How long can the farce go on?

[Workingman]

The whole idea of being in a trading bloc is to aid an economy. It is, therefore, no wonder that the economy has taken centre stage in the Brexit fiasco. All other things, though related, are peripheral. All, that is, except for the straw man European Army, the one that does not exist.

Some of the other things are no more than proposals, and guess what, we have them in our own political galaxy.

The irony is that if we had stuck to the economy at the very beginning none of this brexbollocks would be going on.

[Suff]

Question: Is the deal on the table one you and 100% of Brexiters would have voted for at the outset?

Had I voted, remember I didn't even though I did have a vote, I would not have been voting for a deal, I would have been voting for Brexit.

A deal is not Brexit and Brexit is not a deal.

End of argument. Now if you want to ask people if they voted for a deal after Brexit, that is a very different thing and should be clearly called out.

It is not. Because too many people want the public to think Brexit is the deal.

[Suff]

Most leavers interpreted the slogan as there will be more money to spend at home once we leave the EU.

Well, of course, if you can't destroy the argument then destroy the credibility of the voters....

[Suff]

The irony is that if we had stuck to the economy at the very beginning none of this brexbollocks would be going on.

The whole point about the trading bloc is that you trade within the bloc and are big enough to keep the outsiders from interfering with your own economy by dumping on you.

Had we stayed with the Economic argument it would have been 100% crystal clear that the EU wants the UK for dumping goods and does not want our products or services. Witness that the only growth area in goods and services to export are outside of the EU.

For sucking goods in, the rest of the world is cheaper than the EU with its artificially inflated prices. For selling goods and services, being outside the EU restrictions would offer virtually unlimited opportunity in markets who DO want to buy UK goods and services.

Had we left it with the economy as the main reason, we would be out, the EU would have been given the finger and we'd already have organised our trade deals with the rest of the world who do want to buy our goods.

Whilst you can dumb down the Leavers as much as you like, the economy was not uppermost in the minds of the majority of the Remainers. Cheap holidays to Boringdorm and Shagaluf being key in the equation.... Way to go in thinking about the future of your country and your children....

See, Leavers can do it too.

[cromwell]

Anyway, back to the OP.

Howlong can this go on? May looks likely to win her vote of confidence, God knows how.

But she looks less likely to get her deal through Parliament.

So where does that leave us? No deal or no Brexit.

[TheOstrich]

I completely agree with Cromwell and MedSec, and I wish that ardent Remainers and Europhiles would stop peddling this absolute bullsh1t that the Leave vote was totally driven by the pre-Referendum electioneering.

It wasn't. We wanted Out. Some of us (like me) never wanted In in the first place.

Crommers and Suff have argued their points intelligently, far better than I can - but I have a heartfelt passion for the Leave cause and so, I suspect have many others.

The EU is an abomination of a Federal organisation and the very fact that we've had such extreme difficulty in extracting ourselves from its tentacles speaks absolute volumes.

Second Referendum? Ah - keep on voting till you produce the right result, that's democracy, right?

Giscard d'Estang remarked regarding the pushing through of the Lisbon Treaty:

"The latest brainwave is to preserve part of the innovations of the constitutional treaty, but hide them by breaking them up into several texts. The most innovative provisions would become simple amendments to the treaties of Maastricht and Nice. The technical improvements would be regrouped in a colourless, harmless treaty. The texts would be sent to national parliaments, which would vote separately. Thus public opinion would be led to adopt, without knowing it, the provisions that we dare not present directly. ".

- Wiki

Again, that's democracy, right?

The whole negotiation of our withdrawal has been conducted by closet Remainers - that is why we are now in the mess we are in. Because they - and Europe - want to force a second vote on us.

[Workingman]

Anyway, back to the OP.

Probably wise.

Re the May vote of confidence: Cabinet Office minister David Lidington said she would win because there was "no plausible alternative" to her approach.

That speaks volumes about where the Cons are at present.

Other reasons are the position, the repercussions and the numbers game. Nobody wants the job. A new leader will almost certainly mean a GE - one no party wants to win; and the Cons need about 150 to bring her down. Fail and she is protected from further challenges for a year. That would mean she would lead them into the next GE and they do not want that: at all.

We are where we are and we have what we have.

[Suff]

Of course the reason for all of this is quite obvious. The voters are so badly split that they are always going to punish the sitting government for not getting 100% of what they want.

Remainers can't get to remain, that is a given, but they will do their damnedest to screw things up at the next election by "punishing" everyone for not giving them what they wanted.

Leavers want to LEAVE but are going to find leaving quite difficult. It is going to take time. The main reason is that most don't actually know what Leave looks like in reality. Any more than the Greeks understood what staying in, or leaving, the Euro meant. So leavers are going to punish everyone for not getting them the Leave they wanted, regardless of the practicality of the matter.

So where does that put May? She's trying to do enough Leave to keep the Leavers happy whilst doing enough Remain to be able to placate the Remainers to some extent or other.

The game is that enough Leavers think they got what they wanted and enough Remainers think they got what they needed to vote for the party at the next election.

To quote an interesting line from a film, "You can't ride two horses with one ass".... In attempting the impossible, May has p1ssed off everyone and made the likelihood of a Tory win at the next election fairly remote.

From my perspective, fortunately, Corbyn is the leader of the Labour party and if he wins the last thing he will want to do is more Remain.

If May falls there will be no election. The government will continue until the next election. But if May falls the chances of another Remainer delivering Brexit is minimal, at best.

So how long can this farce go on? March 29th 2019!

The very best thing about May falling would be to see the self satisfied smirk wiped off the face of Barnier. Best of all would be for Davis to replace May and go to the next EU summit and face down all those who derided him. But I'm getting ahead of myself. May has to fall first and that is by no means certain.

[Workingman]

Enough!

You Brexiters are ever so intelligent in your postings and we Remainers are complete idiots. Everything you say is Gospel and all will be well in the sunny uplands with gambolling Unicorns and Mermaids bathing in pristine inshore waters.

And if life turns out differently will you take ownership?

Not a chance! Remainers will be blamed for for the disaster. You Brexit cowards will run away: it's in your genes.

[AliasAggers]

It's a long time since I read such a lot of bull manure.

Perhaps I shouldn't bother to come here.