Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 76 comments are related to the topic:
Rabid Brexiteers and Remainers
Rabid Brexiteers and Remainers
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 76
|
By:
Remaim - Leave with the deal on offer - Leave with No deal.
If they were the options how would you decide the winner? Remain to my mind would have to beat both other votes combined otherwise we go with the greaer of the 2 leave options. That would have to be a guaranteed by parliament. |
|
By:
Also think Boris and JRM have done more damage to themselves than good. Them voted for something they knew would lose anyway that they have spent the last few months describing as a slave state. It's not a good look for zero gain politically. On top of all that this is a deal that is not supported by the majority who voted leave in the first place, so they aren't even representing the people they claim to represent anymore.
I was actually somewhat surprised today when it was obvious it would still lose that JRM and Boris didn't switch back as they'd never really nailed themselves to voting for it before, there was always get out clauses and I was expecting them to use them so they weren't attached to what was a sure fire loser. |
|
By:
The most popular motion in the house was arguably the one put forward by Kenneth Clarke, rather than TM's deal
|
|
By:
The other big mistake I think the leave MPs have made, and again surprise JRM and Boris have fallen into this trap. Is they have now just added more fuel to the leave vote being divided. If the leave MPs operated as a unit like the remainers have it would have been a much better look for them as having a unified position. This collapse in them now supporting something many said was worse than remain a few months ago just makes it look they are unprincipled stereotype politicians in it for their political career. The real damage though is it now comes an even tougher sell that "leave definitely voted for this", as they have made themselves look divided on what leave means.
|
|
By:
The idea of May's deal being most popular because it got most votes is baloney anyway in sense of she's had 3 highly pushed votes, which she's whipped her largest party behind all 3 times, and still lost all 3. In normal times the PM's position would have been untenable after the first vote, and she's survived 3 of these, and perhaps a 4th is coming next week.
If you just gave a free vote to everyone in the house of commons I don't believe for a second that May's deal would come out on top, most the Tories voting it are either doing to spite their face or on the government payroll which is like half the Tory MPs. The fact it has failed 3 times in these conditions tells you just how unpopular the deal is. |
|
By:
With a referendum at 3.15 and no deal at 3.55, a deal is still favourite.
|
|
By:
@ n88uk. I would dispute that.
In respect of immigration the definition was of taking back control of our borders and limiting the numbers entering the UK. It had nothing to do with expelling anyone. Saying it would actually lead to more immigration is just not true and I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion. In the lead up to the referendum every politician was asked if leaving meant leaving the Single Market and the Customs Union and they all replied that it would. The pamphlet that was sent to every household also confirmed this. So people voted with those 3 things in mind. |
|
By:
Mr Clarke’s customs union motion was narrowly defeated by 271 votes to 265 votes on Wednesday, with 34 Tory MPs joining Labour MPs and voting in favour.
|
|
By:
Although you've got to be an idiot not to realise that Mr Calrke's custom union is much closer to remain than it is to no deal. It's my preferred deal because it's the least bad option.
|
|
By:
I agree most realised that akabula, but I have seen good numbers of people on TV in the last few years who literally thought it meant getting the foreigners out so these people exist in some number. And like I say I think the other people will be disappointed anyway as you will just get a spike in non-EU immigration instead. The immigration reason in itself is a sensitive topic, as you have some people who literally just want immigration to be cut but it's fair to say there's a good number of plain racists who voted for this reason hiding behind numbers who will end up gaining nothing from the end result.
Also I didn't say it will lead to more overall immigration, it will lead to more non-EU immigration, this is already happening as EU immigration has fallen, non-EU immigration has gone up, it will increase even more after Brexit. |
|
By:
And you can't ever have expected TM to support that, as it's clearly not what her party want or really BREXIT
|
|
By:
On the last part the thing is I doubt most voters on either side even knew what those two things meant. Maybe they'd understand the single market as it's more obvious, but even now I guarantee a good number have no idea what a or the customs union is.
I mean ffs next week we've got MPs getting a lecture on the customs union and what it entails. The referendum like most votes was won on a few quick sound bites rather than bogged down in policy like that. |
|
By:
I wouldn't touch the referendum market with a barge pole here. It's by 2020, there has to be a good chance if it is happens it won't happen until 2020 so no would win anyway here. I'm not sure if the odds are already taking this into account though as not seen prices elsewhere on like by 2021.
|
|
By:
75% of mp's thereabouts voted Remain including Ken Clarke who put forward the Custom Union option so it's no surprise it garnered a lot of support, a customs union as per May's Mansion house speech, could not be apart of any true Brexit.
Should be a referedum held this summer. |
|
By:
If Brexit happens with no deal/no more freedom of movement of people, then what will actually happen in time is businesses will put pressure on government to open the doors wider and further for those from the commonwealth countries to fill the inevitable gaps left, as they wont want to pay more in wages to Brits.
|
|
By:
The only way you will get no deal is by accident and tbh even then I think parliament votes to revoke before it allows no deal to happen. Tbh those that wanted no deal should have pushed for a 2nd ref on it ages ago, but of course they wouldn't as they can't really countenance supporting a 2nd ref, but if that's what you want you're just highly unlikely to get it any other way.
Which is one of the problems of Brexit, that ultimately pretty sure we will get a fudge one way or another. Politicians are trying to play the game of playing the middle ground that just leaves both sides pissed off if anything. |
|
By:
Didn't Boris say "there is no way we will leave without a deal when he was campaigning" There was plenty of BS and lies from the likes of Nigel Farage.
|
|
By:
It's why May's deal has to fail for both sides really. If May's deal blackmails it's way through in the end it will leave the country massively divided for a generation, leaving everyone feeling betrayed and almost certainly leaving us worse off.
This idea from Boris that you will just be able to tear it up is bs. We gave away that as our card ages ago from Gove, that's why the EU have insisted on the backstop and the likes as they know this was the initial plan, and now Boris is coming back to it as his save face card for backing the deal. In reality this will be impossible. People won't realise just how bad May's deal is until it happens but put simply there is no way the UK can get a good deal out of it. I've argued all along our bargaining position was poor but in May's deal it's literally zero, we are stuck in limbo at the EU's mercy until we agree a deal, why on earth will we get anything on our terms, it will be the EU give us these terms, take it or leave it, and we say no we're gonna do what exactly? |
|
By:
There certainly was a lot of misinformation which I'm sure not all was deliberate.
For out and out lies this takes some beating. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLEIbC4JYgs |
|
By:
The country will be divided no matter what.
|
|
By:
Yes but the government have managed to piss both sides off.
|
|
By:
tbh the only way it might not be divided is if we have another referendum and vote leave again
|
|
By:
The thing is I often see Tories talking about healing the divisions in the country is why this deal needs to go through. It's way, way too late for that. Their total mess has increased the divisions, because it just looks chaos and a total lack of leadership (because it is of course). If Tory's had forged a plan early on that would work for the house, it might not have been to everyone's delight but you would have given an idea of direction that would have allowed people to move on, instead they've allowed attitudes to fester for 3 years which has led to a hardening of attitudes. The idea of no deal and revocation would have been laughable 2 years ago, now that's what this government has driven people to with their incompetence.
|
|
By:
I think you'll find that Labour have pissed off just as many people when it comes to an election
|
|
By:
What the Tories really mean of course by that is heal the problems in the Tory party, because voting this deal through will not heal the problems amongst the people.
|
|
By:
I think no BREXIT was a bigger price after the referendum than it is now, or at least a similar price. It was someat like 5/2 that article 50 would never be triggered in the first place?
|
|
By:
Er Labour haven't been in power though. With Labour I imagine the issue is have they done over enough to win the remain vote, I'm not convinced but until an election and their manifesto you don't know. There is still a lot of questions for them.
An election will be fought on Brexit if it happens, however the general election process goes beyond that. Labour have a lot of extreme seats at both ends, however most the heavy Labour leave seats are the Labour heartlands which have no chance of turning blue. People might have voted leave, but there's no chance these types vote Tory as they despise them. A lot of the battlegrounds are actually remain areas in the likes of London which will be interesting and again will make what the Conservatives choose to do highly interesting. I'm not sure Labour have done enough to necessarily win these areas, but if Conservatives lose them it could still lead to Labour coming to power anyway. |
|
By:
Can't remember original prices now. It's amazing in hindsight how little a deal was made from us triggering Article 50 without even the hint of an idea of an exit plan at the time. Triggering Article 50 with no plan was absolute madness.
|
|
By:
The key to an election will be when it is and who loses votes to who? Both main parties will lose votes? Will remainers switch to the LDs or a new party? We'll see plenty switching to the BREXI party if it hasn't happened, but will they Labour BREXITeers or Tory ones? There are much more Tory leavers than Labour ones, but Labour clearly don't want BREXIT so a bigger portion of them will switch.
|
|
By:
She triggered A50 because she wanted to take it off the table before the GE.
|
|
By:
The vote to revoke article 50 had 75% of MPs in favour.
Deduct the SNP who vote against everything then the majority of Labour MPs voted for it. Why no demand for clarity then? Makes no sense. |
|
By:
It's because at the time it was just viewed as getting the ball rolling, back then the idea we wouldn't get a deal was laughed off.
|
|
By:
Sorry invoke article 50.
|
|
By:
The rhetoric at the time was that once A50 was triggered that's it there is no going back. Personally, I was going to vote LD had she not triggered it, but I lost the motivation to do that once she triggered it. Was pointless anyway really because it was always a safe Tory seat, and I certainly wasn't going to vote Labour
|
|
By:
Tbh I can't even remember the media on it at the time but is amazing in hindsight not much of a deal was made of what we were actually doing. We seemingly invoked Article 50 and it took us over a year after that to even come up with an idea of how we would leave, absolute madness.
|
|
By:
I don't think anyone including the political commentators saw this as anything more than the first step in the process.
The importance of it in terms of starting the clock ticking was lost. I have to be honest in all this, I saw TM as the best person to take us forward despite her being a remainer.  |
|
By:
Maybe she was. She was neutral really rather than a remainer so was meant to pull both sides of the party together. She might have made mistakes, but so might anybody, and I do feel she did her absolute hardest to get a deal done.
|