Cont: Brexit: Now What? 9 Below Zero

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

No I'm not but the issue isn't Corbyn or LibDems it's the fact that no one is willing to let one of their political rivals become PM. The idea of a government national unity sounds good but no one is willing to do what is necessary.

As I said, it seems that people would likely get behind Ken Clarke, or Harriet Harman, or a number of other names. All reports indicate that people absolutely are willing to do what is necessary. But not with Corbyn, for a variety of reasons, and Corbyn is unwilling to do what's necessary if it's anybody other than him.

Corbyn is the biggest - and perhaps only - obstacle here.

 

[Francesca R]

No deal on 31 Oct will be Corbyn's fault. Ah well.

 

[Pixel42]

About 30% isn't "little popular support". It's peaked at over 50% at times, such as in 2009.

I predict a significant bump when the Queen dies.

 

[Darat]

I predict a significant bump when the Queen dies.

It's quite strange, I'm working in Windsor at the moment so not surprisingly royalty often comes up in casual conversations, and I've been astonished how many people seem to think the next Monarch will be William. They've either forgotten Charles or think he'll take a pass on being the King!

 

[Francesca R]

It's now being reported that Johnson will request an extension if no deal is struck.

Clearly he has a cunning plan, but I'm wondering whether Cummings has told him yet exactly what that plan is.

Probably the old "invisible ink" wheeze.

 

[ceptimus]

The Brexit that was originally promised by the Leave campaigners included things like staying in the customs union and retaining free movement.

Remainers in these threads try to argue that, and then in the next breath argue that leavers only voted the way they did in order to STOP free movement.

Which is it? You can't have it both ways.

 

[catsmate]

And he is leader of the Labour Party so they should stand behind him and not vote for someone else.
If someone else CAN get the numbers they can try of course.

Its just that idiot Swinson playing silly buggers at the minute.

Why? They were elected to serve the nation and their constituents, not just the Labour party.

 

[catsmate]

I predict a significant bump when the Queen dies.

Yeah, Charles IV is unlikely to happen.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Oh, FFS: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1180447076062117888

+BREAKING+

Govt Lawyers advising have warned that the forthcoming “Queen’s speech” maybe “unconstitutional”.

Queen’s speeches start a new legislative period they are not to be given immediately before an election otherwise this risks using the monarch for an election broadcast.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Remainers in these threads try to argue that, and then in the next breath argue that leavers only voted the way they did in order to STOP free movement.

Which is it? You can't have it both ways.

I think perhaps your mistake is in your head fusing everybody into a gestalt entity which has just one opinion on everything, rather than treating everybody who posts in this thread as an individual with their own thoughts and opinions.

 

[Lothian]

Post brexit we are relying on America to treat us as equals, and with respect.

In other news it appears that an American diplomat had fled the country after killing one of our citizens. I am sure our friends will put her on the first plane back

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Remainers in these threads try to argue that, and then in the next breath argue that leavers only voted the way they did in order to STOP free movement.

Which is it? You can't have it both ways.

Thing is, having it both ways is exactly what the leave campaign promised and what was voted for.
The problems started once they needed to actually keep those promises. Which is why Nigel Farage washed his hands of the whole working that out thing the moment that became clear.

 

[psionl0]

About 30% isn't "little popular support". It's peaked at over 50% at times, such as in 2009.

The support would quickly dwindle once it came down to the form of the alternative head of state.

I suspect they would accept a large cut in pay and benefits without resigning (the option to resign could be granted along with the compensation reduction).

Then their profitability would jump. They should welcome that, it being the only ethically defensible justification for their roles.

That's not an economic argument - especially if you consider how much a president with all his trappings would cost.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

...which is why you need a leader that a majority can get behind.

I feel like you're deliberately on a wind-up, now.

And who is that?

There seems to be an accetance that Labour should throw their leader under the bus just to appease others but nobody else should even consider holding their nose and supporting him.

Its the usual anti Corbyn **** from so called reasonable centrists. Swinson should get behind Corbyn but she won't because she's an idiot and a Tory who would rather no deal than a left wing government even for a couple of weeks.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

There are rumblings that he'd likely have the support of enough of them. Certainly more than Corbyn does from the Tories.



They might back him if they felt he could be trusted not to exploit the system for his own ends and to instead negotiate a reasonable deal in good faith and hold a second referendum.

The thing is that Brexit has mainly been scuppered by May's "red lines". The Brexit that was originally promised by the Leave campaigners included things like staying in the customs union and retaining free movement. It was May who decided that a hardest-of-hard Brexits was the only possible path.

I think, at this stage, that most MPs would back a deal that didn't do too much damage to the UK, regardless of whether or not it's something they actually want - because they understand what the realistic alternatives are.

One way to make it work is to negotiate a Brexit that's more or less a Brexit-in-name-only, leaving us not dissimilar to Norway. Part of this leaving deal includes a timeline stretching over a period of years for slowly pulling out of other aspects of the EU. This reduces the negative impact of Brexit, allows the Brexiteers to claim that they've won (even if they don't feel like they have) and leaves everybody in a situation that they're not entirely happy with but can live with.

It can be sold to the public as something that's over and done with and all the continuing negotiations can go on in the background. More than that, they can be quietly forgotten and life can go on as normal, should that be what a future government wants. We could even re-join the EU at some point in the future relatively easily and perhaps even without much attention being drawn to it. Any further withdrawal or re-joining could even be sold as if it's a different matter entirely.

We'll still be worse off than we currently are, but everybody gets to save face, everybody gets to convince themselves that they've won, the damage is reduced as low as it possibly can be, and everybody can get on with their lives. It's far from ideal, but it's something that I think most MPs and most of the public could live with.

When you day Tories do you mean Tories or the rebels? The actual Tories wont support him. The rebels maybe but thats a handful. Plus lib dems maybe. Ok so you start at a base of 40 votes? How do you get to 300 odd?

Thats the nonsense of this Swinson numbers line. Cornyn starts at 300 with the SNP. Others would be starting at 10 or 15 percent of that.

If there was a group of actual Tories who would say they would suppprt Ken Clark or Rory stewart or whoever then its a different situation but there isnt.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

That doesn't make sense. If someone else could do a good job, is willing to do it, and will command more respect from their fellow MPs, then why vote for someone that you (for example) don't trust and think is incompetent? The idea that people should vote for him because he's the leader of a different party entirely makes no sense.

Sorry I meant the Labour party should stand behind him ehich makes it hard to get their votes.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Remainers in these threads try to argue that, and then in the next breath argue that leavers only voted the way they did in order to STOP free movement.

Which is it? You can't have it both ways.

Why not? The leave campaign(s) did?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Why? They were elected to serve the nation and their constituents, not just the Labour party.

And the people who elceted them voted for JC as PM.

if people want a gnu the easiest way to achieve that is put jc in. that's why the snp agree to it.

all the lib dems and rebel tories might want to reflect on how they best serve the nation also. the clock is ticking. get it done. he can be removed instantly if there is any issue

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

The support would quickly dwindle once it came down to the form of the alternative head of state.


That's not an economic argument - especially if you consider how much a president with all his trappings would cost.

Does your economic argument include all the income from their 'personal' investments and crown estates that can be repatriated

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

And who is that?

As I've said several times, Ken Clarke is a name that's being thrown around as a credible possibility. Harriet Harman is the other top contender.

There seems to be an accetance that Labour should throw their leader under the bus just to appease others but nobody else should even consider holding their nose and supporting him.

How would Labour be throwing their leader under a bus? If anything, it'd be beneficial to Corbyn because he wouldn't have to be Prime Minister while holding the poisoned chalice that is Brexit. He'll get to to in to the election with his hands clean, and having demonstrated that he can behave like an adult when it's required of him.

Its the usual anti Corbyn **** from so called reasonable centrists. Swinson should get behind Corbyn but she won't because she's an idiot and a Tory who would rather no deal than a left wing government even for a couple of weeks.

Corbyn doesn't have the numbers. Swinson getting behind him would make no difference to his ability to be leader of a GNU. She's better off throwing her support behind someone who could actually credibly lead one.