs didnt want No Deal, why have they not managed to put together a deal that was acceptable to both sides? They have had 3 years to do so.

Of course the reason is because both sides want what is best for themselves.

At no point during this process does there appear to have been any negotiable, just a simple surrender from us, although that was kind of inevitable after we stupidly agreed to the sequencing suggested by the EU.

As Remainers are keen to point out, things change over time, therefore I am sure they will understand that No Deal is very unlikely to be a permanent situation. 

Let's get out, get a deal agreed without a gun to our head and then see how it goes.

If things go badly I am sure a Remainer party will be in charge of the country soon enough and then put in action plans for a Referendum to rejoin the EU.

I do wonder if a hard brexit will result in us rejoining very quickly. Maybe that's bojo's plan - he traitorously wrote a telegraph piece about remain, so maybe its just a big troll? 

[G STAR RAM]

3 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I do wonder if a hard brexit will result in us rejoining very quickly. Maybe that's bojo's plan - he traitorously wrote a telegraph piece about remain, so maybe its just a big troll? 

Why would it? 

Do you not think a hard Brexit  could lead to us ultimately getting a better deal on the other side?

[McRamFan]

Bojo championed getting back our sovereignty, then poops on it.  Not an elected PM, a twit who has stated he wants to be 'king of the world'.

The bloke is a spoilt brat, never done a decent days work in his life, and is now in charge of a country.  Deal with the USA, you are having a laugh.  How far do the goods have to travel?

Suspended Parliament, real reason, so him and his cronies (JRM etc.) can make a few million when the £ fell against the dollar and other significant world currencies. (estimated they made north of £10m yesterday).

If you think this buffoon has the interest of the country as his number one goal, is deluded to the point you need to get your head out of the sand. Trump is lubing up his tiny hand, ready to take control of the glove puppet Boris.

[McRamFan]

7 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Why would it? 

Do you not think a hard Brexit  could lead to us ultimately getting a better deal on the other side?

With who and how? 

[G STAR RAM]

5 minutes ago, McRamFan said:

With who and how? 

With the EU.

All of our cards would be back on the negotiating table rather than having the surrender treaty being used against us.

[Spanish]

10 hours ago, Uptherams said:

The vote in 1975 was what exactly then? There was no status quo once the inevitable referendum were to take place. A vote to remain would have lead to deeper and deeper integration. 

Are you actually trying to kid other people or just yourself? 

nobody was talking about 1975, good grief man stay on topic.  A vote to remain was just that.  

[G STAR RAM]

1 minute ago, Spanish said:

nobody was talking about 1975, good grief man stay on topic.  A vote to remain was just that.  

And surely a vote to Leave was just that also then?

If your argument that a vote to Leave had many unknowns, then you must also apply the same logic to a Remain vote. 

Let's not forget we joined an EEC not an EU.

[Spanish]

2 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

And surely a vote to Leave was just that also then?

If your argument that a vote to Leave had many unknowns, then you must also apply the same logic to a Remain vote. 

Let's not forget we joined an EEC not an EU.

staying had some factual basis to that decision.  Exiting is based on guesswork.  there are 50 ways to leave your lover apparently

 

[G STAR RAM]

1 minute ago, Spanish said:

staying had some factual basis to that decision.  Exiting is based on guesswork.  there are 50 ways to leave your lover apparently

 

Exiting also had some factual basis. (No longer governed by EU laws, regain control of our own borders).

To try and make out we would know the future as a member of the EU but not as a sovereign state is pie in the sky.

But for the sake of this debate, assuming the facts are known, please advise the following for 10 years time, had we remained in the EU.

1 - What new countries will have joined the EU?

2 - What stage would a proposed European army be at?

3 - What financial state will the EU be in?

4 - How many countries will have to have been bailed out of a financial crisis?

[Spanish]

14 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Exiting also had some factual basis. (No longer governed by EU laws, regain control of our own borders).

To try and make out we would know the future as a member of the EU but not as a sovereign state is pie in the sky.

But for the sake of this debate, assuming the facts are known, please advise the following for 10 years time, had we remained in the EU.

1 - What new countries will have joined the EU?

2 - What stage would a proposed European army be at?

3 - What financial state will the EU be in?

4 - How many countries will have to have been bailed out of a financial crisis?

I am talking about the day after, week after, month after.  How can anybody say what 10 years will look like on either side of the vote.  What will brexit look like in the early days, weeks, months after?  Certainty v uncertainty

The facts you mention are only possibly applicable on a no deal and I still don't know how the backstop affects the control of your border

[Ghost of Clough]

11 hours ago, Spanish said:

Simple it was stay as it is, what else could it mean?

A lot of people voted remain in the hope of "reforming the EU" as apposed to keeping things as they are.

[BaaLocks]

14 hours ago, Uptherams said:

The vote was to leave or remain. Nothing about any kind of 'deal'. 

It was, you're right, and it was beyond stupid that was it. It was also beyond stupid that there was no decisive margin in place - this thing could have tipped on one vote and (in a country of >60m people) it just about did.

Maybe some of the extreme Leave proponents might get a bit further if they remembered that rather than giving it the 'Remoaners need to realise the people spoke' line at every opportunity. This was not a decisive vote and we needed to proceed in respect of that, on either side. But we gave too much air time to the wrong people and we now are in a place where the rift is significant and growning embittered.

All that BoJoke's actions over the last 24 hours have done is deepen the divide and ensure that the time when the debate does happen, in a now shortened window, will be even more partisan than before. And it is not 80% of the people telling the majority to tow the line - like it or not this is a split country and we must appreciate that 'my way or the highway' is not going to end well (if for no other reason than that no two people are agreed on what 'my way' looks like).

[Spanish]

14 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

A lot of people voted remain in the hope of "reforming the EU" as apposed to keeping things as they are.

how many people?

[BaaLocks]

40 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Exiting also had some factual basis. (No longer governed by EU laws, regain control of our own borders).

To try and make out we would know the future as a member of the EU but not as a sovereign state is pie in the sky.

But for the sake of this debate, assuming the facts are known, please advise the following for 10 years time, had we remained in the EU.

1 - What new countries will have joined the EU?

2 - What stage would a proposed European army be at?

3 - What financial state will the EU be in?

4 - How many countries will have to have been bailed out of a financial crisis?

Nobody knows but the likelihood is that the EU will look largely unchanged in ten years. The two main scare options, Turkey and Ukraine will not become EU members for the reason they cannot protect their borders. Ukraine also will never join the EU while Putin is in charge, he simply would not allow it. So I don't see who else could join the EU that would provoke any level of change from what exists today?

Questions 2,3 and 4 have no answer I can give - and anything I did say might likely get labelled Project Fear so I'll not, save to say the one country that can't get bailed out now is the UK. Some might think that a silly thing to say as they look at their HDTV and plan their next holiday but many areas of deprived inner cities in the UK have benefitted for years from EU support - but that wasn't exciting enough to paint on a bus.

[BaaLocks]

3 minutes ago, Spanish said:

how many people?

It doesn't matter - they lost. That ship has sailed and many (myself included) fervent remainers get that point clearly. What is needed now is a more consiliatory approach to the leave mandate that the people voted for, no matter how narrowly. Them was the rules of the game - end of.

[BaaLocks]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

Why would it? 

Do you not think a hard Brexit  could lead to us ultimately getting a better deal on the other side?

Well, let's look at it this way. Every single trade negotiation with any EU state that happens will start with 'how's that Irish border going?'. Backstop removed as an option and clear EU directive to any member not to trade with us till that is resolved. Unless the EU blinks in the next two months we have backed ourself into a right old corner.

[G STAR RAM]

26 minutes ago, Spanish said:

I am talking about the day after, week after, month after.  How can anybody say what 10 years will look like on either side of the vote.  What will brexit look like in the early days, weeks, months after?  Certainty v uncertainty

The facts you mention are only possibly applicable on a no deal and I still don't know how the backstop affects the control of your border

It would have been possible to make reasonable estimates of how much we would have to pay to the EU and how many EU migrants would have entered the UK in the days/weeks/months after a vote.

I think for the first time in a long time people chose to vote on a long term vision rather than the days/weeks/months ahead.

Past performance can be used as a decent indicator of the future. People have seen how a European Economic Community had, without being mandated, transformed into a European political union and they didnt like where they believed it was heading.

[G STAR RAM]

6 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

Well, let's look at it this way. Every single trade negotiation with any EU state that happens will start with 'how's that Irish border going?'. Backstop removed as an option and clear EU directive to any member not to trade with us till that is resolved. Unless the EU blinks in the next two months we have backed ourself into a right old corner.

So you can safely say that if we leave with no deal that no German cars will enter the UK until the Irish border problem is resolved?