• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Robspur12 said:
Nonsense it is extending the time for negotiating a deal. If Boris was so bothered about getting out,he should have voted for May's deal then renegotiate from a position of strength. Instead, he was hungry for power. Most leavers wanted control of their borders May's deal would have given us that while also leaving.
Click to expand...
War game the process in very simple terms - it'll only take you around 3 seconds.

If the EU's choices are Brexit with or without a deal, their preference will be with a deal. They will have a reason to come to the table and negotiate, ending up somewhere between our two positions. Their incentive is towards a deal.

Now if the traitor's bill is in place, we cannot leave without a deal. So the EU's two choices are remain or leaving with a deal. They would prefer we remain - they've made that very clear. In which case, they will then offer us the worst possible deal (May's deal) and make us choose. They want us to stay, they've offered us a deal so bad it's far better to stay, we then have to choose. So remaining is the only possible outcome.

It's quite simple and I know you're well capable of stepping through that process. Just take away the bias and war game it from the EU's position - there's no other outcome.
 
Robspur12 said:
Removing the whip from and Deselecting moderates who disagreed with him. Even though he himself voted against the government's agreement.
Click to expand...

What makes them moderate? They are more moderate than some of the other members of their party but depending on your viewpoint that doesn't make them moderate. Ken Clarke for instance opposed admission of women to the student union at Cambridge and lobbied 3rd world countries to not have warnings on cigarette packets and targetted children to smoke while he was a director of BAT.
 
P.D. said:
What makes them moderate? They are more moderate than some of the other members of their party but depending on your viewpoint that doesn't make them moderate. Ken Clarke for instance opposed admission of women to the student union at Cambridge and lobbied 3rd world countries to not have warnings on cigarette packets and targetted children to smoke while he was a director of BAT.
Click to expand...
I used to do some consultancy work for BAT. Best employer I've ever worked for.
 
scaramanga said:
War game the process in very simple terms - it'll only take you around 3 seconds.

If the EU's choices are Brexit with or without a deal, their preference will be with a deal. They will have a reason to come to the table and negotiate, ending up somewhere between our two positions. Their incentive is towards a deal.

Now if the traitor's bill is in place, we cannot leave without a deal. So the EU's two choices are remain or leaving with a deal. They would prefer we remain - they've made that very clear. In which case, they will then offer us the worst possible deal (May's deal) and make us choose. They want us to stay, they've offered us a deal so bad it's far better to stay, we then have to choose. So remaining is the only possible outcome.

It's quite simple and I know you're well capable of stepping through that process. Just take away the bias and war game it from the EU's position - there's no other outcome.
Click to expand...
t
There is no mandate for No deal or hard brexit. If there had been May would have won her 2017 election having put this on the table in her speeches before the election. Boris and his cronies were over reaching and parliament rightly pulled them back. If they had a serious negotiating position they should have extended the deadline then really got to work. They forced Parliament's hand when previous motions aimed at preventing no deal failed.

The EU were not going to deal just on the threat of "no deal" they know we have no infrastructure at the ports let alone in other industries to handle no deal. They aren't idiots. Words alone don't impress them. The threat is only real if backed up with genuine leverage. We have none.

Boris and Cummings knew this which is why they didn't put anything concrete in front of the EU before announcing the prorogation. They have been trying to force an election. If they cared about the "will of the people" they would have voted for May's deal.
 
P.D. said:
What makes them moderate? They are more moderate than some of the other members of their party but depending on your viewpoint that doesn't make them moderate. Ken Clarke for instance opposed admission of women to the student union at Cambridge and lobbied 3rd world countries to not have warnings on cigarette packets and targetted children to smoke while he was a director of BAT.
Click to expand...
I don't particularly like any of the Tories but these ones seem more sensible and pragmatic than the bat brick crazy ones of the ERG.
 
Robspur12 said:
Boris and his cronies went against the will of the people by voting against Theresa May's deal 3 times was it?
Click to expand...

Robspur12 said:
If Boris was so bothered about getting out,he should have voted for May's deal then renegotiate from a position of strength. Instead, he was hungry for power. Most leavers wanted control of their borders May's deal would have given us that while also leaving.
Click to expand...

I think Boris and his circle did back it at the 3rd go, didn't they? It was 20 or so hardcore ERG holdouts that didn't.
 
scaramanga said:
War game the process in very simple terms - it'll only take you around 3 seconds.

If the EU's choices are Brexit with or without a deal, their preference will be with a deal. They will have a reason to come to the table and negotiate, ending up somewhere between our two positions. Their incentive is towards a deal.

Now if the traitor's bill is in place, we cannot leave without a deal. So the EU's two choices are remain or leaving with a deal. They would prefer we remain - they've made that very clear. In which case, they will then offer us the worst possible deal (May's deal) and make us choose. They want us to stay, they've offered us a deal so bad it's far better to stay, we then have to choose. So remaining is the only possible outcome.

It's quite simple and I know you're well capable of stepping through that process. Just take away the bias and war game it from the EU's position - there's no other outcome.
Click to expand...

Why does ruling out a No Deal exit, mean we cannot leave with a deal? Your logic doesn't make sense. It is as though you are saying there are only 2 options possible.Which is ood and not the case.

Brexit: such a waste of time and our money.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Why does a ruling out a No Deal exit, mean we cannot leave without a deal? Your logic doesn't make sense. It is as though you are saying there are only 2 options possible.Which is ood and not the case.

Brexit: such a waste of time and our money.
Click to expand...
Read what I posted and try again.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Why does a ruling out a No Deal exit, mean we cannot leave without a deal? Your logic doesn't make sense. It is as though you are saying there are only 2 options possible.Which is ood and not the case.

Brexit: such a waste of time and our money.
Click to expand...
Tbh we are in this position because Cummings and Boris "war gamed" it to force parliament's hand. A previous motion to take "no deal" off the table was defeated. Boris real aim was not to negotiate with the EU but force an election.
 
Robspur12 said:
Tbh we are in this position because Cummings and Boris "war gamed" it to force parliament hand. A previous motion to take "no deal" off the table was defeated. Boris real aim was not to negotiate with the EU but force an election.
Click to expand...

That has been the case since he took office. In parliment today he more or less dropped his charade that he didn't want an election. He just wants to say - parliment forced me to have an election. Actually it has been the plan from the off. Hence no negotiation with the EU. Cummings game plan - take out Farrage, take out Corbyn - then rule. I don't think they even have a plan for Brexit.

The weird thing is, remove the problematic brexit issue, and I think Boris-Cummings could actually do a decent job refreshing politics. But now, trying to disrupt parliment, and fuking about with no deal, they are totally lost and loopy.
 
Robspur12 said:
Tbh we are in this position because Cummings and Boris "war gamed" it to force parliament's hand. A previous motion to take "no deal" off the table was defeated. Boris real aim was not to negotiate with the EU but force an election.
Click to expand...

Of course he wants an election, just look at today.

He inherited a week hand and a house going rogue.

What he needs is a proper mandate and proper majority. Indeed Corbyn can say the same.

I hope this no deal blocking gets scuppered in the lord's,and an election then has to happen.

It'll be the tie breaker that gets things moving again and breaks the deadlock.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Of course he wants an election, just look at today.

He inherited a week hand and a house going rogue.

What he needs is a proper mandate and proper majority. Indeed Corbyn can say the same.

I hope this no deal blocking gets scuppered in the lord's,and an election then has to happen.

It'll be the tie breaker that gets things moving again and breaks the deadlock.
Click to expand...
Funnily enough if the consequences of no deal were not so potentially severe, I think Parliament should have called Boris's bluff let him tick down the clock and watch the unfolding chaos that would ensue when we were totally unprepared for a no deal outcome. It probably would have wiped the Tories out at the next election.

Unfortunately Parliament have played right into Boris's hands and he was banking on that.
 
Robspur12 said:
Funnily enough if the consequences of no deal were not so potentially severe, I think Parliament should have called Boris's bluff let him tick down the clock and watch the unfolding chaos that would happen when we were totally unprepared for a no deal outcome. It probably would have wiped the Tories out at the next election.

Unfortunately Parliament have played right into Boris's hands and he was banking on that.
Click to expand...

I'm quite impressed with him so far, he has made moves and brought things later to a head.

The thing for me is, as severe as people think no deal is, I can't help thinking it's better than BINO - which parliament seem set upon.

And as much as people talk about no mandate for no deal, they never seem to mention BINO/remain have even less credibility.

No deal IS leaving the EU. BINO/remain are clearly not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back