Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Filo25

Matt_L wrote: »

Anyone who even thinks theres a chance of Article 50 being revoked is living in noddy land. Neither Labour nor the Tory's would attempt such a thing..

So this whole argument is a waste of internet ink..

Certainly no chance of it being revoked without a second referendum, which still looks unlikely to happen, although if the government can't push forward with any model of Brexit and get it through Parliament who knows what happens, a second referendum may look like a good way of getting a hugely problematic bit of politics out of the hands of politicians to the public, a good way of avoiding responsibility for politicos if nothing else.

So its highly unlikely but not impossible.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Lornapink wrote: »

before you say pollsters are 'experts' that ensure their samples reflect reality, recall how the polling consensus was for a huge Hillary win.

Hillary Clinton won by 3 million votes...

If the US election was decided based on who got the most votes, like a referendum is, then we'd have President Clinton in office.;)

Zero_Gravitas

Matt_L wrote: »

Anyone who even thinks theres a chance of Article 50 being revoked is living in noddy land. Neither Labour nor the Tory's would attempt such a thing..

So this whole argument is a waste of internet ink..

Not at all - it’s been an excellent opportunity to demonstrate the hypocrisy of the brexiteer position.

Previously, any remainer attempts to point out in real, practical detail how difficult leaving was actually going to be, they were slapped down, told to not be so negative and that they should be optimistic.

Suddenly, when there’s a sniff of remain in the air, they are all about how difficult it would be to remain and how it couldn’t possibly be done. It would help enormously if they could just stop complaining and be optimistic and supportive of our future position with in EU.

Zero_Gravitas

One other thing - if there’s a vote of confidence in TM, and if she loses, then who would be the leadership candidates?

I’ve said before that it’s very telling that if they thought there was any chance of brexit being a success, the usual suspects would be falling over themselves to be the leader who led us to the glorious sunny uplands of brexit. The fact it hasn’t happened is a clear indication that they all think it’s going to be a massive disaster and they’d rather TM took the blame before challenging.

And for that reason, I don’t think it’ll get to a vote of confidence in TM in the near future. The Tories think it’s best she continues as their sacrificial lamb.

Herzlos

If a successful brexit was possible, one of the more charismatic members (pretty much any with a pulse) would have taken over by now. That no-one is willing to try and take over from May speaks volumes.

StevieJ

ilovehouses wrote: »

[everyone immediately googles how he voted in a referendum that happened over two years ago]

Wikipedia have it right..



That final sentence, although factually correct, has already been edited off.

When I had a look it mentioned he had been moved to Secretary of State for Poundland UK? That has been edited out now.

movilogo

If the US election was decided based on who got the most votes, like a referendum is, then we'd have President Clinton in office.

And in last to last election, UKIP received more votes than Lib Dem and SNP combined.

First Past the Post simply an archaic system.

Thrugelmir

Zero_Gravitas wrote: »

One other thing - if there’s a vote of confidence in TM, and if she loses, then who would be the leadership candidates?

Why the mass hysteria?

Never used to be the British way.

kabayiri

Herzlos wrote: »

If a successful brexit was possible, one of the more charismatic members (pretty much any with a pulse) would have taken over by now. That no-one is willing to try and take over from May speaks volumes.

A successful exit is obviously possible.

You trigger A50; wait a couple of years - possibly have a brew; then you exit.

Voila. You have left the EU.

What you really mean is that some think the cost of leaving is too high. Well, duh, I thought the cost of going to war in the Middle East was too high, but we still did it.

We don't always judge things by pure cost. I don't want a Hamish vision of UK, and I will go to extreme lengths to avoid it.

Filo25

kabayiri wrote: »

A successful exit is obviously possible.

You trigger A50; wait a couple of years - possibly have a brew; then you exit.

Voila. You have left the EU.

What you really mean is that some think the cost of leaving is too high. Well, duh, I thought the cost of going to war in the Middle East was too high, but we still did it.

We don't always judge things by pure cost. I don't want a Hamish vision of UK, and I will go to extreme lengths to avoid it.

How far we have come from the sunny uplands of Brexit........

Maybe if WTO is such a good idea, some frontline politicians should actually take ownership of it and run with it, none of this "No deal is better than a bad deal" nonsense , why not just stop negotiating and say we are off with WTO terms, its almost as if they know it would be economically disastrous and electorally disastrous soon afterwards.

Far easier to sit carping from the sidelines, which seems to be all the leading Brexiteers in politics are good for these days, just keep saying things would be better with a Leaver in charge without actually saying what they are aiming to achieve, I'm sure some true believers will buy it, not sure many others will.