Will UK brexit on 29 March 2019?
- Thread starter Saint
- Start date
Where did you see that?
I heard recently someone describing her as having as much authority as a "do not tumble dry" label.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
Tim Martin is talking out of his arse. The EU will not materially alter the Withdrawal deal. They can't, unless Ireland caves in on the backstop, which I do not believe they will. Ireland has had four centuries of being kicked around by Britain. Now that they have the big boys of the EU behind them, it is their best chance to free themselves from British dominance. I think they will tough it out, even if a hard border has to be put up as a result of a no deal stand-off.
But in any case, for all the tough talk of a no deal exit, how will any PM get that through Parliament? Any attempt to do so will bring about a vote of no confidence, which will be lost. It only takes a handful of Tories - 4 I believe - to vote down their own government, and they will do it. So then we will be into a general election, which the Tories will lose. And that will probably be the end of Brexit altogether - and of the Tory party too. Hunt has been trying to explain this to readers of the Torygraph. He talks of the "extinction" of the Tories in that scenario.
Bozo, if it should be him, can bluster all he likes but he cannot change the arithmetic of Parliament, any more than May could.
On line - BBC and Manchester Guardian
Yazata
Valued Senior Member
Yougov has a new poll out on Westminster voting intention.
Things I note:
Instead of two major parties, there seem to be four.
Unlike earlier polls, Labour isn't in the lead, the Lib-Dems are. My guess is that non-Marxists are defecting en-masse from Labour to the Lib-Dems in order to escape Jeremy Corbyn.
I suspect that the Jeremy Corbyn factor is hitting Brexit and the Conservatives too. Brexit's percentage in this poll is some 10% below the number that recently voted Brexit in the European election and the Conservatives are 10% higher. My guess is that most of these are voters who support Brexit but feel that the Conservatives are the only party that can stop Corbyn.
But that would just split the anti-Corbyn vote between Brexit and the Conservatives. If Brexit can convince the 10% that voted for them in the recent European election not to return to the Conservatives, they will be on stronger ground. Brexit's 'against the posh London elites' populism will probably continue to attract many of the more traditional Labour voters too.
The same problem of divisiveness afflicts the remain side. If they split between the Liberal Dems, part of Labour, the squishy establishment Conservatives, the Greens and Change-UK, they will just weaken themselves.
Which provides context for the current Conservative leadership scramble. Naming a pro-brexit politician with a bit of a populist edge might just split the leave vote between Brexit and the Conservatives, since they would be competing for the same voter. On the other hand, an establishment-pedigree remain-supporting hack in an expensive suit might position the Conservatives in a very different space, as just another of the jostling crowd competing with the Liberal Democrats for the remaining voters.
It's starting to look like a watershed moment.
Last edited:
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
LOL !I heard recently someone describing her as having as much authority as a "do not tumble dry" label.
panhandling patriarchal conservatives ?
Last edited:
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
Yes it is a very interesting poll. However one needs to remember that the Brexit Betrayal Party is a single-issue vehicle, with no position or credibility on the domestic policy issues facing an actual government, so it is not surprising they have dropped relative to their EU election result. In fact, both their continued strength, in spite of this lack, and the strength of the Lib Dems, show that even on a domestic agenda Brexit now looms very large in the minds of the electorate. Before the referendum sensitised the country to the issue, the EU was nowhere on the radar for most voters. Now, it is crucial.Yougov has a new poll out on Westminster voting intention.
Things I note:
Instead of two major parties, there seem to be four.
Unlike earlier polls, Labour isn't in the lead, the Lib-Dems are. My guess is that non-Marxists are defecting en-masse from Labour to the Lib-Dems in order to escape Jeremy Corbyn.
I suspect that the Jeremy Corbyn factor is hitting Brexit and the Conservatives too. Brexit's percentage in this poll is some 10% below the number that recently voted Brexit in the European election and the Conservatives are 10% higher. My guess is that most of these are voters who support Brexit but feel that the Conservatives are the only party that can stop Corbyn.
But that would just split the anti-Corbyn vote between Brexit and the Conservatives. If Brexit can convince the 10% that voted for them in the recent European election not to return to the Conservatives, they will be on stronger ground. Brexit's 'against the posh London elites' populism will probably continue to attract many of the more traditional Labour voters too.
The same problem of divisiveness afflicts the remain side. If they split between the Liberal Dems, part of Labour, the squishy establishment Conservatives, the Greens and Change-UK, they will just weaken themselves.
Which provides context for the current Conservative leadership scramble. Naming a pro-brexit politician with a bit of a populist edge might just split the leave vote between Brexit and the Conservatives, since they would be competing for the same voter. On the other hand, an establishment-pedigree remain-supporting hack in an expensive suit might position the Conservatives in a very different space, as just another of the jostling crowd competing with the Liberal Democrats for the remaining voters.
It's starting to look like a watershed moment.
Re Labour, the related polling, in this exercise, on who people think suitable to be prime minister shows that far more people consider the widely despised, outgoing May to be PM material than think Corbyn would be any good. Only 15% of people think he would make a good PM. That is really important in a general election. I think this shows that Labour will not get a majority in the next general election, regardless of how they may adapt their policy on Brexit. The man himself is a fatal liability. I think the most likely outcome will be a hung parliament, in which centrist/left of centre parties have a combined majority. Don't forget the SNP now gets most of the votes in Scotland, as well, depriving Labour of a traditional reservoir of support.
Perhaps we will need more coalition politics in future. I think that would be a good thing, given the flight to the extremes by both the old established parties.
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
I'm waiting for the brexit luncheon dinner.
Its the dinner after brexit which serves thinly sliced meats with crackers.
Its the dinner after brexit which serves thinly sliced meats with crackers.
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
donald has a crush on borris now
Yazata
Valued Senior Member
New poll out:
Britain definitely seems to be trending away from its historical two-party system towards being a more European-style multi-party system.
There are now four front-running parties.
After appearing on the ropes a while back, the Conservatives have rebounded back into first place (barely). It's apparently the prospect of the deeply unpopular (even among Conservative voters) Theresa May stepping down that's lured some of the traditional Conservative voters who had bailed back to the party. But 47% of the Conservative party's 2017 voters still say that they will vote for a different party this time. 38% of these 2017 voters have gone to the Brexit party and 6% to the Liberal Dems.
That would be disastrous for the Conservatives were it not for Labour being even worse off. 57% of their 2017 voters say that they will vote for a different party this time, with 28% going to the Liberal Democrats, 15% to the Greens and 10% to the Brexit party. If the Conservatives unload Theresa May before the next election and select a more inspiriting leader, Labour will be at a serious disadvantage led by Jeremy Corbyn.
And my guess is that a general election is coming soon, in November or December 2019 or so. If Bojo (or whoever) pushes a clean Brexit in October, Remainer members of his Conservative Parliamentary party are vowing to vote to bring down his government. And if Brexit doesn't happen in October, the Conservative Brexiteers in Parliament promise to do the same. A couple of dozen of them threaten to defect to the Brexit party.
So it looks like the government will collapse either way, around October 31 (Happy Holloween!) and new election will have to take place.
If the Conservative government falls because it delivered Brexit, then it's likely that the Brexit party will be cooperative and will try to form a Brexiteer alliance with the Leave-leaning Conservatives, agreeing not to contest many of their seats so as not to split the vote. And if meanwhile, Labour and the Liberal Democrats split the Remain vote, they will likely be decimated in Parliament.
But, if the government falls because it didn't deliver, the Brexit party will likely go head-to-head with the Conservatives. That might conceivably result in a highly fractured Parliament. It's unclear to me who would win a plurality of seats and get the first nod to form a government. But a coalition government would seem to be unavoidable. Brexit/Conservative or Labour/L-D would be my guess.
Britain definitely seems to be trending away from its historical two-party system towards being a more European-style multi-party system.
There are now four front-running parties.
After appearing on the ropes a while back, the Conservatives have rebounded back into first place (barely). It's apparently the prospect of the deeply unpopular (even among Conservative voters) Theresa May stepping down that's lured some of the traditional Conservative voters who had bailed back to the party. But 47% of the Conservative party's 2017 voters still say that they will vote for a different party this time. 38% of these 2017 voters have gone to the Brexit party and 6% to the Liberal Dems.
That would be disastrous for the Conservatives were it not for Labour being even worse off. 57% of their 2017 voters say that they will vote for a different party this time, with 28% going to the Liberal Democrats, 15% to the Greens and 10% to the Brexit party. If the Conservatives unload Theresa May before the next election and select a more inspiriting leader, Labour will be at a serious disadvantage led by Jeremy Corbyn.
And my guess is that a general election is coming soon, in November or December 2019 or so. If Bojo (or whoever) pushes a clean Brexit in October, Remainer members of his Conservative Parliamentary party are vowing to vote to bring down his government. And if Brexit doesn't happen in October, the Conservative Brexiteers in Parliament promise to do the same. A couple of dozen of them threaten to defect to the Brexit party.
So it looks like the government will collapse either way, around October 31 (Happy Holloween!) and new election will have to take place.
If the Conservative government falls because it delivered Brexit, then it's likely that the Brexit party will be cooperative and will try to form a Brexiteer alliance with the Leave-leaning Conservatives, agreeing not to contest many of their seats so as not to split the vote. And if meanwhile, Labour and the Liberal Democrats split the Remain vote, they will likely be decimated in Parliament.
But, if the government falls because it didn't deliver, the Brexit party will likely go head-to-head with the Conservatives. That might conceivably result in a highly fractured Parliament. It's unclear to me who would win a plurality of seats and get the first nod to form a government. But a coalition government would seem to be unavoidable. Brexit/Conservative or Labour/L-D would be my guess.
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
Stockholm syndrome
http://www.thescienceforum.com/politics/48979-brexit-progress-update-2-a-3.html#post624837
You are just repeating a post that has already been answered (and not refuted) Why?
https://news.yahoo.com/uk-lawmakers...0aG5zBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--
That was my source. I presume your interpretation is correct.
That was my source. I presume your interpretation is correct.
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
Doesnt matter what style colour or shade of lipstick they put on the pig, EU can still throw the UK out of the European parliament system.
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
crisis a 'diplomatic test' for new UK PM
... but they dont have a PM...
... but they dont have a PM...
I considered an interesting fix to the problem however getting it to people to actually consider the overall depth of it isn't an easy challenge.
This is what a decent PM would need to do:
Firstly Approach Europe and express that we have a potential resolution that could well suit not just the UK but also the EU should it be undertaken.
The PM would have to explain to Europe that part of the major concern that caused Briton's to vote the way they did was the concern that EU Bureaucracy is cumbersomely self-serving.
(Britons likely concerned that what interests they had in their own country weren't being considered in Europe as a whole, although this was in due part to blame from UKIP MEP's sitting on their arses collecting Euro cheques for doing nothing, as after all in their position it's easy to make Europe look by not engaging them fully. Incidentally those Euro's the UKIPers got paid will likely be cashed back to Sterling just before any resolution is done, as they were and are all about their own self gain which is what they get from a weakened economy.)
Another part to the vote was the concerns in regards to the increased taxation from immigration, an open border policy across the whole of Europe will being a decent Utopiac envisionment unfortunately has lead to strain on countries relations and heightened levels of xenophobia, especially since part of the Britons concern is being able to make restrictions that otherwise might be deemed "un-utopically European".
For that reason the suggestion is that the UK indeed will leave Europe and will not make a new deal with Europe of this change (No-Deal)..... however this is because the UK intends to create the option of making a small "Division" (technically subdivision) of countries that are both geographically linked and economically tied. This new "division" will become a member of Europe, where as the countries that make it up no longer need to have European Membership. All previous European deals can be migrated to this new "division".
The pro's to using this division framework is as follows:
All this would need to be conveyed to the EU and the countries that are to be asked whether they would be a party to this significant change openly, so that it's not been arranged through back channels or seen as skulduggery.
So in a nutshell, The UK would get to Leave, while remaining (in Lieu), It get's to have a no-deal, while maintaining/renewing old deals while creating new ones (with the "division"), it allows tighter borders in some areas (between subdivisions) while open borders within the subdivision and the NI border problem fixed.
It's just proving this devised system is a credible asset to Europe, not just a fix for the British screw-ups to date. (Incidentally it would be cheaper for the UK to pay Europe to create this change in the EU and create a new division that it would to exit with a no-deal and no significant plan.)
Obviously there is likely more things that need consideration beyond my scope, however I'm interested in seeing what other people think of the idea (although I'm sure some won't be too happy since it's neither the Exit or the Remain they initially considered.) So any thoughts? Critique? Corrections?
This is what a decent PM would need to do:
Firstly Approach Europe and express that we have a potential resolution that could well suit not just the UK but also the EU should it be undertaken.
The PM would have to explain to Europe that part of the major concern that caused Briton's to vote the way they did was the concern that EU Bureaucracy is cumbersomely self-serving.
(Britons likely concerned that what interests they had in their own country weren't being considered in Europe as a whole, although this was in due part to blame from UKIP MEP's sitting on their arses collecting Euro cheques for doing nothing, as after all in their position it's easy to make Europe look by not engaging them fully. Incidentally those Euro's the UKIPers got paid will likely be cashed back to Sterling just before any resolution is done, as they were and are all about their own self gain which is what they get from a weakened economy.)
Another part to the vote was the concerns in regards to the increased taxation from immigration, an open border policy across the whole of Europe will being a decent Utopiac envisionment unfortunately has lead to strain on countries relations and heightened levels of xenophobia, especially since part of the Britons concern is being able to make restrictions that otherwise might be deemed "un-utopically European".
For that reason the suggestion is that the UK indeed will leave Europe and will not make a new deal with Europe of this change (No-Deal)..... however this is because the UK intends to create the option of making a small "Division" (technically subdivision) of countries that are both geographically linked and economically tied. This new "division" will become a member of Europe, where as the countries that make it up no longer need to have European Membership. All previous European deals can be migrated to this new "division".
The pro's to using this division framework is as follows:
- There can be open borders within the division (this deals with the border concerns in Ireland)
- The division should try to keep to about 5 countries in total, this reduces the bureaucracy to a manageable level (The division would then have to elect or enroll representatives to interact with the EU at Brussels, thereby reducing the number of politicians even at Brussels aiding Bureaucracy there too. This is especially proven should other "sub-divisions" form in Europe)
- All old deals are capable of being migrated or renewed which means business can continue with limited upheaval (In essences fullfilling a no-deal exit while retaining deals)
- The UK Leaves Europe (Expunged as a direct member)
- The UK in lieu of the division still can manage to have all the benefits of an EU member state, through the division it's now a party to.
- The division can be maintained (deals etc) no matter if countries want to join or leave, removing the messy way for countries to leave the EU should they decide to do so (The UK is trailblazing in regards to how to exit the EU, if the UK makes a complete hash of it like it appears to currently, it undermines the chance for all countries in Europe should they ever decide they want to leave.)
- European Taxation and Law would exist between the EU and the "Division", however the "Division" itself could have reduced taxation and alterations to EU law similar to a democratic state system
- There can be tougher external border that is around the perimeter of the division policed by it's members.
- Division members can make self-governance decisions that are geographically effective for themselves. (No more blocking of bureaucracy by countries that literally are unaffected by legislation due to their lack of proximity)
All this would need to be conveyed to the EU and the countries that are to be asked whether they would be a party to this significant change openly, so that it's not been arranged through back channels or seen as skulduggery.
So in a nutshell, The UK would get to Leave, while remaining (in Lieu), It get's to have a no-deal, while maintaining/renewing old deals while creating new ones (with the "division"), it allows tighter borders in some areas (between subdivisions) while open borders within the subdivision and the NI border problem fixed.
It's just proving this devised system is a credible asset to Europe, not just a fix for the British screw-ups to date. (Incidentally it would be cheaper for the UK to pay Europe to create this change in the EU and create a new division that it would to exit with a no-deal and no significant plan.)
Obviously there is likely more things that need consideration beyond my scope, however I'm interested in seeing what other people think of the idea (although I'm sure some won't be too happy since it's neither the Exit or the Remain they initially considered.) So any thoughts? Critique? Corrections?
Last edited:
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
wont happen, no matter what type of bunting you put up or how much tinsel is strapped to the free tea n cakes.
Europe doesn't want the UK to break away and still hold independent power over UK EU trade..
it will set an example that undermines Europe/nato
it appears to be a bit of a sticking point.
EU knows it can hold out the threat of a hard BREXIT knowing it will damage UK much more than it will damage the EU.
an on flow of that is the political damage it will do to the tory majority voter base that has kept conservative policys going unchecked for the last 10 years.
the global market shrinkage in accordance with new environmental processes and greater technology is driving a mini recession
the usa china trade war is in reality a recession
each side is jostling to try not to get the worst end of the stick
i think priority needs be placed on restructuring national economy to make them more self reliant in a sustainability way.
however, there is soo much industry that is lent up against "globalism" that it makes national market protection basics, very internationally combative.
unles, along with facebook crypto currency launch, an allied group of trading partners all install universal health care & a minimum wage income for all people working or unemployed(work for unemployment schemes should be mandatory like in the Netherlands[small but constructive and community equity giving all citizens a stake in being a valued voter consumer & earner/creator]).
but that is the big jump
and i dont think any western country has another that is ready to jump with it.
that is the sci-fi version of the next step in the global economy.
the usa is too divisive with its class systems for it to be a leader in moving the species forward.
unfortunate considering it has all the tools and economy to do it.
the uk is probably the closest to pair with a few other countrys like Denmark Sweden Switzerland Netherlands.
they could make a new trading visa pact.
it is common to hear peopel talking their face off about how society is moving toward a cashless society, yet the only way that can happen is by installing a universal wage and compulsory work scheme.
most societys are a long way off such advanced social cultural secular intellectualism
Last edited:
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
i would like to see a new independent modern secular Britain.
it would invigorate the global economy
i think it would be just what everyone needs.
but ... its like cutting the social services budgets... those who stand to lose money complain
im personally against cutting social services budgets however the majority of UK voters have supported that consistently for the last 10 or more years.
it would invigorate the global economy
i think it would be just what everyone needs.
but ... its like cutting the social services budgets... those who stand to lose money complain
im personally against cutting social services budgets however the majority of UK voters have supported that consistently for the last 10 or more years.