• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

r-u-s-x said:
Yes so the Tory option with a Tory government is likely to be more neo-liberal, Labour come in they are likely to try and renegotiate it anyway to a Norway model.

It allows us to vote in a Keynesian manifesto which in the last election was probably most like the Green party, it is very unlikely going towards no chance, this country is not where you (nor I ) want it to be.
Click to expand...

I'm fairly confident Corbyn in 2022 wouldn't touch a Canada FTA, and would just bring in a radical domestic agenda.
 
scaramanga said:
I've laid out where good deals can be had and even how no deal can be a success. You've ignored that repeatedly, so I'm not going to continue to discuss it.
Click to expand...

Ahaha :D That is a good one. If you can't quickly, easily outline how a no deal would be a success then I'd suggest its not becuase I ignored it. I would relish your intelligence and ideas, almost all commentators think no deal would be catastrophic. Where did they go so wrong?
 
Interesting to see what will happen now if, as seems likely, May wins the vote tonight.

She's pinned her career to the back of this deal, but there's no way she will get it through parliament.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Ahaha :D That is a good one. If you can't quickly, easily outline how a no deal would be a success then I'd suggest its not becuase I ignored it. I would relish your intelligence and ideas, almost all commentators think no deal would be catastrophic. Where did they go so wrong?
Click to expand...
You're in an echo chamber. Expand your sources and you'll find them all over the place. I've already linked to quite a few in this very thread.
 
scaramanga said:
You're in an echo chamber. Expand your sources and you'll find them all over the place. I've already linked to quite a few in this very thread.
Click to expand...

My take away: you couldn't simply outline how no deal would be a success. Don't need sources, just your reasoned logic.
 
monkeybarry said:
Won by 200 - 117

Yeah, that's a nice united Govt then.

I wonder what Corbyns tactics are now
Click to expand...

The same. She has to bring her deal back to Parliament, she can't change it. She has the same problems. The interesting thing for me now is what the headbangers like Johnson and Mogg do.
 
the dza said:
The same. She has to bring her deal back to Parliament, she can't change it. She has the same problems. The interesting thing for me now is what the headbangers like Johnson and Mogg do.
Click to expand...
I was thinking re; a parliamentary vote of no confidence.
He knows now there are appx 100 Tories that would go with it (some wouldn't get involved). But does he want to align himself the likes of Rees Mogg etc
 
monkeybarry said:
I was thinking re; a parliamentary vote of no confidence.
He knows now there are appx 100 Tories that would go with it (some wouldn't get involved). But does he want to align himself the likes of Rees Mogg etc
Click to expand...

I think it's very optimistic to think that 100 tories would vote against the government in a confidence vote. Vote against May, yes, but not to bring down their own government. A no confidence vote makes more sense to do after her deal is voted on imo (assuming it gets voted down). Let them drown in their own mess.
 
r-u-s-x said:
We will be in the backstop by then so would be in the customs / regulatory union and all it entails.
Click to expand...

That's why it's so crucial to get Canada, rather than May's deal, now. The backstop/any customs union bind kills off a left-wing Brexit permanently.
 
the dza said:
The same. She has to bring her deal back to Parliament, she can't change it. She has the same problems. The interesting thing for me now is what the headbangers like Johnson and Mogg do.
Click to expand...

With tale between their legs, they back May's deal with the backstop re-negotiated. Quite some U-turn, presumably in the face of another referendum. But will they be enough to carry the deal? It's still a bad deal, still doesn't deliver sovrignity, still probably leaves the UK worse off financially.
 
SpurMeUp said:
With tale between their legs, they back May's deal with the backstop re-negotiated. Quite some U-turn, presumably in the face of another referendum. But will they be enough to carry the deal? It's still a bad deal, still doesn't deliver sovrignity, still probably leaves the UK worse off financially.
Click to expand...

There is no re-negotiation of the backstop though, at least not one that they would accept. As far as I can tell, she will go back to Parliament with the same deal. She's just running the clock down.
 
the dza said:
There is no re-negotiation of the backstop though, at least not one that they would accept. As far as I can tell, she will go back to Parliament with the same deal. She's just running the clock down.
Click to expand...

They'll be some token clarification or guidance which nods to the ERGs demands. She'll come up with something that just allows them to save face. THe backstop is only if no trade deal is made, so it's a bit ott isn't it? It's become the focus when the bigger piece is the effects on the economy - £6,000 worse off per person the BoE estimates under this deal, is that right?

Then there is the lack of sovrignity under May's deal. Brexiteers will tell you that control and sovrignity are key, more than immigration, so not sure how you can accept a deal where we are still beholden to the European court. Of course the reality is that the European court ruling on some trade things is not a big deal. However, if the ERG effectively accept that, then it shows their whole premise is flawed.
 
Last edited:
the dza said:
There is no re-negotiation of the backstop though, at least not one that they would accept. As far as I can tell, she will go back to Parliament with the same deal. She's just running the clock down.
Click to expand...

EFTA with no financial contribution until Canada, instead of the transition and back-stop?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back