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. #19081
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    It's not the entire countries fault. Don't beat yourself up over something you voted against.
    I just hope that something will come from it, like commons can't go on with the adversarial parliamentary ways it has been going on with since the 1600s (maybe earlier), and that a style more like european countries where consensus is reached is a bett.....

    Oh who am I kidding both sides will double down and it will be even more of a shit show.

  2. #19082
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Quarantine and Chill
    Posts
    47,059
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallisto View Post
    I just hope that something will come from it, like commons can't go on with the adversarial parliamentary ways it has been going on with since the 1600s (maybe earlier), and that a style more like european countries where consensus is reached is a bett.....

    Oh who am I kidding both sides will double down and it will be even more of a shit show.
    Beg Elizabeth to dissolve the parliament and trigger an election?

    I dunno, lol.
    Elizabeth Warren is the neighbor in the horror movie who drives by the haunted house and is like “hey guys seems bad in there want to come with me?” and America is the family that’s like “nah it’s probably not that bad there were only chainsaw noises in the night that one time!”

  3. #19083
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Oh, ok, so that's why the EU came into the negotiations at full steam, with a prepared battle plan and strategic goals being placed well ahead of time so the UK was on the backfoot pretty much before the negotiations started... because the EU is slow and inept. Right...

    Tell me, would you call this withdrawal agreement better for the EU or for the UK?

    And then tell me, who came up with it, because it was really all they could accomplish?

    Thanks, tell me again how the EU is slow and inept. This will be a textbook example of how to assert your position in international diplomacy and trade negotiations... slow and inept, as if.
    The agreement is better for the EU, absolutely. As I said, the UK was utterly unprepared, they were wrong to get into this mess without being serious. This is not at all an example of the EU being not slow and inept. This is the UK falling into all holes with the EU watching, that's it.

  4. #19084
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    The agreement is better for the EU, absolutely. As I said, the UK was utterly unprepared, they were wrong to get into this mess without being serious. This is not at all an example of the EU being not slow and inept. This is the UK falling into all holes with the EU watching, that's it.
    EU is clearly at fault for making obviously one-sided agreement that then failed to actually get required approval (and as result EU is likely going to lose a lot more then it would get with something actually agreeable).

    Same pattern happened in Ukraine with Association Agreement.

  5. #19085
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    EU is clearly at fault for making obviously one-sided agreement that then failed to actually get required approval (and as result EU is likely going to lose a lot more then it would get with something actually agreeable).
    I think this happened because the EU wanted to help the UK politicians make a case for staying, this was their idea of help. Plus of course they wanted to send a universal message to all members - exiting is going to be hard, don't try it, etc.

  6. #19086
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    I think this happened because the EU wanted to help the UK politicians make a case for staying, this was their idea of help.
    Yes, they are too focused on their approach being the only right one.

    Because, really, all that UK wanted is to be able to set restrictions on freedom of movement from the very start. There wouldn't be referendum if that one would be available.

    That EU is unable to solve this in amicable way and can only be dogmatic that "four freedoms are non-negotiable" is on EU.

  7. #19087
    I found this opinion article in The Times today. I'm quoting it all because paywall.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew Parris
    Boris Johnson is enough of a rascal to rat on Brexit

    The frontrunner for No 10 might be the only candidate who’d get away with ripping up Article 50 and starting again

    Watching Theresa May’s tearful farewell on the steps of Downing Street I felt intensely the tangle of sentiment and argument, the wrestle of conflicting emotions that now disfigure our politics as they have disfigured her premiership.

    When she spoke of her disappointed hopes I felt sympathy. When she tried to drag in the kindertransport of children rescued from the Nazis — and twisted the words of its pioneer, Sir Nicholas Winton, into an argument for her Brexit compromise — I felt rage and scorn. When her voice cracked I felt pity. When she spoke of the need to seek common ground I felt indignant at a prime minister who stubbornly refused to reach out until her own position was threatened.

    And when she reminded us that it was now up to her successor to secure what she had failed to secure, a Brexit that works for everybody, I felt despair. Will it be Boris Johnson? Have we learnt nothing? To that incompetent scoundrel in a moment.

    For the lack of two attributes, Theresa May’s premiership has ended in failure. The want of these two qualities, unless the next prime minister can supply them, will consign his or her premiership to the same fate. And the missing ingredients? The first is logic, the second honesty. Can Mrs May’s successor supply these? In their absence, British politics chokes. Nothing matters more.

    So to hell with “empathy”, “reaching out”, “listening”, “emotional intelligence” and all that jazz. To hell with Boris’s “charm”, Jeremy Hunt’s “calm”, Matt Hancock’s “energy”, Michael Gove’s “intellect” or Rory Stewart’s “back story”. And brush aside Mrs May’s tears. We’re in for a weekend of psychobabble: a summer pudding of self-pity on Mrs May’s side and, on her critics’ side, oh-so-wise advice on how she could have kept everybody sweet.

    Our politics doesn’t need any further buckets of slop about “seeking the common ground”. Leadership is about so much more than relationship counselling. Process, process, process — the curse of our age, forever flinching from the crunch question, the only question: not of process but of outcome. This is what she couldn’t duck any longer. Her successor will also struggle, and fail, to avoid it.

    What do I mean about honesty and logic? The frontrunner in the race for Downing Street offered a masterclass in his lack of it during the referendum: “My policy on cake is pro having it and pro eating it.” You can’t.

    The Archangel Gabriel couldn’t have delivered Mrs May’s famous “Brexit that works for everyone” promise. It will become fashionable in columns like these to identify things she could have done to get her deal through, and the time (always yesterday) when she could have done them. And I can believe that with Mr Gove’s persuasiveness or Mr Johnson’s amiable bombast, a different prime minister might just have pushed something like her deal over the line.

    But — have we all forgotten? — her deal is for the 22-month transition period, not for Britain’s final status outside the EU. So we’d now be in that transition period, still tearing ourselves apart, for it’s really only about the final status that Brexiteers and Remainers disagree.

    And so to the logic. It’s possible to believe (as I don’t) that Brexit could lead us to glory: but only after a “clean” exit from the EU and the ties that come with membership. And it’s possible to believe (as I do) that we are wiser to remain. But to believe we could benefit from being half-in, half-out defies logic. The ties of membership, or half-membership, are what real Leavers believe hold us back. Real Remainers, meanwhile, share their horror at subjecting ourselves to rules we’ve lost the right to shape. The illogic of compromise that delivers the worst of both worlds would defeat Gabriel, defeated Mrs May, and will defeat whoever succeeds her.

    And so to honesty. Somebody has to square with the British people. She never would. It is about Remain or Leave. We loop back to 2016, but this time with a much clearer grasp of what “Leave” means. Isn’t the Gordian knot cut by putting the question again?

    And here, I don’t mean to queer Mr Johnson’s pitch by putting the wind up his Brexiteer supporters, but must mention one faint hope: a reason for hoping a Johnson premiership would not end in calamity. My Times colleague Rachel Sylvester discussed it in these pages on Tuesday. Mr Johnson might be capable of ratting on his promise to take us out of the EU — and getting away with it.

    The arguments against his suitability are too many for a comprehensive list. Casual disregard for the truth; reckless caprice; lazy disregard for detail; weak negotiating skills (as Whitehall knows); moral turpitude which perhaps we should overlook in politics but which has been so destructive of others’ lives that I cannot forget it; and his failure as foreign secretary to achieve anything but an extension of his notoriety beyond our own shores.

    The man’s a rascal. But like many rascals he’s capable of a big decision. It’s possible to imagine him telling the country that this Brexit business has got into such a poisonous muddle that we need to rip it up and start again: to revoke Article 50, or refer back to the people, or both. He might escape with his life. A Hunt, a Gove, a Hancock or a Javid wouldn’t.

    Be clear: whoever takes over will soon enough need to be very, very bold, one way or the other. Would-be Tory leaders will shortly be wooing supporters with a promise to “go back to Brussels” for a better deal, threatening no-deal Brexit if they don’t. Whoever wins will then have to try. They’ll return empty-handed. What then? Here’s Mr Johnson, speaking in Switzerland today: “We will leave the EU on October 31, deal or no deal ... The way to get a good deal is to prepare for a no deal. To get things done you need to be prepared to walk away.”

    This week the Institute for Government published an important report, suggesting that a PM intent on a no-deal Brexit could thwart parliament by a lightning decision to do it without MPs’ say-so. Be warned, would-be prime ministers: this would be nuclear, a coup against representative democracy and a breach of our unwritten constitution. This way, infamy lies. Gangrene would follow such an amputation. Don’t even think about it.

    That leaves a referendum, a revocation, a general election, or all three. Theresa May’s departing tears are unlikely to be the last shed at Downing Street’s door.

  8. #19088
    Quote Originally Posted by Flarelaine View Post
    I found this opinion article in The Times today. I'm quoting it all because paywall.
    I doubt it. Theresa May refused to do the right and obvious thing with respect to Brexit because doing so would have probably permanently split her beloved Conservative Party.

    Most of her Cabinet have been competing for who is the most Brexity since long before she even hinted her exit, anticipating an eventual exit on her part. They've never taken Brexit seriously enough as to place it above the potentiality of them becoming PM above that.

    Boris Johnson is one of those people, who sold a bunch of lies to achieve the Brexit vote, then sold a bunch of lies as to why he failed in the Cabinet.

    He'll be the most likely to Hard Brexit, because he clearly doesn't think the act of "Brexiting" is something to be concerned with, especially at the expense of his own political aspirations.

    This is the latest entry in a long running thread of "The Modern Western Political class has it so good and thinks they're willing to play games with life, safety and the public good because they don't think anything of consequence can truly befall them". You'd think the Financial Crisis would have taught them (the Western political class) a thing or two on that note, but that's a big fat nope.

    Most broadly, this is evidenced by games involving immigration, while Western work forces will struggle to keep paying for the current public entitlement without growing the work force further (and thus the tax base) through immigration.

  9. #19089
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    I doubt it. Theresa May refused to do the right and obvious thing with respect to Brexit because doing so would have probably permanently split her beloved Conservative Party.

    Most of her Cabinet have been competing for who is the most Brexity since long before she even hinted her exit, anticipating an eventual exit on her part. They've never taken Brexit seriously enough as to place it above the potentiality of them becoming PM above that.

    Boris Johnson is one of those people, who sold a bunch of lies to achieve the Brexit vote, then sold a bunch of lies as to why he failed in the Cabinet.

    He'll be the most likely to Hard Brexit, because he clearly doesn't think the act of "Brexiting" is something to be concerned with, especially at the expense of his own political aspirations.

    This is the latest entry in a long running thread of "The Modern Western Political class has it so good and thinks they're willing to play games with life, safety and the public good because they don't think anything of consequence can truly befall them". You'd think the Financial Crisis would have taught them (the Western political class) a thing or two on that note, but that's a big fat nope.

    Most broadly, this is evidenced by games involving immigration, while Western work forces will struggle to keep paying for the current public entitlement without growing the work force further (and thus the tax base) through immigration.
    Oh, I doubt it as well, but I though I'd still toss it out there for discussion. It's an opinion piece, but I think the point is that Johnson is unprincipled enough to pull it off. So far he was for Brexit because it disrupted everything and that allowed him to gamble big. But if he can be the Man who Restored Order?

  10. #19090
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    20,988
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    Yes, they are too focused on their approach being the only right one.

    Because, really, all that UK wanted is to be able to set restrictions on freedom of movement from the very start. There wouldn't be referendum if that one would be available.

    That EU is unable to solve this in amicable way and can only be dogmatic that "four freedoms are non-negotiable" is on EU.
    You both deserve each other, you are both clueless about everything.

    Damn why the fuck can't I ignore stupid?
    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.

  11. #19091
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    You both deserve each other, you are both clueless about everything.

    Damn why the fuck can't I ignore stupid?
    Cos there's fuckall to talk about, really.

    Unless we'd like to ride on the UK denying two million people their right to vote. Because apparently, that's how you democracy. No wonder the EU isn't democratic, it asks its member states to allow every citizen the right to vote. How dare they.
    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.

  12. #19092
    Bloodsail Admiral Snorkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    1,048
    Regardless of what happens - no deal, revoke or whatever is in the middle - Brexit is going to dominate our politics for the foreseeable future.

    Such a fucking huge waste of time for nothing.

  13. #19093
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    You both deserve each other, you are both clueless about everything.

    Damn why the fuck can't I ignore stupid?
    You keep calling everyone else stupid, yet most of your posts are composed of a single sentence reflexively pushing the remain position with all the intellectual sophistication of an American cheerleader.

    It would be better if you were just silent when you had nothing to say.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    This is the latest entry in a long running thread of "The Modern Western Political class has it so good and thinks they're willing to play games with life, safety and the public good because they don't think anything of consequence can truly befall them". You'd think the Financial Crisis would have taught them (the Western political class) a thing or two on that note, but that's a big fat nope.
    The problem with the conservative party is that they are composed of people not well educated enough to go into finance. We no longer get first-class people in politics because the corporations run the country, not the politicians, so parliament is filled with second or increasingly third-string public schoolboys. The same problem afflicts your country: your essential conservatism blinds you to this.
    Last edited by melpwurst; 2019-05-25 at 08:32 AM.

  14. #19094
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    Because, really, all that UK wanted is to be able to set restrictions on freedom of movement from the very start. There wouldn't be referendum if that one would be available.
    They already had the ability to set restrictions, they chose not to use them.
    Any additional restrictions aren't possible while staying inside the common market.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    EU is clearly at fault for making obviously one-sided agreement that then failed to actually get required approval (and as result EU is likely going to lose a lot more then it would get with something actually agreeable).

    Same pattern happened in Ukraine with Association Agreement.
    The EU is not a dictatorship that can just freely break their laws, maybe that is different where you are from?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    That EU is unable to solve this in amicable way and can only be dogmatic that "four freedoms are non-negotiable" is on EU.
    Yes, the EU should just abolish itself to please the Brits.
    Is that your view of democracy? 17 million dictating the fate of 500 million?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by melpwurst View Post
    It would be better if you were just silent when you had nothing to say.
    Why don't you take your own advise burner?

  15. #19095
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    The agreement is better for the EU, absolutely. As I said, the UK was utterly unprepared, they were wrong to get into this mess without being serious. This is not at all an example of the EU being not slow and inept. This is the UK falling into all holes with the EU watching, that's it.
    You must be joking. Or you haven't followed the negotiations at all. The EU was one step ahead every step of the way. While concluding its main task of concluding FTA negotiations with Japan, opening up negotiations with Australia, concluding CETA (including a regional controversy in Belgium), introducing revolutionary privacy data protection that practically the entire planet has adopted by now...

    I could go on and on... thinking the EU is slow and inept is a very, very invalid point of view. You may want it to be slow and inept so you can continue hating on it, but it certainly isn't.
    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.

  16. #19096
    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    They already had the ability to set restrictions, they chose not to use them.
    Any additional restrictions aren't possible while staying inside the common market.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The EU is not a dictatorship that can just freely break their laws, maybe that is different where you are from?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Yes, the EU should just abolish itself to please the Brits.
    Is that your view of democracy? 17 million dictating the fate of 500 million?
    You are agreeing with Shalcker. (People in) the UK wanted to set restrictions onto the freedom of movement in a way that was stricter than what was possible if they stayed in the EU.

    For the record, I think there were (and are) bigger reasons to leave the EU, but I agree the freedom of movement was a key one that triggered it all, and if it was not for that, nothing would have happened.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    You must be joking. Or you haven't followed the negotiations at all. The EU was one step ahead every step of the way. While concluding its main task of concluding FTA negotiations with Japan, opening up negotiations with Australia, concluding CETA (including a regional controversy in Belgium), introducing revolutionary privacy data protection that practically the entire planet has adopted by now...
    What you say does not contradict what I say in any way. You cannot use the example of UK-EU negotiations as an example of EU being "not slow" because in this example they are merely "faster" than the UK which are just "standing still" (being unprepared completely). This is a laughable bar.

    Please wake me up when the EU do something proactive like, say, make China stop stealing / appropriating Western IP. Who does this? Right, the US. Always someone other than the EU.
    Last edited by rda; 2019-05-25 at 09:08 AM.

  17. #19097
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Cos there's fuckall to talk about, really.

    Unless we'd like to ride on the UK denying two million people their right to vote. Because apparently, that's how you democracy. No wonder the EU isn't democratic, it asks its member states to allow every citizen the right to vote. How dare they.
    I am still beyond pissed at that. I have had several friends in the UK who could not vote because their forms were never processed, even though they did everything in time. There should be heavy censure over this.
    Hail Lilith and see you in Hell!

  18. #19098
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    You are agreeing with Shalcker. (People in) the UK wanted to set restrictions onto the freedom of movement in a way that was stricter than what was possible if they stayed in the EU.
    I'm not, I'm disagreeing with the both of you.
    You are just too uninformed to understand what options UK politicans did have but choose not to implement.

  19. #19099
    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    I'm not, I'm disagreeing with the both of you.
    I am not seeing how, sorry.

    Dammit, you edited your post and included the line of "you are just uninformed". Could you explain it then, maybe? It does not matter much with whom you are agreeing or disagreeing, this is all secondary. Just explain the point. Was the question of restrictions onto the freedom of movement instrumental or not?
    Last edited by rda; 2019-05-25 at 09:13 AM.

  20. #19100
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    I am not seeing how, sorry.
    Do you know what restrictions to freedom of movement were possible and what British citizens wanted changed?
    Do you know whom freedom of movement applies to?

Posting Permissions

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