So that means Chequers is in effect a dead duck. The EU will reject it, May has no mandate for it and even the Remainers are now tactically rejecting it.
So that means Chequers is in effect a dead duck. The EU will reject it, May has no mandate for it and even the Remainers are now tactically rejecting it.
Its great fun isn't it. I thought it would be the referendum that split the tories but its actually Brexit itself. Party in crisis, defunct government and Corbyn waiting in the wings with his little lefty beard.Originally Posted by Burney
Great fun
Actually, yes it is. Looks like it’s going to come down to a diamond-hard Brexit or no Brexit at all. Only one of those options has any democratic legitimacy.Its great fun isn't it. I thought it would be the referendum that split the tories but its actually Brexit itself. Party in crisis, defunct government and Corbyn waiting in the wings with his little lefty beard.
Great fun
Bring it on.
Perhaps you are actually a traitor. I think, after our US president's antics today, that it's possible to ask the question. You are a traitor to the UK, even if your loyalty to AWIMB does not seem in question.
And even that a hugely tenuous one. The argument that 17 million people understood what they were voting for has been largely undermined by the rather obvious fact that nobody really has a clue how to do any of this or what it will look like.
But as discussed, the legitimacy of a democratic process is irrelevant as long as it is a British one.
I'm sorry, but that is a canard. One could question the legitimacy of any vote on the basis that people didn't know what they were voting for. When people voted for Tony Blair, were they voting for invading Iraq? When they voted for David Cameron were they voting for gay marriage? Of course not. No vote is specific or comprehensive in its meaning, but - whether you like them or not - votes are the only legitimate means of democratic expression we have.
All that was on the ballot was to remain in or leave the EU. The vote was to leave. Everything else is detail.
That is nonsense and you know it. You cant compare this with a single, reactive foreign policy issue or a minor civil rights issue within an election manifesto. IF for no other reason than that those decisions were not justified solely by the fact that people voted for them.
This was a single issue vote on one question. Possibly the most incomprehensible and complex question in our constitutional history.
Yes, people voted leave. They didnt vote for specific versions of it and we have no idea what they wanted from it (although we can make a guess in certain areas).
The process since has shown just how complicated it is. Each side is quick to point to a betrayal of the voters on various fairly minor detailed points but its all *******s.
Which part of every single significant campaigner on both sides explicitly stating that leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market and customs union do you think those 17 million failed to understand?
Well, if you talk to ordinary people a lot of them will have no clue what any of that means so, in answer to your question, every part.
Those are two things. It is sooo much more complicated than that.
Are you sure a soft Brexit is out of the question?
No Deal would be voted down by Parliament and the government would almost certainly be forced to ask for more time to negotiate, which the EU is likely to accept. This would force May out and would probably prompt a GE. Labour would campaign on the promise that they'll honour the referendum result by negotiating a soft Brexit.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote