Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[Greenmile]

I don't know anything about doctorates, but I know to pass my viva to read History at Newcastle Uni I had to prepare and argue a point with a distinguished professor of history.

Mine was on Swedish influence in the Baltic continuing pretty much unchanged if Charles XI has lived longer and Charles XII hadn't taken over.

Bit niche, and my viva (is that even the right word?) with the head of history on it was a proper humdinger, but I got my place.

Did you just tell him you’d definitely seen a documentary on the TV where Ian Hislop proved your point beyond any doubt?

[CrosspoolClarets]

Your info is wrong.

The NI only customs partnership was the EU idea from the start, the UK wide one was Mays idea to try to get the whole union in the customs partnership.

But if it means Brexiteers accept it as proof of the EU blinking I don't give a ****!

When did the EU come up with that? I know of the last couple of weeks but are you talking last year?

I don’t have info, I’m going from memory.

May invented the NCP in the spring of last year if memory serves me. I don’t recall the EU being all for a NI version of it at the time.

It doesn’t matter who blinks of course, we just need to leave properly and move on with our lives.

[Lancasterclaret]

Did you just tell him you’d definitely seen a documentary on the TV where Ian Hislop proved your point beyond any doubt?

Hhahaha!

I'm sure that Mr Hislop wouldn't be making documentaries on Swedish supremacy in the Baltic!

[Greenmile]

Hhahaha!

I'm sure that Mr Hislop wouldn't be making documentaries on Swedish supremacy in the Baltic!

Well yes. That doesn’t matter though. He didn’t repeat Daily Express talking points about the backstop on HIGNFY either.

[Jakubclaret]

Wish I was as clever as you.

You can be clever but sometimes there’s no substitute for plain old fashioned common sense, some of my friends went to QEGS & UNI afterwards & are very bright blokes but severely lack any sort of common sense & are bamboozled with the simplest of things, but on the other hand have progressed through school & university with degrees etc.

[Spijed]

When did the EU come up with that? I know of the last couple of weeks but are you talking last year?

I don’t have info, I’m going from memory.

May invented the NCP in the spring of last year if memory serves me. I don’t recall the EU being all for a NI version of it at the time.

It doesn’t matter who blinks of course, we just need to leave properly and move on with our lives.

Here you go:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/u ... -1.4046877" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[elwaclaret]

I don't know anything about doctorates, but I know to pass my viva to read History at Newcastle Uni I had to prepare and argue a point with a distinguished professor of history.

Mine was on Swedish influence in the Baltic continuing pretty much unchanged if Charles XI has lived longer and Charles XII hadn't taken over.

Bit niche, and my viva (is that even the right word?) with the head of history on it was a proper humdinger, but I got my place.

Genuinely impressed. So far the closest I’ve got to that is an old photograph, could have been correctly identified as a Confederate black regiment. Raised a few eyebrows as it disagrees with Virginia University among others... until I quoted several Union sources more or less say as much; not least Ben Butler himself.
He adopted a black regiment left behind by Levern (I think it was) and recruited them into the Union Army en masse in New Orleans... I go on to argue that the photo was unseen until appearing in the Civil War Times Illustrated in the mid 70’s, and so it is entirely possible that the photo was seen by a veteran and labelled The 1st Louisiana Confederates, recognising some of the individuals rather than simply a modern Rebel self justification manufactured for propaganda purposes. Even though the picture itself suggests they were union by the time of the photo.

[Lancasterclaret]

Genuinely impressed. So far the closest I’ve got to that is an old photograph, could have been correctly identified as a Confederate black regiment. Raised a few eyebrows as it disagrees with Virginia University among others... until I quoted several Union sources more or less say as much; not least Ben Butler himself.
He adopted a black regiment left behind by Levern (I think it was) and recruited them into the Union Army en masse in New Orleans... I go on to argue that the photo was unseen until appearing in the Civil War Times Illustrated in the mid 70’s, and so it is entirely possible that the photo was seen by a veteran and labelled The 1st Louisiana Confederates, recognising some of the individuals rather than simply a modern Rebel self justification manufactured for propaganda purposes. Even though the picture itself suggests they were union by the time of the photo.

Don't know much the American Civil War apart from tactical and strategic stuff to be honest.

Big fan of the Generalship of Longstreet

Big fan of the cavalry tactics of Nathan Bedford Forrest (but at the same time recognising he was about as racist as it is possible to be)

[elwaclaret]

Don't know much the American Civil War apart from tactical and strategic stuff to be honest.

Big fan of the Generalship of Longstreet

Big fan of the cavalry tactics of Nathan Bedford Forrest (but at the same time recognising he was about as racist as it is possible to be)

Typical ACW stuff.... great leader, but I doubt I’d like them. Forrest was best under his own command. Caused major problems for Bragg (I think) at either Murfreesboro or Corinth when he sulked. A great cavalier though... if you like him look up Morgan. Proper swashbuckling stuff... magic.

[Lancasterclaret]

Typical ACW stuff.... great leader, but I doubt I’d like them. Forrest was best under his own command. Caused major problems for Bragg (I think) at either Murfreesboro or Corinth when he sulked. A great cavalier though... if you like him look up Morgan. Proper swashbuckling stuff... magic.

Oh aye, Confederate cavalry commanders sulking at major battles a definite issue for the South.

Didn't Stuart do it at Gettysburg?

Be interesting to see what would have happened had Jackson not been killed, but once the North found and promoted decent generals it couldn't lose.

[Mala591]

So what has happened today? Has Johnson offered a NI only CU backstop? This is the BIG offer/compromise that Varadkar was hoping for and it looks like he might have got it.

[elwaclaret]

Don't know much the American Civil War apart from tactical and strategic stuff to be honest.

Big fan of the Generalship of Longstreet

Big fan of the cavalry tactics of Nathan Bedford Forrest (but at the same time recognising he was about as racist as it is possible to be)

As for Longstreet is crowning glory was telling a still sulking George Picket, he should thank that old man (Lee on his deathbed), he made you a legend. It could all have been a very different world if Lee had listened to him at Gettysburg.

[Lancasterclaret]

As for Longstreet is crowning glory was telling a still sulking George Picket, he should thank that old man (Lee on his deathbed), he made you a legend. It could all have been a very different world if Lee had listened to him at Gettysburg.

Aye, Lee got a tank named after him

What did Longstreet get?

[elwaclaret]

Oh aye, Confederate cavalry commanders sulking at major battles a definite issue for the South.

Didn't Stuart do it at Gettysburg?

Be interesting to see what would have happened had Jackson not been killed, but once the North found and promoted decent generals it couldn't lose.

Yes went on a ground tour of the union army, full circle pillaging instead of scouting and reporting to Lee.

[Lancasterclaret]

So what has happened today? Has Johnson offered a NI only CU backstop? This is the BIG offer/compromise that Varadkar was hoping for and it looks like he might have got it.

Here you go Mala, PM Foster of the telegraph has a fair idea

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/11 ... 7517590532" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AndrewJB]

Thanks for that AndrewJB. Very interesting. It sounds wonderful... and expensive. I’d love to have a guarantee that money will not stop me of getting my Doctorate in a few years time. But to be fair I don’t think there are that many obstacles for those looking for a Degree. You are assured 4 years of student loans... which covers a foundation year. You have to pay it back but if I get the backing to earn and work at a higher grade I think that is fair enough, and they deserve their interest for the leg up. Under the old system of Grants I had to beg and borrow (mainly of my parents) to self fund as I did not fit all of their tick boxes.

It is all very laudable, and maybe in the next world...

However, I have lost my faith in JC, not necessarily his views... but his Wish washy leadership to really force the party onto a path. I just don’t think he has anywhere near enough sharp talent around him to make it happen... or even to get close. It sounds like JC is looking to create a small scale federal state of his own, almost as a side issue. Higher wages, lower hours... lovely.

Sorry but, Where does he get the money for his revolution... and can I have some please?

It will not happen. Sadly.

Edit - put grant instead of loan

Under the old system your university and living allowance were paid, and once in work you paid it back through taxes. Personally I'd like to see a system in which students contribute beforehand through a system of national service (their time and labour - which they all have in abundance), but that's a future conversation.

Corbyn's "wishy washy" leadership is democracy. I don't want a leader who tells everyone what to do, but who is a conduit for ideas emanating from below. Whatever you like of the Labour platform is there because of the membership, the leader, and the people around the leader. As opposed, for example, to Johnson who promises forty new hospitals, and a day later we learn he means six, plus some vague plans with no funding for a few more. Did that come from the hundred and thirty thousand Tory members, or Dominic Cummings? We've had big spending promises, and also big tax cuts from Johnson. Which one has he lied about? At least Labour have been honest that they'll tax the rich.

[Lancasterclaret]

Under the old system your university and living allowance were paid, and once in work you paid it back through taxes. Personally I'd like to see a system in which students contribute beforehand through a system of national service (their time and labour - which they all have in abundance), but that's a future conversation.

Corbyn's "wishy washy" leadership is democracy. I don't want a leader who tells everyone what to do, but who is a conduit for ideas emanating from below. Whatever you like of the Labour platform is there because of the membership, the leader, and the people around the leader. As opposed, for example, to Johnson who promises forty new hospitals, and a day later we learn he means six, plus some vague plans with no funding for a few more. Did that come from the hundred and thirty thousand Tory members, or Dominic Cummings? We've had big spending promises, and also big tax cuts from Johnson. Which one has he lied about? At least Labour have been honest that they'll tax the rich.

Greens and Lib Dems policy is 100% member led.

Corbyn can do what he wants compared to that.

And he does as well, which is why people are suspicious of him.

[elwaclaret]

Yes went on a ground tour of the union army, full circle pillaging instead of scouting and reporting to Lee.

One of the biggest things was Vicksburg, once Grant cut the Mississippi, it was just a matter of time. Though grant was very nearly sacked before Petersburg due to the incredible losses they were taking.

Why I love it so many twists and turns. Everything about it is a contradiction. One of the topics I’ve been playing with for my dissertation is possibly, really getting into Lancashire around the time. We have Confederates from Burnley and Bacup, pro Southern meetings in Clitheroe, Pro Northern in Blackburn... and that’s is without starting to really dig at it.

[Lancasterclaret]

One of the biggest things was Vicksburg, once Grant cut the Mississippi, it was just a matter of time. Though grant was very nearly sacked before Petersburg due to the incredible losses they were taking.

Why I love it so many twists and turns. Everything about it is a contradiction. One of the topics I’ve been playing with for my dissertation is possibly, really getting into Lancashire around the time. We have Confederates from Burnley and Bacup, pro Southern meetings in Clitheroe, Pro Northern in Blackburn... and that’s is without starting to really dig at it.

Confederates had real hopes of getting Britain involved because of the cotton industry.

But I don't think it got closer than wishful thinking.

Yeah, once the Mississippi was cut it was all over.

Union control of the seas and the rivers with the navy absolutely decisive.

[CrosspoolClarets]

Here you go:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/u ... -1.4046877" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ok, thanks, so that just says the EU may be accepting the arrangement today, it doesn’t imply they were willing to accept it before Johnson became PM.

This still feels like a big win for me. It respects the GFA, there is no border on the island, and NI are pretending to be in the EU CU while being out of it, and participating in UK trade deals.

It’s the obvious sensible solution once Ireland and the EU accepts that the UK or just Ni will not be in the EU CU. It sounds like that penny has finally dropped. Let us hope.

[elwaclaret]

Under the old system your university and living allowance were paid, and once in work you paid it back through taxes. Personally I'd like to see a system in which students contribute beforehand through a system of national service (their time and labour - which they all have in abundance), but that's a future conversation.

Corbyn's "wishy washy" leadership is democracy. I don't want a leader who tells everyone what to do, but who is a conduit for ideas emanating from below. Whatever you like of the Labour platform is there because of the membership, the leader, and the people around the leader. As opposed, for example, to Johnson who promises forty new hospitals, and a day later we learn he means six, plus some vague plans with no funding for a few more. Did that come from the hundred and thirty thousand Tory members, or Dominic Cummings? We've had big spending promises, and also big tax cuts from Johnson. Which one has he lied about? At least Labour have been honest that they'll tax the rich.

Can not argue against a word of it, and really respect your position. I honestly do. Hope you get ALL you want and it works. For me we have a frontman clown leader, with a decent team who have done the job. Up against a genuinely nice guy, with a cabinet that for me just does not seem ‘smart’ (not a dig at intellect, there are some very intelligent people among them) but a lot of their policies seem to come with a wistful cloud around them. I just cannot begin to believe the current Labour Party has anything like the guile they would need to pull it all off..If they fail we end up with another 70’s. It could be argued, that then it was very much NOT Labour’s fault, this time it would be.

Edit - autocorrection changed a word.

[AndrewJB]

You can be clever but sometimes there’s no substitute for plain old fashioned common sense, some of my friends went to QEGS & UNI afterwards & are very bright blokes but severely lack any sort of common sense & are bamboozled with the simplest of things, but on the other hand have progressed through school & university with degrees etc.

I love this post. I especially like thinking it in a drunken southern accent. It doesn't matter which accent, really.

[elwaclaret]

Confederates had real hopes of getting Britain involved because of the cotton industry.

But I don't think it got closer than wishful thinking.

Yeah, once the Mississippi was cut it was all over.

Union control of the seas and the rivers with the navy absolutely decisive.

Not just that, It sliced the East from the main food growing areas, ideally they needed Tennessee back... but Davis and Lee were obsessed with Richmond and the East... Grant saw that once he cut the food supply East, it would be just a matter of time. He was ridiculed for his infamy of his drinking for much of the campaign, as no one believed he could do it. The writings of those in Vicksburg is beyond belief, and those in the Union lines had it little better. Frightening stuff.

Edit - As for joining for the Confederates, it was a lot closer than most realise. In documents still being released from the war and from parliament... demonstrate Lord Palmerston was very much in favour of us weighing in.

[If it be your will]

I strongly suggest this from Peston is a must read - it links to a Spectator article with a big message from a No 10 source but I think they allow a few free articles a month to view.

https://twitter.com/peston/status/11813 ... 45734?s=21

This “number 10 source” is clearly an unofficial official communication. It sounds like Cummings has fed this to the Spectator (speculation by me).

The quote passage is absolute dynamite.

It is essentially saying (my interpretation) that we are banking on our huge power in the world (not least with the USA as backup) to strong arm smaller EU countries.

It isn’t even a veiled threat - it is a clear threat. Threats of retribution, including by withdrawing some security and defence cooperation, to countries that back Brexit delay against the clear expressed will of the UK government. States that the UK will treat it as hostile interference by foreign powers and will respond accordingly.

Also very clear Ireland will be the main target of this message, but also Eastern Europe.

Ballsy stuff. Highly impressive - if it works. Clearly a risk it won’t.

Things seem to be afoot this evening. Suddenly both sides seem to want some sort of solution to Brexit.

We'll never truly know for certain, but I wonder if this "unofficial communication" was the thing that suddenly made everyone take the UK seriously? (I'm amazed if it has worked, but it is starting to look suspiciously like it might have done. I expect we'll find out within a day or so.)

[elwaclaret]

Things seem to be afoot this evening. Suddenly both sides seem to want some sort of solution to Brexit.

We'll never truly know for certain, but I wonder if this "unofficial communication" was the thing that suddenly made everyone take the UK seriously? (I'm amazed if it has worked, but it is starting to look suspiciously like it might have done. I expect we'll find out within a day or so.)

What, cripple Ireland... who could have thought of such a thing. Think this “source inside” stuff is getting a bit much. I doubt such stark comments were made by anyone too close. There is no need for overkill. It is bordering on crass.

[Spiral]

We need a GE asap so that we can try and get a HOC that has a clear view. Having a ref first gets us nowhere and risks serious trouble.

Us leavers are quite prepared to lose brexit to get a meaningful Brexit. Remaining would mean we can get another chance down the line. Leaving with a trapstop is likely to mean that we never leave properly. So why do people say referendum before a GE.?

A GE would be fought on very clear grounds as the 4 parties have distinct positions as per my earlier posts. If Labour duck a GE after the 31 Oct they will be severely punished when the time comes.

The accepted wisdom is that once an extension is granted (I'm guessing the deal won't get parliamentary approval) Labour give a clear run for a GE. So far so good. No chance Labour deny a GE when the threat of no deal is removed, temporarily as it may be. BUT. Here's food for thought. What if Labour move towards a 2nd ref before a GE and Johnson accepts (is defeated in attempts to stop a 2nd ref, same difference, but he's running a minority govt so has the benefit of looking like a strained martyr). Why would he privately want this? To put a bum deal to the people (BINO) and lose (to remain), of course. Why? A referendum requires 50% to win, but you can govern (in a subsequent GE) with a majority on just 35-40%. Cameron secured his 2015 majority on 36.9%. GE called, rally the brexiteers, Johnson gets 5 years, fulfils his life's ambition a bit longer then leaves Brexit to some other poor bugger a few years down the line. This could all be (probably is) total b0llocks and it's late and I might have missed some obvious holes in this scenario, but I won't ever believe Johnson to be all-in on no deal until I see it in black and white as a manifesto pledge. A few remainers on here said at the time of his leadership election that Boris would find a way to abandon Brexit were it politically convenient for him. Just bear this all in mind. So yes, I can sympathise with the need for a GE before a referendum, but I can see a path (although it's not the most likely) where the inverse works for Johnson.

[CrosspoolClarets]

Things seem to be afoot this evening. Suddenly both sides seem to want some sort of solution to Brexit.

We'll never truly know for certain, but I wonder if this "unofficial communication" was the thing that suddenly made everyone take the UK seriously? (I'm amazed if it has worked, but it is starting to look suspiciously like it might have done. I expect we'll find out within a day or so.)

All Cummings was doing was firing a shot across the bows.

Classic “good cop bad cop”. It hasn’t done it in isolation, it is part of the diplomatic package. And, of course, we aren’t assuming it is done yet.

This could have been resolved in 2016 if the Tories hadn’t stitched up Johnson out of spite and put May in power. He is (allegedly) a womanising liar, but he is far more intelligent than May and far more able to play the tough line when needed (look at him evicting so many MPs from the whip, whereas she had them rebelling left right and centre).

I said last week that Steve Baker told us that Boris could be our greatest ever peacetime PM. That seems a bit rich, but there is a huge gap between that and what some think of him - he is likely to surpass their low expectations.

[elwaclaret]

Things seem to be afoot this evening. Suddenly both sides seem to want some sort of solution to Brexit.

We'll never truly know for certain, but I wonder if this "unofficial communication" was the thing that suddenly made everyone take the UK seriously? (I'm amazed if it has worked, but it is starting to look suspiciously like it might have done. I expect we'll find out within a day or so.)

One thing Europe doesn’t need is Britain pulling out, they know Trump is itching for an excuse for the US to pull out of Europe. That is bound to focus minds. Never mind anything else. It really is pulling no punches... and a bit crass to let out, if true.

[If it be your will]

One thing Europe doesn’t need is Britain pulling out, they know Trump is itching for an excuse for the US to pull out of Europe. That is bound to focus minds. Never mind anything else. It really is pulling no punches... and a bit crass to let out, if true.

I openly doubted its truth when Crosspool first posted it, too. I still do, to a degree. And yes, if it is true, it is quite an astonishing thing for the UK to have done. It would show just how vicious the EU/UK relationship has become - far more vicious than I'd realised - the gloves aren't just off, they're covered with blood-stained innards. But the more interesting question is 'Did it work?'

Hmm. Jury's out. Interesting 3 days to come.

[Colburn_Claret]

Why are we electing Federalists is the question that springs to mind when I read this. They're selected by the leaders of the member countries, how come all these federalists are getting elected to lead their countries?

They get elected by a majority of leaders. Some of the elected come with very dodgy pasts or a history of incompetence. Either way we have a leadership chosen from a very selected panel, voted for by 27 people, to rule how many hundreds of millions of people. You and I, are irrelevant. The reason we dont get a say is obvious. Even if we didn't derail the project, it would slow it down to almost a standstill. The last thing the Barniers and Tusks of this world want, is our opinion. It's why they need more and more policies ruled by Brussels, it takes our voice away. It gives them a free hand to create the Europen Empire. A suggestion I was laughed at for expounding, but confirmed by Verhofstadt himself at the Lib Dem conference, and the idiots cheered him.

[Colburn_Claret]

If, as it sounds like, Boris has made a big concession, and we get a deal similar to the one by Teresa May, what would your view be of the current PM?

Anything that left Brussels with a veto/overpowering say on British policy, whether its custom controls, or border controls, or prevents us from seeking our own trade deals would be a disaster. It just wouldnt be leaving.
Having a deal that includes an acceptance of some of these isnt a problem, so long as it's something we agree with, and not something that the EU can change whenever it suits, with or without our approval.

[Lancasterclaret]

Not just that, It sliced the East from the main food growing areas, ideally they needed Tennessee back... but Davis and Lee were obsessed with Richmond and the East... Grant saw that once he cut the food supply East, it would be just a matter of time. He was ridiculed for his infamy of his drinking for much of the campaign, as no one believed he could do it. The writings of those in Vicksburg is beyond belief, and those in the Union lines had it little better. Frightening stuff.

Edit - As for joining for the Confederates, it was a lot closer than most realise. In documents still being released from the war and from parliament... demonstrate Lord Palmerston was very much in favour of us weighing in.

Cuts both ways that though

Richmond the only major industrial town in the south, with the biggest armaments works.

They could no more fight without that than they could without the food.

Doomed from the start unless they could win a decisive battle and capture Washington and so convince the world that they could survive.

[Lancasterclaret]

The last thing the Barniers and Tusks of this world want, is our opinion. It's why they need more and more policies ruled by Brussels, it takes our voice away. It gives them a free hand to create the Europen Empire. A suggestion I was laughed at for expounding, but confirmed by Verhofstadt himself at the Lib Dem conference, and the idiots cheered him.

This is why its very hard to back any Brexit.

Because its driven by people who see what they want to see, rather than what actually is happening.

[Spijed]

Seems like any deal between the Brexit party and the Tories is off and it's open warfare.

From the Guardian:

And Leave.EU, the pro-Brexit group that Farage founded, reckons reckons Johnson has “blinked”.

Leave.EU
✔
@LeaveEUOfficial
If a deal is in the offing, as today's media excitedly report, it means someone's blinked, and it looks like it's Boris.

The PM's original proposal provided for a DUP veto. Not so, says the Northern Ireland Secretary, "I can tell you it doesn't mean a veto for one community"

[summitclaret]

It won't matter as much if we get a deal. However if we do and the HOC don't approve it then all bets are off. What would the various parties/ groups do in such a vote? My thoughts.

I think BJ should and will play hardball with all tories inc the ERG. That means you lose the whip if you don't back me. Similarly, he will give the rebels a one and only chance to get the whip back if they back a deal and the subsequent bill. Anyone voting for a referendum/ revoke is banned for life from the party.

DUP - depends on what the concessions are.
SNP will vote no
LD ditto
CUK ditto
Former labour independents - chance of some yes
Labour party to whip for no, can see at least 19 rebels.

Result it might just get through, probably depending on the DUP. However, there will be all sorts of amendments when Bercow allows them.

[martin_p]

Seems like any deal between the Brexit party and the Tories is off and it's open warfare.

From the Guardian:

And Leave.EU, the pro-Brexit group that Farage founded, reckons reckons Johnson has “blinked”.

Leave.EU
✔
@LeaveEUOfficial
If a deal is in the offing, as today's media excitedly report, it means someone's blinked, and it looks like it's Boris.

The PM's original proposal provided for a DUP veto. Not so, says the Northern Ireland Secretary, "I can tell you it doesn't mean a veto for one community"

A deal is the worst outcome for the Brexit Party, the become an irrelevance in the blink of an eye.

[summitclaret]

If BJ loses a vote on a deal, I think he will still be in a good place as he will have smoked out the MPs blocking progress. Every mp from a leave seat that votes no will be wide open at the next GE.

[willsclarets]

This is why its very hard to back any Brexit.

Because its driven by people who see what they want to see, rather than what actually is happening.

It's the characterisation of the EU that's pedalled by nationalists in the interests of cloaking ulterior principles that gets me. Empire def: An extensive group of states or countries ruled over by a single monarch, an oligarchy, or a sovereign state.

The irony of suggesting the EU is empirical in nature is completely at odds with the raison d'être of the union's formation, and cannot by definition become a comparative "nation-state" with empirical qualities, like those prior to the formation of the EU where war was the remedy in lieu of cooperative structures. Not just the remedy of imperialism but by proxy the protection of cultural diversity and preservation of the minority's voice.

This fallacy that we as a people have "lost our voice" is demonstrably untrue, yet the very recent historical tragedies that precipitated the necessity of the EU, where voices really were trodden on or disappeared forever, is totally ignored in the face of literalism (E.g Ringo spouting a quote from a plaque without context) or diversion from the actual motives of taking this point of view.

[martin_p]

If BJ loses a vote on a deal, I think he will still be in a good place as he will have smoked out the MPs blocking progress. Every mp from a leave seat that votes no will be wide open at the next GE.

Like Johnson did twice with May’s deal?

[summitclaret]

Like Johnson did twice with May’s deal?

May's deal was not leaving in any meaningful way. Anyway there was no imminent GE then.

[Lancasterclaret]

May's deal was not leaving in any meaningful way. Anyway there was no imminent GE then.

If you think that about Mays deal then you have to think that about Johnsons as well.

[Quickenthetempo]

A deal is the worst outcome for the Brexit Party, the become an irrelevance in the blink of an eye.

In theory yes, but if it's so bad a deal it's not really Brexit, they might find a way into mainstream politics to push for more once we have left?

A No deal means they won't stick around.

[Lancasterclaret]

In theory yes, but if it's so bad a deal it's not really Brexit, they might find a way into mainstream politics to push for more once we have left?

A No deal means they won't stick around.

If a brexit deal is agreed, they are dead.

Gone.

They'll be polling UKIP levels within a year.

[Spijed]

If a brexit deal is agreed, they are dead.

Gone.

They'll be polling UKIP levels within a year.

Wonder what Labour voters will do who were happy to vote for the Brexit party in places like Burnley?

Is that good for the Tories?

[Mala591]

Lest we forget what all this is about:

Independent international trade policy
Free trade/tariff free trade deal with the EU
Independent legal system
Independent immigration policy
Independent agricultural policy
Independent fisheries policy
No more net payment into the EU

Free travel and movement around Europe is a major loss
Even with a fta there will be more trade friction at EU/UK borders

Anything else?

[Lancasterclaret]

Donald Tusk just now

"The UK has still not come forward with a workable, realistic proposal. But I have received promising signals from Taoiseach
@LeoVaradkar
that a deal is possible. Even the slightest chance must be used. A no deal #Brexit will never be the choice of the EU."

Clearly a long way to go, but also still hope.

[If it be your will]

In theory yes, but if it's so bad a deal it's not really Brexit, they might find a way into mainstream politics to push for more once we have left?

A No deal means they won't stick around.

I agree. The absolute best scenario for Brexit Party is the Tories passing a Brexit-in-name-only deal. Even if the deal is without an exit clause, like May's (rendering it illegal to ever fully leave), Farage wouldn't think twice about campaigning on a 'rip up the deal' ticket. This is precisely the path that leads to a Farage PM - and the end of the Conservative Party.

That's why I don't think it will happen.

[martin_p]

If a brexit deal is agreed, they are dead.

Gone.

They'll be polling UKIP levels within a year.

Who said there’s no positives to leaving the EU!

[Lancasterclaret]

Wonder what Labour voters will do who were happy to vote for the Brexit party in places like Burnley?

Is that good for the Tories?

Doesn't matter if Brexit is done.

I'm not sure Farage would be up for rebranding again and trying to fight both the Cons and Lab to be honest.

He doesn't deal with defeats well, and he'd get some pummelling in by-elections trying to get up and running.

He'd probably claim that his work is done, and go on speaking tours in which he gets asked questions he wants to answer and gets rapturous applause when he comes out with his usual guff.

[Jakubclaret]

I love this post. I especially like thinking it in a drunken southern accent. It doesn't matter which accent, really.

So true though, it's a priceless attribute to possess & all the brexiteers I've encountered have it in spades, sets some of us apart from some of the remain camp.