View Poll Results: 10 days left, what'll it be?

Voters
92. You may not vote on this poll
  • Hard Brexit (crash out)

    45 48.91%
  • No Brexit (Remain by revoking A50)

    24 26.09%
  • Withdrawal Agreement (after a new session is called)

    0 0%
  • Extension + Withdrawal Agreement

    3 3.26%
  • Extension + Crashout

    9 9.78%
  • Extension + Remain

    11 11.96%
  1. #20841
    Quote Originally Posted by ranzino View Post
    deadline is oct 31 and nobody really knows what will happen. default is "no deal " now, a cold hard brexit.
    Yea, but there's been many deadlines, and this will happen on X and then something else happens to delay delay delay, no?

  2. #20842
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    Peston seems to think that there will be a GE soon.

    https://www.itv.com/news/2019-07-19/...s-inescapable/
    Spot on. The only question left is if remain Tories dare bring down their own government before October 31st.

    But Boris never has to openly say he is going for a no deal, he can pay lip service to aiming for a one right up until 11.59 pm to keep Tory remainers sweet. Then at one minute past midnight by law oopsie, we've left with no deal and he can quite rightly claim it wasn't his fault, the EU never offered an acceptable deal.

    Brexiteers rejoice, thy peoples will be done.

  3. #20843
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    20,171
    Quote Originally Posted by dribbles View Post
    Spot on. The only question left is if remain Tories dare bring down their own government before October 31st.

    But Boris never has to openly say he is going for a no deal, he can pay lip service to aiming for a one right up until 11.59 pm to keep Tory remainers sweet. Then at one minute past midnight by law oopsie, we've left with no deal and he can quite rightly claim it wasn't his fault, the EU never offered an acceptable deal.

    Brexiteers rejoice, thy peoples will be done.
    What would be an acceptable deal in your mind?
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before.

    A bunch of times actually.

  4. #20844
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Baden-Wuerttemberg
    Posts
    4,726
    Quote Originally Posted by alturic View Post
    Yea, but there's been many deadlines, and this will happen on X and then something else happens to delay delay delay, no?
    delay happens only if the "PM of the day" (comes next week: Boris J.) asks for extension.
    the crux is: it may come to that Elizabeth the Eternal is not impressed by the vote of tories and voices disbelief in his ability to "command a majority in the House of Commons".
    more blunt: in that scenario she will not appoint him as PM. but it also means nobody is there to ask for extension unless PM May is asked to act as caretaker. UK may fall off the edge by sheer incompetence of its politicians and the lack of time to fix that.

  5. #20845
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    What would be an acceptable deal in your mind?
    For Dribbles: We, the EU pays his country 3000 billion euros, we make trade deals they really love.... and they have there own say.
    ''With this attack, we have no choice but to protect our kind by unleashing our almighty weapon upon them. Summoning the Apocalypse'' - Stellaris Apocalypse trailer.

  6. #20846
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    8,057
    Quote Originally Posted by LeGin Tufnel View Post
    What?
    I wrote that I didn't think something would happen, you replied that you didn't think it would happen.

    The next poster even pointed out that your argument was agreeing with what I said.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by dribbles View Post
    Spot on. The only question left is if remain Tories dare bring down their own government before October 31st.
    It's not just remain Tories that are the danger, it's any Tory who is willing to bring down his own government in order to prevent the catastrophe of a no deal Brexit, and it's looking incredibly likely now, Phillip Hammond has publicly stated he would vote against the government in a no confidence motion in order to prevent a no deal Brexit.

    TBH, there's only one way this can really end now, a referendum on no deal vs no Brexit, that's the only option as no version of Brexit will make it through the house wihtout being voted down by remainers or Brexiteers, and no deal simply isn't an option that parliament will entertain.
    Last edited by caervek; 2019-07-19 at 10:27 PM.

  7. #20847
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    I wrote that I didn't think something would happen, you replied that you didn't think it would happen.

    The next poster even pointed out that your argument was agreeing with what I said.
    Yep.

    OK.

    Try to to login more than once every year and then have a conversation.

    Ta.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by dribbles View Post
    Spot on. The only question left is if remain Tories dare bring down their own government before October 31st.

    But Boris never has to openly say he is going for a no deal, he can pay lip service to aiming for a one right up until 11.59 pm to keep Tory remainers sweet. Then at one minute past midnight by law oopsie, we've left with no deal and he can quite rightly claim it wasn't his fault, the EU never offered an acceptable deal.

    Brexiteers rejoice, thy peoples will be done.
    Absolute, unspeakable rubbish, Mr D.

    Come October 31st, the UK will be in flames.

    Boris will have to be in a bunker.

  8. #20848
    Moderator Northern Goblin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Cumbria, England
    Posts
    12,324
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Don't think the size of Parliament matters much. The more people you have, the more precise statistics are. Which is generally not the worst idea. The main reason to downsize is probably cost.
    Less MPs means less idiots getting in to fill up the numbers. Parties would have to send their best and brightest and less of the godawful dregs that makes you wonder how the fuck they got elected.


    Sports and Fitness mod, Brit with weird sleeping hours.
    Has good taste in ale, bad taste in D&D choices.

  9. #20849
    Quote Originally Posted by Northern Goblin View Post
    Less MPs means less idiots getting in to fill up the numbers. Parties would have to send their best and brightest and less of the godawful dregs that makes you wonder how the fuck they got elected.
    Look at the two big parties you have right now. Then look at their upper echolon. Do you really think the size of Parliament would improve the quality of their leadership? I mean, this is an academic discussion, downsize or upsize or keep it the same, I don't think it'll make a difference.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    “It’s majoritarian, the majority wins, it’s ruled by the majority for the majority – sod the minority. Whereas true democracy includes everybody’s opinion in society,” - Margaret Georgiadou, 2019 about Brexit referendum.
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  10. #20850
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Look at the two big parties you have right now. Then look at their upper echolon. Do you really think the size of Parliament would improve the quality of their leadership? I mean, this is an academic discussion, downsize or upsize or keep it the same, I don't think it'll make a difference.
    When it comes to this issue I don't know which way to go. On one hand you have the argument that we have a brain drain of sorts in our political class, 70k a year and the ability to net work yourself up a little notebook of contacts worth hundreds of thousands of pounds once you leave office and start lobbying in the private sector just isn't rewarding enough apparently to attract our best and brightest.

    On the other hand, I don't believe our best and brightest when it comes to governance should really care about money at all. It's a good screw and will hardly leave you short even if you would be earning more in the private sector.

    The big problem atm isn't just a lack of talent, it's the increasingly extreme positions of the parties and the leadership because the British people are sick of a centre ground that hasn't delivered for the past 2 decades.

    If Corbyn had unambiguously backed Remain he would be walking the polls right now, but this isn't as simple as that. His position annoys the fuck out of me but we have a 50/50 split atm and Vae Victus politics isn't going to heal the country which is why Boris will see, at best, 1 week of office before a GE is called.

    It's not just the political class that is fucked right now,. we the people have alot to answer for too.

  11. #20851
    Quote Originally Posted by Kronik85 View Post
    If Corbyn had unambiguously backed Remain he would be walking the polls right now, but this isn't as simple as that. His position annoys the fuck out of me but we have a 50/50 split atm and Vae Victus politics isn't going to heal the country which is why Boris will see, at best, 1 week of office before a GE is called.
    Corbyn won't back remain because he is an ardent leaver following the footsteps of Michael Foot. He has openly called it an Empire that needs to be put in its place and was openly calling for a backing of brexit as recently as 2015. His "Remain and Reform." was lip service at best for remain in 2016 and down mostly because he didn't want to lose labour votes in the more southern areas and London. It's the only reason why everyone around him is for remain and he is fence sitting.

    Plus him kicking out Allistair Campbell for voting for LD but not lifting a finger against I think Kate Hoey who has repeatedly stated she would vote for Brexit party in local and european elections. Instead allowing her to stay in Labour and walk out on her own terms.

  12. #20852
    Quote Originally Posted by Kronik85 View Post
    The big problem atm isn't just a lack of talent, it's the increasingly extreme positions of the parties and the leadership because the British people are sick of a centre ground that hasn't delivered for the past 2 decades.
    I don't buy it. I don't buy it for the same reasons I don't buy simplistic left/right discussions. It's a cop out of an argument because people don't like to discuss the issue. The issue isn't left/right or centre. Not here, not in the US, not in Britain. The issue is that stupidity is not just tolerated, it's glorified. Brexit isn't right or left. It's stupid. Outright stupid. There is no other terminology to use that is appropriate. It's literally hurting yourself without any good reason.

    This is important, because what you're doing is avoiding the issue. That's the problem the British had for decades. Avoiding the issue, not talking about the blame. If you talk about "oh it's the electorate being sick of the centre", you're not successfully putting the blame on the parties. They're just playing the game. You're blaming the electorate. Which is unfair, because from all you guys are saying, the British electorate had jack all to do with whatever the hell the election result is. Oh sure, they'll vote for something, but FPTP messes up the result so badly that you guys openly say it needs to go.

    This is not on the British electorate that can hardly change the matter. The only thing I could blame the British people for is that they haven't actually set fire on Westminster by now. Yes, yes, I'm being mean again. But seriously, how do you think a revolution starts? Since when has Britain stopped chopping heads off if they fucked up? Be glad, we're in the civilised, modern age now. You don't need to chop heads off. But how about you put them in prison? Free speech? Fuck that, they're frauding an entire country into ruin. I wonder what's more important, the right of fraudsters to fuck you up or your right to not be fucked up. Hmmm, let me think about that...

    Seriously, go, start a revolution. It's what everyone else is thinking but nobody's saying. Do it. Politicians will never change the system. Certainly not so the electorate has an actual chance of proper representation. That would make three quarters of them unemployed instantly.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    “It’s majoritarian, the majority wins, it’s ruled by the majority for the majority – sod the minority. Whereas true democracy includes everybody’s opinion in society,” - Margaret Georgiadou, 2019 about Brexit referendum.
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  13. #20853
    Moderator Northern Goblin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Cumbria, England
    Posts
    12,324
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Look at the two big parties you have right now. Then look at their upper echolon. Do you really think the size of Parliament would improve the quality of their leadership? I mean, this is an academic discussion, downsize or upsize or keep it the same, I don't think it'll make a difference.
    If paired with a change from FPTP to PR voting? Yeah, you won't have two giant monoliths because vote share is split nationally, or at the very least, regionally.

    Coupling a smaller number of seats, with the big two parties having a smaller % of total seats, you'd see a lot of people not fit for duty be out of a job.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kronik85 View Post
    the British people are sick of a centre ground that hasn't delivered for the past 2 decades.
    The centre hasn't been a majority government in over a decade. What we have is a right wing leadership appealing to the far right as a priority, with a hard left opposition who seems to be more concerned with ideological purity than winning elections and reinstating a left wing government.


    Sports and Fitness mod, Brit with weird sleeping hours.
    Has good taste in ale, bad taste in D&D choices.

  14. #20854
    Quote Originally Posted by ranzino View Post
    delay happens only if the "PM of the day" (comes next week: Boris J.) asks for extension.
    the crux is: it may come to that Elizabeth the Eternal is not impressed by the vote of tories and voices disbelief in his ability to "command a majority in the House of Commons".
    more blunt: in that scenario she will not appoint him as PM. but it also means nobody is there to ask for extension unless PM May is asked to act as caretaker. UK may fall off the edge by sheer incompetence of its politicians and the lack of time to fix that.
    Ugh, I shudder at the sheer stupidity that is the "royal family", I think I feel that way due to all the middle-aged women in the US being in love with them all for some weird reason.

  15. #20855
    Epic!
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dual US/Canada
    Posts
    1,695
    Quote Originally Posted by alturic View Post
    Ugh, I shudder at the sheer stupidity that is the "royal family", I think I feel that way due to all the middle-aged women in the US being in love with them all for some weird reason.
    The Queen is one of the most valuable politicians that the UK has. No matter what people think of her title, the UK would be daft to underestimate the value of having someone who has commanded respect and authority across the world for longer than most of the human population has been alive.

    As for the 'best and brightest', I don't think the problem is so much that being a political leader isn't well paying enough. I think the problem is more that the best and brightest don't want to spend a majority of their time fundraising for campaigns and then glad handing the electorate every few years rather than, y'know, actually doing things that can make a difference. The goal of politicians is so focused on getting and holding their seat that it makes it hard to get anything done with it once you have it.

    And besides which, why bother fielding good candidates when so much of the population votes for the party line rather than the actual people in question anyway?

  16. #20856
    Quote Originally Posted by Northern Goblin View Post
    If paired with a change from FPTP to PR voting? Yeah, you won't have two giant monoliths because vote share is split nationally, or at the very least, regionally.

    Coupling a smaller number of seats, with the big two parties having a smaller % of total seats, you'd see a lot of people not fit for duty be out of a job.
    I don't get what you think is happening in PR. Unless you set it up as a basic constituency-only system, you have national lists over which the top echolon is decided by the party, not the electorate. I am not aware of any country doing a thing like that.

    As an example, Merkel (or soon AKK) would always be in parliament, whether she won a local constituency or not. Since she won her local constituency, her "list spot" gets bumped down to the next one. If he wins his constituency, it gets bumped down to #3.. and so on, and so forth until you have people losing their constituency, then they can get into Parliament according to the list spots the party gets based on the overall election result.

    PR doesn't change the people at the top of the party. Neither does size. It's not the top 300 in a party that are the problem. The problem in the UK is the top 10 people. And you'll never get rid of those, because that would actually be undemocratic. The party has to be able to choose who their leaders are. That's what democracy means.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    “It’s majoritarian, the majority wins, it’s ruled by the majority for the majority – sod the minority. Whereas true democracy includes everybody’s opinion in society,” - Margaret Georgiadou, 2019 about Brexit referendum.
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  17. #20857
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Which is unfair, because from all you guys are saying, the British electorate had jack all to do with whatever the hell the election result is. Oh sure, they'll vote for something, but FPTP messes up the result so badly that you guys openly say it needs to go.

    This is not on the British electorate that can hardly change the matter.
    Here is the thing. They had a referendum a few years ago. It was not a sufficient suggested change to FPTP since decisions would still be made through FPTP. BUT it was a change that would change the perceived need to vote strategically. It was a gradual change that could upset constituencies. And most of them did not even bother to show up and vote.
    The problem is APATHY. Look at Brexit, even there the main drive is apathy. Many people just want it over so they can go back to their regularly schedule programme.

  18. #20858
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    What would be an acceptable deal in your mind?
    Actually, I think the more pertinent question would be how morally bankrupt brexiteers would be to openly rejoice over their government lying to them just because that gives them the policy outcome they want.
    But I guess the answer to that question is somewhat obvious.

  19. #20859
    Moderator Northern Goblin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Cumbria, England
    Posts
    12,324
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    I don't get what you think is happening in PR. Unless you set it up as a basic constituency-only system, you have national lists over which the top echolon is decided by the party, not the electorate. I am not aware of any country doing a thing like that.

    As an example, Merkel (or soon AKK) would always be in parliament, whether she won a local constituency or not. Since she won her local constituency, her "list spot" gets bumped down to the next one. If he wins his constituency, it gets bumped down to #3.. and so on, and so forth until you have people losing their constituency, then they can get into Parliament according to the list spots the party gets based on the overall election result.

    PR doesn't change the people at the top of the party. Neither does size. It's not the top 300 in a party that are the problem. The problem in the UK is the top 10 people. And you'll never get rid of those, because that would actually be undemocratic. The party has to be able to choose who their leaders are. That's what democracy means.
    Yes, and most parties won't be prioritising the majority of their useless idiots at the top of the list, would they?

    The Tories aren't going to put in idiots like Chope and Francois over the likes of Hammond and Lidlington if they're given a small quota to fill.

    The top 10 are far from the worst elements of this Conservative government. You haven't yet witnessed some of the horrors that lie within the ERG. You will should Johnson be leader though, they make Gove look competent.


    Sports and Fitness mod, Brit with weird sleeping hours.
    Has good taste in ale, bad taste in D&D choices.

  20. #20860
    The Insane Acidbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Belgium, Flanders
    Posts
    15,115


    This is something the UK needs to become very much aware off, you think a no deal can't happen because you vote all sort of retarded and pointless amendments on your side. The EU simply doesn't care about those things your parliamentarians vote for.

    A No deal will happen because this won't go on forever, this won't be tolerated forever and people are getting increasingly frustrated with the UK childish behaviour.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •