Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

[SocketRocket]

He doesn’t represent the public, only a section of it. He’s a PM not a dictator!
If it was a bluff then he should of took his party and partners with him, whose fault is it the DUP and 21 tories voted against him.

I didnt say 'the public' did I? I said the voting public, you know where the majority voted to leave and where he has been trying to make that happen but your anti Tory blinkers will never see that.

 

[SocketRocket]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....e-put-a-border-in-the-irish-sea-1-9110754/amp

Come on, how many MPs said they would respect the referendum, how many said they only wanted to stop no deal, how many times did they tell us there would be no second referendums. Cast your net a bit wider than that.

Have you bothered to read what's in his and the EUs new deal, have you seen how NI get the best of both worlds from it. Its nothing to do with throwing the DUP under a bus, its what's in the best interest of NI and Ireland overall and protecting the good friday agreement. Weren't you anti DUP when they were voting with the government.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I didnt say 'the public' did I? I said the voting public, you know where the majority voted to leave and where he has been trying to make that happen but your anti Tory blinkers will never see that.

More rubbish, his job is to look after everyone, not the few, the many.

I’m a Leave voter, I never ever want a No Deal, therefore, not representing me!

Edit: And for what it’s worth I’d feel the same if it was a Labour PM acting the same way.
Try and remember that when I voted Leave I understood I was putting my trust in the Government of the Day, the subsequent Governments have failed me!
If another vote was held tomorrow or god knows when, I will still vote Leave, regardless of who’s in power.

 

[SocketRocket]

More rubbish, his job is to look after everyone, not the few, the many.

I’m a Leave voter, I never ever want a No Deal, therefore, not representing me!

No deal is just one of the possible outcomes of leaving, did you not understand this when you voted, the process of leaving was revealed to us before we voted, article 50 gave the oppertunity to negotiate a leaving deal or if not for us to leave without one.

Also, cant you debate anything without using phrases like 'more rubbish' posters like you accuse me of using insults but fail to see how you do it yourself and then get mardy when someone reacts to them.

His job isnt to look after everyone, its to govern the country according to his parties policies which the public vote for, if these policies are contrary to your personal beliefs how can you expect him to look after them, its you that needs to adapt to the wishes of the majority and vote in someone who does represent you at the next election.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

No deal is just one of the possible outcomes of leaving, did you not understand this when you voted, the process of leaving was revealed to us before we voted, article 50 gave the oppertunity to negotiate a leaving deal or if not for us to leave without one.

Also, cant you debate anything without using phrases like 'more rubbish' posters like you accuse me of using insults but fail to see how you do it yourself and then get mardy when someone reacts to them.

His job isnt to look after everyone, its to govern the country according to his parties policies which the public vote for, if these policies are contrary to your personal beliefs how can you expect him to look after them, its you that needs to adapt to the wishes of the majority and vote in someone who does represent you at the next election.

No Deal was never, ever an option on the table, even when TM called a GE after the result No Deal was never in the tory manifesto, if the EU kick us out with No Deal then that is something I’d accept as they are not my elected representatives. No Deal is now being used as a stick, but apparently it’s not what anyone in the HoC wants.

Again you are confusing the point over who he represents, isn’t he looking after all those who voted Leave regardless of political allegiance?

And as for who we vote for in a GE, I’d also expect any Government to look after all, from the top to the bottom, you seem to be saying (using the current Government as an example) the tories should only be looking after tory voters and 2 fingers to the rest!

 

[Hobbit]

No Deal was never, ever an option on the table, even when TM called a GE after the result No Deal was never in the tory manifesto, if the EU kick us out with No Deal then that is something I’d accept as they are not my elected representatives. No Deal is now being used as a stick, but apparently it’s not what anyone in the HoC wants.

Again you are confusing the point over who he represents, isn’t he looking after all those who voted Leave regardless of political allegiance?

And as for who we vote for in a GE, I’d also expect any Government to look after all, from the top to the bottom, you seem to be saying (using the current Government as an example) the tories should only be looking after tory voters and 2 fingers to the rest!

You've continually posted up No Deal was never on the table, and you've posted up links and graphics saying the same. Fine, that's your belief. My belief is it has always been a possible outcome. Which one of us is right?

So why was No Deal always possible? Firstly, if the deal offered was so bad it would be rejected and the EU refused to offer anything else. Secondly, May's deal was rejected by the HoC 3 times. And until Johnson's team managed to get the EU to reopen the WA, No Deal was very much on the table. No Deal still isn't off the table, even if the majority of the HoC say it is. If things continue to rumble on beyond Jan 31st I wouldn't be surprised if Macron says enough and refuses to agree to a further extension.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

You've continually posted up No Deal was never on the table, and you've posted up links and graphics saying the same. Fine, that's your belief. My belief is it has always been a possible outcome. Which one of us is right?

So why was No Deal always possible? Firstly, if the deal offered was so bad it would be rejected and the EU refused to offer anything else. Secondly, May's deal was rejected by the HoC 3 times. And until Johnson's team managed to get the EU to reopen the WA, No Deal was very much on the table. No Deal still isn't off the table, even if the majority of the HoC say it is. If things continue to rumble on beyond Jan 31st I wouldn't be surprised if Macron says enough and refuses to agree to a further extension.

And if Macron refuses, like I’ve put above “we” have no choice, but even again in interview this morning the PM has said he wants a deal, it’s only the extremists looking for a No Deal, therefore who’s being honest? Are they saying we want a deal and putting in very little effort?

Obviously Bri, I am only one voice stating I don’t want No Deal, and it seems to me it’s getting like No Deal is the only option, first we had Remainers lost = Shut up go away, now it seems, Leavers who want a deal = Shut up go away.

Sophy Ridge laid in to him this morning asking if his deal was so good why didn’t he give Parliament a few more days to debate it rather than pulling the Bill and going for a GE.
Best case for him know is 31st Jan and only if he has a clear majority, how does a tory remain MP vote if they are representing a strong remain area?

 

[SocketRocket]

And if Macron refuses, like I’ve put above “we” have no choice, but even again in interview this morning the PM has said he wants a deal, it’s only the extremists looking for a No Deal, therefore who’s being honest? Are they saying we want a deal and putting in very little effort?

Obviously Bri, I am only one voice stating I don’t want No Deal, and it seems to me it’s getting like No Deal is the only option, first we had Remainers lost = Shut up go away, now it seems, Leavers who want a deal = Shut up go away.

Sophy Ridge laid in to him this morning asking if his deal was so good why didn’t he give Parliament a few more days to debate it rather than pulling the Bill and going for a GE.
Best case for him know is 31st Jan and only if he has a clear majority, how does a tory remain MP vote if they are representing a strong remain area?

He didnt give them more time because he could see Reeve, Letwin, Benn etc turning it into a Frankenstein monster bill with amendments that make it another surrender bill. Dont be so blinkered.

 

[drdel]

And if Macron refuses, like I’ve put above “we” have no choice, but even again in interview this morning the PM has said he wants a deal, it’s only the extremists looking for a No Deal, therefore who’s being honest? Are they saying we want a deal and putting in very little effort?

Obviously Bri, I am only one voice stating I don’t want No Deal, and it seems to me it’s getting like No Deal is the only option, first we had Remainers lost = Shut up go away, now it seems, Leavers who want a deal = Shut up go away.

Sophy Ridge laid in to him this morning asking if his deal was so good why didn’t he give Parliament a few more days to debate it rather than pulling the Bill and going for a GE.
Best case for him know is 31st Jan and only if he has a clear majority, how does a tory remain MP vote if they are representing a strong remain area?

If the MP was one of the majority in the HoC who voted to trigger Art 50 they made their decision at that time!

 

[Deleted member 16999]

If the MP was one of the majority in the HoC who voted to trigger Art 50 they made their decision at that time!

And if it isn’t?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

He didnt give them more time because he could see Reeve, Letwin, Benn etc turning it into a Frankenstein monster bill with amendments that make it another surrender bill. Dont be so blinkered.

You’re guessing again and yet I’m blinkered, I could accuse you of the very same thing by asking if you believe everything boris says!
He knew 31st October was dead in the water, he had got his Bill passed stage 1, he had the upper hand.

 

[Foxholer]

You've continually posted up No Deal was never on the table, and you've posted up links and graphics saying the same. Fine, that's your belief. My belief is it has always been a possible outcome. Which one of us is right?

So why was No Deal always possible? Firstly, if the deal offered was so bad it would be rejected and the EU refused to offer anything else. Secondly, May's deal was rejected by the HoC 3 times. And until Johnson's team managed to get the EU to reopen the WA, No Deal was very much on the table. No Deal still isn't off the table, even if the majority of the HoC say it is. If things continue to rumble on beyond Jan 31st I wouldn't be surprised if Macron says enough and refuses to agree to a further extension.

Absolutely this!

When you voted - to Leave - did you see 'With a Deal' or 'Without a Deal' as options on the voting paper? I certainly didn't, and, having checked out what invoking Art 50 meant, absolutely knew that 'No Deal' was (and still is) a possibility/option!

So anyone who voted Leave (should have) realised that 'No Deal' WAS on the table - even as an undesirable option, though better, imo, than May's 'stay' one!

 

[SocketRocket]

You’re guessing again and yet I’m blinkered, I could accuse you of the very same thing by asking if you believe everything boris says!
He knew 31st October was dead in the water, he had got his Bill passed stage 1, he had the upper hand.

I am just trying to be open minded about it, some of you dont seem to understand how negotiations work. Negotiators have to be prepared to give and take too find some common ground, you cant simply say 'Boris said this or that then changed his position so hes a Liar' You are blinkered and over biased and either cant or are not capable of taking a reasoned viewpoint.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Absolutely this!

When you voted - to Leave - did you see 'With a Deal' or 'Without a Deal' as options on the voting paper? I certainly didn't, and, having checked out what invoking Art 50 meant, absolutely knew that 'No Deal' was (and still is) a possibility/option!

So anyone who voted Leave (should have) realised that 'No Deal' WAS on the table - even as an undesirable option, though better, imo, than May's 'stay' one!

Have you ever seen a ballot paper with boxes covering every option?
Did the GE ballot paper in 2017 have a box promising every MP would respect the referendum?

The information we have now is vastly different to what we had in 2016, tell me, with 2 choices Leave or Remain, how was the campaign fought as it was that point I had to make a decision, it wasn’t based on what Art 50 said or what deal TM negotiated.
My input and say in the matter ended in 2016.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I am just trying to be open minded about it, some of you dont seem to understand how negotiations work. Negotiators have to be prepared to give and take too find some common ground, you cant simply say 'Boris said this or that then changed his position so hes a Liar' You are blinkered and over biased and either cant or are not capable of taking a reasoned viewpoint.

What part of “I wish boris’s deal had got us out” is blinkered?
You just don’t seem to accept I don’t want a No Deal, I’m more than intelligent enough to understand negotiation, it still doesn’t mean I have to agree with the strategy.

 

[SocketRocket]

What part of “I wish boris’s deal had got us out” is blinkered?
You just don’t seem to accept I don’t want a No Deal, I’m more than intelligent enough to understand negotiation, it still doesn’t mean I have to agree with the strategy.

I dont want a no deal, I'd rather we had a good free trade deal but I accepted when I voted leave that no deal was a possible outcome, if you don't accept that then you voted the wrong way.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I dont want a no deal, I'd rather we had a good free trade deal but I accepted when I voted leave that no deal was a possible outcome, if you don't accept that then you voted the wrong way.

What did you base that acceptance on?
The only people who mentioned No Deal was the remain side and that was dismissed as project fear!

I genuinely believe some are confusing what we know now, to what was stated during the Referendum run up.

 

[Hobbit]

And if Macron refuses, like I’ve put above “we” have no choice, but even again in interview this morning the PM has said he wants a deal, it’s only the extremists looking for a No Deal, therefore who’s being honest? Are they saying we want a deal and putting in very little effort?

Obviously Bri, I am only one voice stating I don’t want No Deal, and it seems to me it’s getting like No Deal is the only option, first we had Remainers lost = Shut up go away, now it seems, Leavers who want a deal = Shut up go away.

Sophy Ridge laid in to him this morning asking if his deal was so good why didn’t he give Parliament a few more days to debate it rather than pulling the Bill and going for a GE.
Best case for him know is 31st Jan and only if he has a clear majority, how does a tory remain MP vote if they are representing a strong remain area?

I believe he wants a deal, and I've always thought he wanted a deal. If he didn't want a deal he has the option of a pact with Farage, which would more than stitch up Labour. And when has it been Leavers who want a deal should shut up and go away? Think you're reading between the lines there 2+2=5.

As for pulling the Bill; its a Remain Parliament. His Bill would have been amended to death, including going beyond the 31st Jan - that I would have put money on. And if it had been amended, what would the EU do with the amended version? They said it isn't open to change. It would have ended up with no to No Deal by Parliament. No to the amended Deal by the EU. Stalemate, No Deal or Remain, and how long would that have taken to sort out?

As for how bad is No Deal; who knows. But it is only a snapshot in time. No Deal would morph into deals in various areas. Its in the interests of both sides to have a deal.

 

[drdel]

Have you ever seen a ballot paper with boxes covering every option?
Did the GE ballot paper in 2017 have a box promising every MP would respect the referendum?

The information we have now is vastly different to what we had in 2016, tell me, with 2 choices Leave or Remain, how was the campaign fought as it was that point I had to make a decision, it wasn’t based on what Art 50 said or what deal TM negotiated.
My input and say in the matter ended in 2016.

And if we wait another 3 years we will know even more, when do you reckon we will know enough?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I believe he wants a deal, and I've always thought he wanted a deal. If he didn't want a deal he has the option of a pact with Farage, which would more than stitch up Labour. And when has it been Leavers who want a deal should shut up and go away? Think you're reading between the lines there 2+2=5.

As for pulling the Bill; its a Remain Parliament. His Bill would have been amended to death, including going beyond the 31st Jan - that I would have put money on. And if it had been amended, what would the EU do with the amended version? They said it isn't open to change. It would have ended up with no to No Deal by Parliament. No to the amended Deal by the EU. Stalemate, No Deal or Remain, and how long would that have taken to sort out?

As for how bad is No Deal; who knows. But it is only a snapshot in time. No Deal would morph into deals in various areas. Its in the interests of both sides to have a deal.

People are quick to throw the Art 50 argument in, I believe we were told we would negotiate a deal prior to starting the legal process to leave, it was the EU who stated they wouldn’t negotiate until afterwards, so when we voted we didn’t know No Deal would be part of Art 50, that came at a later date.
A lot of things we are now meant to just accept, ie shut up, were not known facts at the time of the referendum.