Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

[dances with sheeple]

3 minutes ago, Dave Beans said:

According to Vote Leave & last Tory manifesto, I thought we were going to leave in an orderly manner?

WTO is more orderly than many think IMO, the deals will come together quickly or a lot of EU economies will be taking a hit as well, and the EZ in general doesn`t really want any more negatives does it? The "orderly manner" stuff requires a strong UK negotiating team and an EU comfortable enough with it`s position to let a country or two go. Neither option exists, therefore we need to go No Deal, drain the Westminster swamp at the next GE, and let the EU voters do the same for Brussels in May, then we can move forward in a manner that benefits the citizens of the EU and the UK.

[frederico]

I do think the labour party are the real villains in all this, I'm not a tory by the way and I would much prefer to like labour.

But Corbyn and his cronies are pathetic pretend revolutionaries.

[Kosmin]

13 minutes ago, dances with sheeple said:

I think in a nutshell, if they don`t deliver Brexit there are enough (obviously enough) Brexit voters who will go over to a Farage party to sink the Big Two,

It's very hard to see this happening. Why hasn't this happened already? There were lots of constituencies where Leave won by a large majority (70%), but were still far off UKIP winning a seat (did they come close in many places in 2015?). One big reason is people who might vote UKIP are divided on domestic policies and so prefer to continue to vote for the policies they like rather than UKIP, which will either disappoint some on the Left or the Right, or perhaps both if they choose the centre ground. Another is that the vast majority of UKIP candidate have no political experience.

Also there is a risk that the vote will be further split between UKIP and Farage.

I think they might win some seats, but for them to get close to power relies on a large proportion of the 17.4m prioritising this. I reckon several million might, but not a majority of them.

[dances with sheeple]

1 hour ago, jonb2 said:

There are 27 of them. They will come through. We have nothing on the table do we?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/02/07/world/europe/brexit-impact-on-european-union.html

 

What we have on the table is the size of our economy, we don`t really need much else at this stage. If you think the EU isn`t panicking at the thought of losing an economy our size you are really not thinking things through IMO.

[frederico]

2 minutes ago, dances with sheeple said:

WTO is more orderly than many think IMO, the deals will come together quickly or a lot of EU economies will be taking a hit as well, and the EZ in general doesn`t really want any more negatives does it? The "orderly manner" stuff requires a strong UK negotiating team and an EU comfortable enough with it`s position to let a country or two go. Neither option exists, therefore we need to go No Deal, drain the Westminster swamp at the next GE, and let the EU voters do the same for Brussels in May, then we can move forward in a manner that benefits the citizens of the EU and the UK.

We'll never change Westminster, not sure about Brussels, the whole thing isn't working very well and some of those Europeans get a lot more stroppy than the brits.

The chance to leave in an orderly manner has long gone, that ship sailed about a year ago. Leave or remain its anything but orderly.

[frederico]

3 minutes ago, dances with sheeple said:

What we have on the table is the size of our economy, we don`t really need much else at this stage. If you think the EU isn`t panicking at the thought of losing an economy our size you are really not thinking things through IMO.

Yes, but we should have seen the whites of their eyes 2 years ago, they didn't believe we had it in us to just leave and that was the only way to get a decent deal.

It's now too late, they can't change and our parliament is still to scared to stand up for anything.

 

[dances with sheeple]

11 minutes ago, onlooker said:

Not a hope in hell of WTO being approved, IMHO, and I say that as a confirmed Leaver. An extension will be negotiated (in exchange for money), Project Fear will be turned even higher, with more outragious lies, and Farage and JRM will meet with unfortunate accidents.

WTO is the default, it doesn`t need to be "approved". The political consequences of an extension or revoking article 50 are less palatable to the PTB than No Deal IMO. May is going to be pushed towards No Deal now, no other option left.

[OnionTerror]

1 minute ago, frederico said:

Yes, but we should have seen the whites of their eyes 2 years ago, they didn't believe we had it in us to just leave and that was the only way to get a decent deal.

It's now too late, they can't change and our parliament is still to scared to stand up for anything.

 

What would have been a decent deal?

[frederico]

Just now, dances with sheeple said:

WTO is the default, it doesn`t need to be "approved". The political consequences of an extension or revoking article 50 are less palatable to the PTB than No Deal IMO. May is going to be pushed towards No Deal now, no other option left.

Well yes, this is the catch 22 the pathetic mps have got themselves into. So it'll be European elections for us.

[thecrashingisles]

2 minutes ago, frederico said:

Yes, but we should have seen the whites of their eyes 2 years ago, they didn't believe we had it in us to just leave and that was the only way to get a decent deal.

It's now too late, they can't change and our parliament is still to scared to stand up for anything.

How would it have changed the deal?  "No deal is better than a bad deal" was always true for the EU, even if it wasn't for the UK.

[frederico]

Just now, Dave Beans said:

What would have been a decent deal?

Sensible trade agreement and sensible customs arrangement in NI whatever people say, something could be worked out. Maybe bonded lorries or something.

Nothing is impossible because its just whether people want to do it or not.

[Kosmin]

9 minutes ago, frederico said:

I do think the labour party are the real villains in all this, I'm not a tory by the way and I would much prefer to like labour.

But Corbyn and his cronies are pathetic pretend revolutionaries.

Not the Labour party, but the voters who voted to Leave and then voted Labour. Labour made their opposition to Brexit clear, despite what may have been written in their manifesto or campaigns.

[onlooker]

4 minutes ago, dances with sheeple said:

WTO is the default, it doesn`t need to be "approved". The political consequences of an extension or revoking article 50 are less palatable to the PTB than No Deal IMO. May is going to be pushed towards No Deal now, no other option left.

I forsee the MPs (of whom a majority favour Remain) taking control away from the Govt, and grovelling for a long extension, while they draft terms of surrender. I have yet to see evidence that May and what remains of her Cabinet, have any fight in them.

[frederico]

1 minute ago, thecrashingisles said:

How would it have changed the deal?  "No deal is better than a bad deal" was always true for the EU, even if it wasn't for the UK.

I think we can agree a deal is better than no deal for both sides. The eu just needed to realise they should compromise a little bit rather than going all in. Anyone negotiating with May would think she was very weak because she is.

[OnionTerror]

3 minutes ago, frederico said:

Sensible trade agreement and sensible customs arrangement in NI whatever people say, something could be worked out. Maybe bonded lorries or something.

Nothing is impossible because its just whether people want to do it or not.

No controls on third country goods..Hmm..

[thecrashingisles]

Just now, frederico said:

I think we can agree a deal is better than no deal for both sides. The eu just needed to realise they should compromise a little bit rather than going all in. Anyone negotiating with May would think she was very weak because she is.

In what sense did they go all in?  They gave in to May's demands to add a UK-wide insurance policy as well as the NI-backstop.

[frederico]

2 minutes ago, Kosmin said:

Not the Labour party, but the voters who voted to Leave and then voted Labour. Labour made their opposition to Brexit clear, despite what may have been written in their manifesto or campaigns.

I don't think its unreasonable to expect a party to stick to a significant part of their manifesto.

Corbyn obviously just wants an election at all costs.

[frederico]

1 minute ago, Dave Beans said:

No controls on third country goods..Hmm..

Sorry what do you mean by this?

[thecrashingisles]

Just now, frederico said:

I don't think its unreasonable to expect a party to stick to a significant part of their manifesto.

Corbyn obviously just wants an election at all costs.

If a party fails to win a majority, usually it's taken to mean that voters rejected what they were offering so they should rethink, otherwise oppositions would never be able to change their policies between elections.

[frederico]

1 minute ago, thecrashingisles said:

In what sense did they go all in?  They gave in to May's demands to add a UK-wide insurance policy as well as the NI-backstop.

Err yeah, but no but, they really didn't. Why don't they make the backstop legally limited?

[thecrashingisles]

Just now, frederico said:

Err yeah, but no but, they really didn't. Why don't they make the backstop legally limited?

Because if there's a time limit, it's not a backstop.  They always said that Great Britain could unilaterally pull out of the customs union element, but the Northern Ireland backstop can't be time limited, otherwise it doesn't provide a guarantee and still allows the border to be used as a bargaining chip.

[OnionTerror]

5 minutes ago, frederico said:

Sorry what do you mean by this?

Once the UK leaves the single market, then it leaves the jurisdiction of ECJ (EEA countries run through the EFTA court)...both are arbiters of the SM...  The whole point of the single market is to harmonise standards..If your out of it, then goods are checked to see if the goods your shipping into the SM meets the required standard.

Its never been a 50/50 negotiation - you're either in the SM or your not.  If not, then goods being shipped into the SM will be treated as any other third country.

Edited April 1, 2019 by Dave Beans

[frederico]

2 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said:

If a party fails to win a majority, usually it's taken to mean that voters rejected what they were offering so they should rethink, otherwise oppositions would never be able to change their policies between elections.

Lol, Corbyn  et al say anything they think people want to hear.

[GrizzlyDave]

31 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

It really doesn't. It will be a monumental mess that our leaders will try to dodge responsibility for by attempting to blame it on the EU setting our to punish us. 

It’s clean because both sides (EU and UK) do not dilute their positions.

The EU protects its integrity.

The UK regains it’s sovereignty.

Over time in the future things will come together. And each step taken as a conscious tradeoff from both sides.

[dances with sheeple]

21 minutes ago, Kosmin said:

It's very hard to see this happening. Why hasn't this happened already? There were lots of constituencies where Leave won by a large majority (70%), but were still far off UKIP winning a seat (did they come close in many places in 2015?). One big reason is people who might vote UKIP are divided on domestic policies and so prefer to continue to vote for the policies they like rather than UKIP, which will either disappoint some on the Left or the Right, or perhaps both if they choose the centre ground. Another is that the vast majority of UKIP candidate have no political experience.

Also there is a risk that the vote will be further split between UKIP and Farage.

I think they might win some seats, but for them to get close to power relies on a large proportion of the 17.4m prioritising this. I reckon several million might, but not a majority of them.

? Because Leave won,  the two main parties campaigned to honour the result (one of them kindly providing the referendum) and we haven`t had a GE yet? Don`t underestimate the backlash if Brexit isn`t delivered. (There is no way that the PTB are not going to deliver Brexit now, the damage to their system would be too great)