Brexit - Post Match Reaction

[Portugalsaint]

It used to be called U turns Shurlock, I prefer swiveliest of swivels! A bit of humour in the turmoil.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Neither I or GM were remotely confused about the difference between the WA or a deal. Nor that No Deal was that too, as it was WTO terms and in fact several other mini deals that have now been arranged between us and the EU in the case of us leaving on 29th March without "a deal".

 

I'll get back to you later about the parts of the WA that I don't like, when I have more time.

 

No, of course not...

 

I'm with you, leave the single market and the customs union, go for a FTA like Canada+++ and failing that, I'm perfectly content trading on WTO terms. May has been a disaster, but if her dithering, indecisiveness, Remainer lack of drive and incompetence somehow takes us to a position that we stumble past 11pm on 29th March without a deal, then I will forgive her. As you say, the Canada +++ deal was offered on more than one occasion by Tusk, it was what David Davis had spent all his time working on, until May's treacherous scheming with Robbins swept it aside for the awful Chequeurs deal. May having two Brexit Ministers resign, is testament to her deviousness.

[Tamesaint]

You and JJ are hilarious. Utterly unable to distinguish between your wet dream fantasies and reality. UKIP were on about 17% public support in 2014, now they're on 5% - despite the Tories desperate thrashing around. UKIP are a busted flush who will never get near power - which is why the ERG persist in trying to hijack the Tories instead of moving wholesale to UKIP.

 

Wes doesn't seem to realise that UKIP version 2019 is nothing like the UKIP of 2015. Under the current leader Batten and his advisor Yaxeley Lennon they are little more than a BNP style racist party. Last week he was all over the place on this issue and clearly still hasn't cottoned on to why Farage, Nuttall and Coburn have all left.

 

As for JJ.... well he only believes something if it appears on some alt right website.

[CB Fry]

You mean the so called worst deal in our history? The sort of bad deal that May said was not as good as no deal? The one that has been likened to the punishment deal meted out to a country defeated in a war? That deal?

 

In any event, what is on the table isn't a deal at all. It is a Withdrawal Agreement to cover the two years when the real trade deal would be arranged. It will cost us £39 billion for something that we don't even know we will be getting in return.

 

In almost three years since the vote to leave, we haven't even begun discussing a trade deal properly yet.

 

I'll repeat my prediction.

 

May's deal - with maybe some bullsh it semi-colon changed here or there - will go through. Probably next week. The DUP and enough of the ERG are looking for a ladder to climb down. Davis has already gone. Meathead Arlene is positioning for it.

 

And you, Wes Tender, will greet this a victory. And on Independence Day you will revel in posting sh ite about cracking open the champagne, feeling like a free man and other such smug, celebratory garbage.

 

So seriously get ready to pivot. Because when this "worst deal in history" is served up you will be sucking it up and swallowing it whole. Gobble gobble.

[shurlock]

I'll repeat my prediction.

 

May's deal - with maybe some bullsh it semi-colon changed here or there - will go through. Probably next week. The DUP and enough of the ERG are looking for a ladder to climb down. Davis has already gone. Meathead Arlene is positioning for it.

 

And you, Wes Tender, will greet this a victory. And on Independence Day you will revel in posting sh ite about cracking open the champagne, feeling like a free man and other such smug, celebratory garbage.

 

So seriously get ready to pivot. Because when this "worst deal in history" is served up you will be sucking it up and swallowing it whole. Gobble gobble.

 

[Wes Tender]

Wes doesn't seem to realise that UKIP version 2019 is nothing like the UKIP of 2015. Under the current leader Batten and his advisor Yaxeley Lennon they are little more than a BNP style racist party. Last week he was all over the place on this issue and clearly still hasn't cottoned on to why Farage, Nuttall and Coburn have all left.

 

As for JJ.... well he only believes something if it appears on some alt right website.

 

As for you, apparently you haven't cottoned on to the new Party which Farage would lead, the Brexit Party, which was formed to distance itself from UKIP. You also fail to realise that it doesn't matter too much whether people are as precious as you, and see them as too far to the right for your liking or not. Perhaps you have heard about the rise of "populist" parties in many parts of Europe and naively don't think that it could happen here. A vote for either party would mostly be a protest vote to give the two main parties a good kicking for ignoring the Referendum vote. Apart from existing UKIP voters, this vote will come from disaffected Conservative and Labour leave voters, many of them traditional supporters of those parties, but who believe that they have been badly let down by them.

[Wes Tender]

I'll repeat my prediction.

 

May's deal - with maybe some bullsh it semi-colon changed here or there - will go through. Probably next week. The DUP and enough of the ERG are looking for a ladder to climb down. Davis has already gone. Meathead Arlene is positioning for it.

 

And you, Wes Tender, will greet this a victory. And on Independence Day you will revel in posting sh ite about cracking open the champagne, feeling like a free man and other such smug, celebratory garbage.

 

So seriously get ready to pivot. Because when this "worst deal in history" is served up you will be sucking it up and swallowing it whole. Gobble gobble.

 

You don't half post some twaddle. This is almost on a par with your opinion that Man Utd were as likely to be relegated as West Ham, some years back. I will only be cracking open the English sparkling wine if we leave on WTO terms, or some other deal which is not BRINO like May's dog's dinner.

[Wes Tender]

Jeff, you asked me what I had against the WA.

 

https://lawyersforbritain.org/withdrawal-agreement-the-northern-irish-backstop-and-the-constitution-of-the-united-kingdom

[CB Fry]

You don't half post some twaddle. This is almost on a par with your opinion that Man Utd were as likely to be relegated as West Ham, some years back. I will only be cracking open the English sparkling wine if we leave on WTO terms, or some other deal which is not BRINO like May's dog's dinner.

We'll see.

 

The fact that you continually bring up something I posted five-six years ago (and remember it the wrong way round every time, so it doesn't even reflect what I said anyway) is awfully sweet.

 

You'll be celebrating it. Just wait.

Edited 14 March, 2019 by CB Fry

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Jeff, you asked me what I had against the WA.

 

https://lawyersforbritain.org/withdrawal-agreement-the-northern-irish-backstop-and-the-constitution-of-the-united-kingdom

 

Yep, I asked you. I assume you have no idea, hence why you've pointed me to a website and not written in your own words. I also said "outside the backstop", and the WHOLE of that article is about the backstop.

 

You are beyond a parody. You are an idiot, a fraud, a parrot and a racist, and you have no defence because you have no intelligent, independent thoughts of your own.

 

You, are a Brexiteer.

Edited 14 March, 2019 by Unbelievable Jeff

[Wes Tender]

https://lawyersforbritain.org/the-political-declaration-does-not-save-us-from-the-trap-of-the-withdrawal-agreement

 

Further reasons why the WA is so bad for us and also repercussions against a Canada style agreement alternative covered.

[Wes Tender]

Yep, I asked you. I assume you have no idea, hence why you've pointed me to a website and not written in your own words.

 

You are beyond a parody.

 

I really can't be arsed to write something myself when it is so ably covered by a legal expert. Did you read the near 600 pages of the Withdrawal Agreement? Or did you read a summary of it? You are such a prat.

[Wes Tender]

We'll see.

 

The fact that you continually bring up something I posted five-six years ago (and remember it the wrong way round every time, so it doesn't even reflect what I said anyway) is awfully sweet.

 

You'll be celebrating it. Just wait.

 

West Ham currently as likely to go down as Man United are.

 

Doesn't it mean the same thing then?

[Unbelievable Jeff]

I really can't be arsed to write something myself when it is so ably covered by a legal expert. Did you read the near 600 pages of the Withdrawal Agreement? Or did you read a summary of it? You are such a prat.

 

That whole article was about the backstop you ****tard - I said to you "outside of the backstop".

 

You're a ****ing idiot, who routinely embarrasses himself on his forum because you have no knowledge of law, economics or politics. Why don't you leave the arguments to those of us who do know, and use your time doing something useful.

[CB Fry]

Doesn't it mean the same thing then?

No.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Doesn't it mean the same thing then?

 

That means it's unlikely that West Ham will go down. The other way round it means that United are likely to go down.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

https://lawyersforbritain.org/the-political-declaration-does-not-save-us-from-the-trap-of-the-withdrawal-agreement

 

Further reasons why the WA is so bad for us and also repercussions against a Canada style agreement alternative covered.

 

Backstop, AGAIN.

 

 

Wes and his "worst deal in our history", and he can't even string a sentence together explaining why.

[Plastic]

Backstop, AGAIN.

 

 

Wes and his "worst deal in our history", and he can't even string a sentence together explaining why.

 

I won’t believe it until Julia Hartley-Brewer says so.

[Tamesaint]

As for you, apparently you haven't cottoned on to the new Party which Farage would lead, the Brexit Party, which was formed to distance itself from UKIP. You also fail to realise that it doesn't matter too much whether people are as precious as you, and see them as too far to the right for your liking or not. Perhaps you have heard about the rise of "populist" parties in many parts of Europe and naively don't think that it could happen here. A vote for either party would mostly be a protest vote to give the two main parties a good kicking for ignoring the Referendum vote. Apart from existing UKIP voters, this vote will come from disaffected Conservative and Labour leave voters, many of them traditional supporters of those parties, but who believe that they have been badly let down by them.

 

You keep banging on about a "seismic" (your phrase not mine) change going to happen in British politics but I think you are wrong:

 

1. You overestimate the importance of Brexit. You are quite clearly turned on by the subject but you are in a minority. Surely even you have heard friends saying how bored they are of Brexit. It is customary now for television and radio presenters to apologise for mentioning "The B word". It is not as important to most people as it is to youn

 

2. I am fully aware of the tide of populism in Europe - much of it in countries with a short lived democratic history. Tribal loyalties and historic links have embedded the 2 party system in the British psyche much deeper than you think. Remind me again how many parliamentary elections has Farage stood in and how many has he won? At the end of the day when it comes to a General Election the majority return to the safety of voting for the main 2 parties.

 

3. Any populist movement in the UK will somehow have to cope with the FPTP system. There may well be a lot of huff and puff about breaking the mould of politics but it is almost impossible with FPTP. How many votes did UKIP win in the 2015 GE and how many parliamentary seats did they win ??

 

It seems from your posts that you like the thought of populism taking off in Britain. You are going to be disappointed.

Edited 14 March, 2019 by Tamesaint

[Portugalsaint]

TameSaint

I agree with you regarding populism in the UK, it is for those with short lived democracies. It is however worrying with this rise in Europe.

 

Do you however think, that the Labour Party was killed off this evening as their politicians sat firmly in their seats instead of voting.

[Wes Tender]

That whole article was about the backstop you ****tard - I said to you "outside of the backstop".

 

You're a ****ing idiot, who routinely embarrasses himself on his forum because you have no knowledge of law, economics or politics. Why don't you leave the arguments to those of us who do know, and use your time doing something useful.

 

You obviously didn't read it all, did you, or else you would see that it isn't all about the backstop. But then you're the idiot who can't read anything put out from the Brexit side, as it makes you feel unclean. And don't include yourself in "us" when you speak of those who know about law, economics or politics. If you claim that I don't, then you certainly don't. When are you p*ssing off out of the UK because you can't stand having leave voters all around you?

[Unbelievable Jeff]

You obviously didn't read it all, did you, or else you would see that it isn't all about the backstop. But then you're the idiot who can't read anything put out from the Brexit side, as it makes you feel unclean. And don't include yourself in "us" when you speak of those who know about law, economics or politics. If you claim that I don't, then you certainly don't. When are you p*ssing off out of the UK because you can't stand having leave voters all around you?

 

 

Perhaps you can point me to what I missed then?

 

It's OK, I'll wait for you to give me an actual reason from your own mouth why you don't like the "worst deal in our history". You've had loads of time, which is what you said you needed earlier in the day. It should be pretty easy to do considering how much you gate May's WA...surely?

 

Perhaps you can answer my economics question from the other day that you've also been dodging as well, why the Euro going down the pan is a bad thing for the UK economy?

Edited 15 March, 2019 by Unbelievable Jeff

[CB Fry]

Just like when I accurately predicted that West Ham United would obviously not be relegated all those years ago, the community of non-partisan Economic experts have been bang on the money too.

 

https://amp.ft.com/content/534e108a-4651-11e9-b168-96a37d002cd3?__twitter_impression=true

 

 

I (didn't) like this paragraph

 

...

 

We need to think clearly about the nature of the pain. Rather than making us poorer than in the past, Brexit is a deliberate decision to miss out on economic progress. It is not empty shelves and huge job losses, but a slow drip of lost opportunities, activity moved elsewhere and income disappointments. The correct analogy is Britain’s slow, 30-year, relative decline from victor in the second world war to the sick man of Europe, not the immediate pain of a recession or a financial crisis.

 

.....

[benjii]

Just like when I accurately predicted that West Ham United would obviously not be relegated all those years ago, the community of non-partisan Economic experts have been bang on the money too.

 

https://amp.ft.com/content/534e108a-4651-11e9-b168-96a37d002cd3?__twitter_impression=true

 

 

I (didn't) like this paragraph

 

...

 

We need to think clearly about the nature of the pain. Rather than making us poorer than in the past, Brexit is a deliberate decision to miss out on economic progress. It is not empty shelves and huge job losses, but a slow drip of lost opportunities, activity moved elsewhere and income disappointments. The correct analogy is Britain’s slow, 30-year, relative decline from victor in the second world war to the sick man of Europe, not the immediate pain of a recession or a financial crisis.

 

.....

 

Yeah, but think of the bananas!

[Wes Tender]

 

Perhaps you can point me to what I missed then?

 

It's OK, I'll wait for you to give me an actual reason from your own mouth why you don't like the "worst deal in our history". You've had loads of time, which is what you said you needed earlier in the day. It should be pretty easy to do considering how much you gate May's WA...surely?

 

Perhaps you can answer my economics question from the other day that you've also been dodging as well, why the Euro going down the pan is a bad thing for the UK economy?

 

If you're not prepared to accept the reasons why the Withdrawal Agreement is a really bad deal from legal experts, then why should I waste time putting it into my own words? I have much better things to do with my life than humouring you. You speak as if other posters don't habitually post links to articles to support their case, like Fry has here, to deflect from his idiocy on the football balls-up he made some years back. Likewise the answer to your other question. Frankly I thought it not worth wasting time on when you are thick enough to claim that the Euro going down the pan wouldn't have an adverse effect on our economy, and indeed other economies around the World.

[Tamesaint]

TameSaint

I agree with you regarding populism in the UK, it is for those with short lived democracies. It is however worrying with this rise in Europe.

 

Do you however think, that the Labour Party was killed off this evening as their politicians sat firmly in their seats instead of voting.

 

No . Labour will continue in opposition. Tribal loyalties will ensure that they still exist but they will never be in power with the likes of Corbyn as their leader. It is what makes the thought of a General Election so unappealing to those with views in the centre / centre right of politics. The choice of government is between a Little Englander Tory party hell bent on an economic policy which will cause untold damage to the country or an economically illiterate party of loons who couldn't decide to make a cup of tea without taking a succession of votes on the pros and cons of tea making. I guess this is why the TIG got going. FPTP however may well cause TIG to disappear.

Edited 15 March, 2019 by Tamesaint

[Unbelievable Jeff]

If you're not prepared to accept the reasons why the Withdrawal Agreement is a really bad deal from legal experts, then why should I waste time putting it into my own words? I have much better things to do with my life than humouring you. You speak as if other posters don't habitually post links to articles to support their case, like Fry has here, to deflect from his idiocy on the football balls-up he made some years back. Likewise the answer to your other question. Frankly I thought it not worth wasting time on when you are thick enough to claim that the Euro going down the pan wouldn't have an adverse effect on our economy, and indeed other economies around the World.

 

But what's that got to do with Brexit - if the Euro fails it makes no difference if we're in the EU or not. In that article it wasn't going down the pan, it was just weakening (much like our currency since we voted out).

 

People do use sources to back up, but they explain what their problem is, and then back it up. All you did was post a link that talked about the one point that I said not to talk about.

 

Just give me 3 bullet points, off the top of your head, in what you don't like about May's WA, that does not include the backstop. You've posted so many words saying that you don't want to, when you could have just put that effort into telling me YOUR opinion.

 

It's the last time I'll ask - we can all see that you have no idea why you don't like the "worst deal in our history".

Edited 15 March, 2019 by Unbelievable Jeff

[Tamesaint]

It's the last time I'll ask - we can all see that you have no idea why you don't like the "worst deal in our history".

 

I think that you will find that this was the phrase that came out of Wes's Random phrase generator at the time he was writing. Little logic behind it - just hyperbole.

Edited 15 March, 2019 by Tamesaint

[Unbelievable Jeff]

I think that you will find that this was the phrase that came out of Wes's Randall phrase generator at the time he was writing. Little logic behind it - just hyperbole.

 

He's been told by someone that he shouldn't like May's WA, but he can't work out in his head, why. That's the issue - I wish he'd just stop embarrassing himself and admit he doesn't know.

[Wes Tender]

https://brexitcentral.com/ignore-nay-sayers-heres-still-course-clean-brexit-29th-march/

 

I realise that Jeff would feel dirty reading this, so he'll probably ignore it, but despite the recent amendments, the likelihood is that we are still leaving on 29th March at 11pm on WTO terms.

[Wes Tender]

But what's that got to do with Brexit - if the Euro fails it makes no difference if we're in the EU or not. In that article it wasn't going down the pan, it was just weakening (much like our currency since we voted out).

 

People do use sources to back up, but they explain what their problem is, and then back it up. All you did was post a link that talked about the one point that I said not to talk about.

 

Just give me 3 bullet points, off the top of your head, in what you don't like about May's WA, that does not include the backstop. You've posted so many words saying that you don't want to, when you could have just put that effort into telling me YOUR opinion.

 

It's the last time I'll ask - we can all see that you have no idea why you don't like the "worst deal in our history".

 

1) We have to cough up at least £39 billion as a sweetener towards a free trade deal, without knowing what the terms will be, or even if one will be achieved. We haven't even begun discussing any future trading arrangement between us yet, beyond some meaningless waffle of the so-called Political Declaration.

2) We won't be able to sign any of our own trade deals during the period of the Withdrawal Agreement

3) Business uncertainty will be prolonged for another two years.

4) We will have to accept any new laws passed by the EU during this period, some of which might be damaging to us, and we will have no say in stopping them.

 

And this is as requested without considerations of the backstop, which is the worst aspect of it all.

 

Argue away about how great these things are. The only thing that I can think of that you anti-democratic remoaners will like about it, is that it leaves us worse off than we are currently in the EU, which was probably the plan all along.

[OldNick]

https://brexitcentral.com/ignore-nay-sayers-heres-still-course-clean-brexit-29th-march/

 

I realise that Jeff would feel dirty reading this, so he'll probably ignore it, but despite the recent amendments, the likelihood is that we are still leaving on 29th March at 11pm on WTO terms.

Sorry Wes I think he underestimates the fact that the gravy train is far too enjoyable to give up for the civil service and politicians. So we will flop back into the EU. We as a nation will have lost so much credibility and we will forever be weakened as when we are told that we have to ditch the £ etc,we will hardly be able to say 'No we are not, we will leave' It is a shameful and embarrassing chapter in our countries history. Our credibility has been lost and sadly it is the people who think they care most about our nation who are responsible for it.

Misleading the man in the street that it would be so easy was dispicable. Most of the people doing the misleading did not know the rules of our departure themselves. It was like getting an American baseball fan to referee a game of football.

Taking your passionate defence of leave out of the equation , I did you didnt believe that the terms we had signed up to were so loaded against us before we started.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

1) We have to cough up at least £39 billion as a sweetener towards a free trade deal, without knowing what the terms will be, or even if one will be achieved. We haven't even begun discussing any future trading arrangement between us yet, beyond some meaningless waffle of the so-called Political Declaration.

2) We won't be able to sign any of our own trade deals during the period of the Withdrawal Agreement

3) Business uncertainty will be prolonged for another two years.

4) We will have to accept any new laws passed by the EU during this period, some of which might be damaging to us, and we will have no say in stopping them.

 

And this is as requested without considerations of the backstop, which is the worst aspect of it all.

 

Argue away about how great these things are. The only thing that I can think of that you anti-democratic remoaners will like about it, is that it leaves us worse off than we are currently in the EU, which was probably the plan all along.

 

Thank you for replying.

 

1. So that £39 billion will be extracted now, or when the trade deal is agreed - of that there is no doubt. There is a good chance that even if we left on WTO that we would still pay those monies owed.

2. We can sign-off I believe, with a pre-defined date that trade deal will start (like signing a player outside of transfer windows), ie, we can sign but not implement.

3. Debatable - they are aware of the terms they are currently trading on, and as soon as any trade deals are agreed with countries/trade areas these can be taken on by businesses. It's not uncertainty like now.

4. Yep, we will, but I thought one of the Brexiteers biggest problems with being in the EU was that we couldn't stop these laws anyway - so no difference to now really.

[shurlock]

Les seems a bit confused.

 

He stresses the importance of mitigating business uncertainty yet that's precisely why companies are desperate for a transitional period. Of course this is the same transitional period that would require the UK to comply with EU regulation which Les is also railing against (mindful that the transitional period, as it says on the tin, is temporary and is endorsed by hard brexiter initiatives like the malthouse compromise).

 

Its hard to avoid the conclusion that Les position is both internally inconsistent and more swivel-eyed than the swiveliest of swivel-eyes (shout out portugalsaint). Which basically sums up the poor fella in a nutshell

Edited 15 March, 2019 by shurlock

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Les seems a bit confused.

 

He stresses the importance of mitigating business uncertainty yet that's precisely why companies are desperate for a transitional period. Of course this is the same transitional period that would require the UK to comply with EU regulation which Les is also railing against (mindful that the transitional period, as it says on the tin, is temporary and is endorsed by hard brexiter initiatives like the malthouse compromise).

 

Its hard to avoid the conclusion that Les position is both internally inconsistent and more swivel-eyed than the swiveliest of swivel-eyes (shout out portugalsaint). Which basically sums up the poor fella

 

I'm just impressed he replied and tried to put things in his own words. Kudos for finally doing that.

[saint si]

Thank you for replying.

 

1. So that £39 billion will be extracted now, or when the trade deal is agreed - of that there is no doubt. There is a good chance that even if we left on WTO that we would still pay those monies owed.

2. We can sign-off I believe, with a pre-defined date that trade deal will start (like signing a player outside of transfer windows), ie, we can sign but not implement.

3. Debatable - they are aware of the terms they are currently trading on, and as soon as any trade deals are agreed with countries/trade areas these can be taken on by businesses. It's not uncertainty like now.

4. Yep, we will, but I thought one of the Brexiteers biggest problems with being in the EU was that we couldn't stop these laws anyway - so no difference to now really.

 

1) yep. for the zillionth time, it's not a bargaining chip if we want to have any lasting standing in the world

2) and in many ways that is a major purpose of having a transition period - creating some headroom to put in place trade deals (not least with the EU itself)

3) the "uncertainty" would be in respect of what our future trading relationship would look like. If we crash out then we have exactly same uncertainty as we will inevitably start trying to negotiate a new trade deal with EU (as well as others). Only in that scenario we *also* lose the immediate certainty of having any kind of established trading relationship. In any case the certainty of a terrible outcome is not a de facto better position than having some uncertainty*

4) it's a transitional arrangement. That's just the nature of it and blindingly obvious. EU is not likely to pass anything particularly damaging on us in the interim period ... honestly not even sure it is that easy to come up with such a law that would simultaneously hurt Britain and enrich the other EU nations (there's an open challenge to Wes and the other scare-mongers). In practice if it did we would just take a long time implementing it, argue about it a lot, and delay and delay until we exit the transitional arrangement. Maybe a better solution is if we had a seat at the table, elected representatives in the European Parliament and some kind of veto power maybe?

 

* reminds me of when football teams are called "inconsistent" ... like it is somehow better to be consistently bad

[Wes Tender]

Les seems a bit confused.

 

He stresses the importance of mitigating business uncertainty yet that's precisely why companies are desperate for a transitional period. Of course this is the same transitional period that would require the UK to comply with EU regulation which Les is also railing against (mindful that the transitional period, as it says on the tin, is temporary and is endorsed by hard brexiter initiatives like the malthouse compromise).

 

Its hard to avoid the conclusion that Les position is both internally inconsistent and more swivel-eyed than the swiveliest of swivel-eyes (shout out portugalsaint). Which basically sums up the poor fella in a nutshell

 

You seem a little confused, Adonis' mate. The business uncertainty isn't because of the 2 year transitional period, it is because that is the time that we ought to be negotiating a future trading arrangement with the EU. As nobody knows what the future deal will be with them, and indeed whether one will be concluded within that time frame, that is the cause of the business uncertainty. Either I didn't explain it well, or you didn't comprehend it well.

 

I'm pleased to see that otherwise you are your usual arrogantly smug and insulting self.

[Verbal]

1) yep. for the zillionth time, it's not a bargaining chip if we want to have any lasting standing in the world

2) and in many ways that is a major purpose of having a transition period - creating some headroom to put in place trade deals (not least with the EU itself)

3) the "uncertainty" would be in respect of what our future trading relationship would look like. If we crash out then we have exactly same uncertainty as we will inevitably start trying to negotiate a new trade deal with EU (as well as others). Only in that scenario we *also* lose the immediate certainty of having any kind of established trading relationship. In any case the certainty of a terrible outcome is not a de facto better position than having some uncertainty*

4) it's a transitional arrangement. That's just the nature of it and blindingly obvious. EU is not likely to pass anything particularly damaging on us in the interim period ... honestly not even sure it is that easy to come up with such a law that would simultaneously hurt Britain and enrich the other EU nations (there's an open challenge to Wes and the other scare-mongers). In practice if it did we would just take a long time implementing it, argue about it a lot, and delay and delay until we exit the transitional arrangement. Maybe a better solution is if we had a seat at the table, elected representatives in the European Parliament and some kind of veto power maybe?

 

* reminds me of when football teams are called "inconsistent" ... like it is somehow better to be consistently bad

 

I was going to post a response to Tender's nonsense but this, plus Shylock's and Jefffey's points cover all the bases. I can only assume there are two stages of withdrawal from the modern world - the turning-up-for-work one and the turning-off-the-mind one. Because it's all so desperately feeble and getting feebler by the day - going over the oldest of ground (eg is it even possible at this point that even a Jihadist doesn't understand what the £39bn is about?).

 

And it IS the rejection of the modern world that's at the heart of this kind of jihadism - the unintelligible technology, the countable brown people running things, the new ideas, etc. It's no wonder that we are left with the worst of all paradoxes: that the people who run this modern world, and are virtually all remoaners, are expected to meekly implement the 1950s by a coddled baby boomer generation who had everything, will lose nothing, and still expect the world to turn around them.

 

As Donald of Orange would say: SAD.

[Wes Tender]

I was going to post a response to Tender's nonsense but this, plus Shylock's and Jefffey's points cover all the bases. I can only assume there are two stages of withdrawal from the modern world - the turning-up-for-work one and the turning-off-the-mind one. Because it's all so desperately feeble and getting feebler by the day - going over the oldest of ground (eg is it even possible at this point that even a Jihadist doesn't understand what the £39bn is about?).

 

And it IS the rejection of the modern world that's at the heart of this kind of jihadism - the unintelligible technology, the countable brown people running things, the new ideas, etc. It's no wonder that we are left with the worst of all paradoxes: that the people who run this modern world, and are virtually all remoaners, are expected to meekly implement the 1950s by a coddled baby boomer generation who had everything, will lose nothing, and still expect the world to turn around them.

 

As Donald of Orange would say: SAD.

 

Your usual insufferably pompous drivel. It doesn't seem to occur to you that it is precisely this sort of arrogant condescending twaddle that lost remain the vote.

[benjii]

Your usual insufferably pompous drivel. It doesn't seem to occur to you that it is precisely this sort of arrogant condescending twaddle that lost remain the vote.

 

So dinlows voted against their betters in a fit of pique, basically?

[Unbelievable Jeff]

So dinlows voted against their betters in a fit of pique, basically?

 

Yep, and they'll get violent if they don't get their way.

[CB Fry]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47584616

 

Gobble, gobble, gobble.

[badgerx16]

2) We won't be able to sign any of our own trade deals during the period of the Withdrawal Agreement

We won't have that many negotiated by the end of the WA, at the rate the DTI is currently managing.

[shurlock]

I can see little Les getting behind a bojo speech like this.

 

 

My friends, the hour is late and the issue momentous. Like all of us fighting for the future of our great nation, I have wrestled hard with my conscience. I must tell you, there were evenings when the demons of doubt flooded into the cerebrum of certainty. Nerves are frayed, hopes dashed; Jacob Rees-Mogg is speaking Latin. Tempers have fugit.

 

We have given up much for this fight. Careers, friendships, grace and favour homes in London and Kent. I do not think it is unfair to say that I could have been a contender. I coulda had class. And, I must be honest, I still hope to be a contender again in the future — maybe even the near future. But this is not about ambition. We have readily sacrificed it, to stand like*Horatius at the bridge of Britain, defending our home against fearful odds.

 

And be in no doubt my friends, that the odds were fearful. The hordes of pigeon-hearted Eurocrats, the snivelling media establishment, craven civil service and pusillanimous political class has fought all the way to steal our Brexit. But we few, we happy few, kept faith with Britain.*

 

We have fought heroically, my friends. But for us, MPs would have folded under the weight of their combined attack. Our defence of the will of the people has ensured they have not been betrayed.*

 

We have seen off the serfdom of the single market: there will be no knee-bending Norway option here. We have beaten back the demands for a second referendum — demands made not by the people but by Blairities, by Tony’s cronies, the men who brought you the war in Iraq.*

 

Now, when we look at the prime minister’s deal, many of us have rightly criticised this mouse of a Brexit, this craven, feeble sellout, this sham Brexit, this betrayal. But now I must tell you, my friends, that after great soul-searching I have concluded that it may yet be the right craven, feeble, sham Brexit. This may be a mouse of a Brexit, but I am confident that with stout hearts and good cheer — and perhaps the right leadership — this might yet be a mouse that roars.

 

This deal is not, we know, the Brexit we wanted. But it is therefore a Brexit for which we cannot be blamed. It may be only half a Brexit, but we stand ready to secure the other half, the better half, the half that would have made this work, at a later, as-yet-unspecified date. This is not the end; it is not even the beginning of the end.

 

I admit that the prime minister’s deal is not quite the full English. But it will sustain us until we can partake of the gastronomic Brexit that still awaits us once we have the appetite to claim it.*

 

It has been a privilege to stand with my fellow Conservatives fighting for freedom and with a fearsome commitment to our unique country and its citizens. Some will accuse me of ratting on the cause; some have accused me previously of ratting for the cause. Like Churchill, I stand accused of*ratting and re-ratting, but I say to you, my friends I have only ever ratted for England.

 

This Brexit is perhaps little more than half a loaf, but our country is hungry for sustenance and we must nourish the revolution. Our enemies are still planning to take the people’s Brexit away from them. Now is the time to secure*it. We have braved Barnier; chucked Chequers and junked Jean-Claude. We may not have won every battle, but we have most certainly won the war. Now we must win the peace (as well as the next general election).*

 

Our country is crying out for certainty. Our party is crying out for unity. It is time to heal the divisions; it is time to rebuild the party; it is time to unite my pool of votes in a leadership contest.

 

We must now link arms and march confidently into our bright, free future. This country is strongest when its people stand together; it is strongest when its national party of government stands together — as it may well do if it can find the right figurehead. This is the greatest party in the greatest nation on earth. The Conservatives have found their voice, now*we lack only a tribune.

 

I have nothing to offer. [Turns page.] Ah, sorry, I mean I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, gin and tonic. But I stand ready to serve in the cause of healing our great nation. Let us get to work. Let us go forward together. Cry God for Brexit, Britain and Boris. My friends, to the phonebanks!”

 

 

https://www.ft.com/content/45005008-464a-11e9-b168-96a37d002cd3

[sadoldgit]

Which ever way you voted surely the last two years have demonstrated a) what a crap political system we have b) what a cr ap bunch of politicians we have and c) how cr ap we must look to the rest of the world looking at the televised sessions of Parliament, especially when dealing with Brexit.

[Wes Tender]

You remoaners just don't understand the machinations of Conservative Party politics at all. Boris and McVey are jockeying for pole position for when May is told to arrange the removal lorries to leave No.10. May's deal will be voted down the next time too and when the leadership competition comes, there is a majority of remoaners in the house to appease, but who realise that they will have to appoint a leaver in the final two to put before the membership, or the Party is toast.

[saint1977]

You remoaners just don't understand the machinations of Conservative Party politics at all. Boris and McVey are jockeying for pole position for when May is told to arrange the removal lorries to leave No.10. May's deal will be voted down the next time too and when the leadership competition comes, there is a majority of remoaners in the house to appease, but who realise that they will have to appoint a leaver in the final two to put before the membership, or the Party is toast.

 

The fact that you don’t see Remainers as Conservatives tells you where you heading and Heidi Allen is spot on - a minority xenophobic party whose members are rapidly passing away - Boris, Sheridan, Griffin, Farage, Chope, Bone, McVey, Foster, Redwood. You’ll be utterly unelectable. The best you could hope for is that you’ll retain 150 or so seats like the IDS days. Although I think even IDS would find you too far right and JRM would find you too in-intellectual to want to hang out, and prefer to be a maverick in a new centrist party of grown up Ex Tory and Labour MPs.

[shurlock]

You remoaners just don't understand the machinations of Conservative Party politics at all. Boris and McVey are jockeying for pole position for when May is told to arrange the removal lorries to leave No.10. May's deal will be voted down the next time too and when the leadership competition comes, there is a majority of remoaners in the house to appease, but who realise that they will have to appoint a leaver in the final two to put before the membership, or the Party is toast.

 

Les - how’s Sunderland this morning?

[Unbelievable Jeff]

You remoaners just don't understand the machinations of Conservative Party politics at all. Boris and McVey are jockeying for pole position for when May is told to arrange the removal lorries to leave No.10. May's deal will be voted down the next time too and when the leadership competition comes, there is a majority of remoaners in the house to appease, but who realise that they will have to appoint a leaver in the final two to put before the membership, or the Party is toast.

 

That's odd, because I've spenty life being a Conservative party member, and whether I'm a Remainer or Brexiteer, I'm still a Conservative.

 

If the ERG take us out with No Deal, we will have a Labour Government for years.

[shurlock]

The fact that you don’t see Remainers as Conservatives tells you where you heading and Heidi Allen is spot on - a minority xenophobic party whose members are rapidly passing away - Boris, Sheridan, Griffin, Farage, Chope, Bone, McVey, Foster, Redwood. You’ll be utterly unelectable. The best you could hope for is that you’ll retain 150 or so seats like the IDS days. Although I think even IDS would find you too far right and JRM would find you too in-intellectual to want to hang out, and prefer to be a maverick in a new centrist party of grown up Ex Tory and Labour MPs.

 

Not sure about that characterisation of JRM - a fair number of his supporters are thick, unapologetic racists. Not surprising when you’re happily hanging around with alt- or far-right figures like Candace Owens who inspired the shooter behind yesterday’s carnage in NZ or attending dinners with groups calling for the repatriation or black Britons.