Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

kingstreet

cogito wrote: »

No he didn’t. Why don’t you google what he actually said and then come back and correct yourself.

Nah. I think I'll stick to what I said, thanks all the same.

If I'm proved wrong, you can come back in a few years time and tell me so...

Arklight

Sailtheworld wrote: »

Not the best of days for Boris. Positive steps to prevent him by-passing parliament to get a no-deal brexit through have been passed by parliament. Not 'thwarted' exactly but a step in the right direction.

And his stand-up comedy routine with a kipper have been shown to be based on flawed information. That's bad enough but even the Telegraph have called him out.

Will it make much of a difference to the faithful - no of course not.

Which is exactly what he wanted. If he intended to suspend parliament to push through a no deal Brexit he'd just have kept quiet and then done it.

Instead he's blustered about doing it loudly and long enough for MPs to take steps to stop him. Then, when he hasn't delivered Brexit in October, he can blame it on MPs, judges, Jeremy Corbyn's cat, and whatever other enemies of the people he can think of.

Filo25

Arklight wrote: »

Which is exactly what he wanted. If he intended to suspend parliament to push through a no deal Brexit he'd just have kept quiet and then done it.

Instead he's blustered about doing it loudly and long enough for MPs to take steps to stop him. Then, when he hasn't delivered Brexit in October, he can blame it on MPs, judges, Jeremy Corbyn's cat, and whatever other enemies of the people he can think of.

I think he will end up calling a GE when Parliament blocks No Deal from him, this goverment barely has a governing majority now, that situtation isn't going to improve.

It's a gamble for him to call a GE without delivering Brexit (given how most Tory voters feel about the subject), but no doubt it will be pitched as required to stop Parliament blocking Johnson in his attempts to deliver "The will of the people" etc.... I think that could play ok with the Tory base.

The next election will probably be decided by how successful each of the main parties is in retaining their 2017 vote against the threat of the LibDems and Brexit Party.

melanzana

The intelligence of the majority in UK has been surpassed by the CULT of Brexit now.

Let us hope that common sense prevails after three years now.

I had to laugh at Johnson and the kipper, now if anyone did not get the reference there for the Brexit Party (many former Kippers), I really do despair.

But I live in hope that most of us want the best for our country, not just England and Wales now.

It is kind of embarrassing for the future PM to be talking about smoked kippers and the ingredients for Mars Bars. Honestly.

LHW99

Filo25 wrote: »

I think he will end up calling a GE when Parliament blocks No Deal from him, this goverment barely has a governing majority now, that situtation isn't going to improve.

It's a gamble for him to call a GE without delivering Brexit (given how most Tory voters feel about the subject), but no doubt it will be pitched as required to stop Parliament blocking Johnson in his attempts to deliver "The will of the people" etc.... I think that could play ok with the Tory base.

The next election will probably be decided by how successful each of the main parties is in retaining their 2017 vote against the threat of the LibDems and Brexit Party.

I wonder if he could engineer to lose a vote of confidence in early October. With the current numbers it seems unlikely any one else would be able to put a government together, so we could drop out by dint of the deadline passing.

Filo25

LHW99 wrote: »

I wonder if he could engineer to lose a vote of confidence in early October. With the current numbers it seems unlikely any one else would be able to put a government together, so we could drop out by dint of the deadline passing.

If it came to those desperate straits I think there would probably be the numbers to form a government of national unity at least in the very short term.

SpiderLegs

Filo25 wrote: »

If it came to those desperate straits I think there would probably be the numbers to form a government of national unity at least in the very short term.

Who do you think would be PM in this scenario?

SouthLondonUser

Tromking wrote: »

I get that, its just that your criticism is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of our parliamentary system of government.

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

I almost wish you were right, although you are wrong on so many levels.

Guys, I ask again: could you please be so kind as to explain how/why I would be wrong and what I would have misunderstood?

Alternatively, for the sake of consistency, could you please apologise and admit your mistakes?

Yes, I know, asking fact-resistant Brexiteers to substantiate what they say is an outrageous request, but, still...

ben501

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

Alternatively, for the sake of consistency, could you please apologise and admit your mistakes?

Surely this would have no purpose other than boosting your ego.
(I'm not even bothering to look & see what the disagreement is about)
I agree though. You asking people to apologise is becoming quite a consistent event.

By the way, have you asked any of our MPs to apologise yet for agreeing to trigger Article 50 and set us on the way? Another of those small details that still hasn't been satisfactorily explained. Why are those who voted for brexit always called thick (or various more derogatory terms), while it was the MPs who voted to invoke Article 50 who did the damage.

SouthLondonUser

ben501 wrote: »

Surely this would have no purpose other than boosting your ego.
(I'm not even bothering to look & see what the disagreement is about)
I agree though. You asking people to apologise is becoming quite a consistent event.

Well, the consistent event is actually people spitting out factually false nonsense. My calling it out is just a consequence.

For example, someone said I was confusing parliamentary and presidential systems; nonsense - requiring a vote of confidence when a new government is formed is, indeed, a feature of many parliamentary systems. Whether you agree with that or not is an opinion; that it has nothing to do with a presidential system is a fact.

I like to hold people accountable... even though I know it's quite pointless in this populist age.