"oh you don't get me I'm the end of the union": lol brexit is how we're all gonna die

xp Late but just to be sure, Suzy yr newspaper tweet was a fake

Lab say before the meeting must rule out no deal before starting.
SNP say must rule out no deal, extend A50 and agree to PV before meeting again.
LD will keep talking as long as May is "considering the option of" (Vince Cable this morning) no no deal and PV.

This is going to go nowhere.

The question facing May will still be arithmetic. If she adopted Lab policy wholesale (CU, permanently enshrined workers/env rights) 1) how many Con votes would she lose (which is bound to be more than she lost on her deal) and 2) how many Lab votes still wouldn't cross the floor because it's a Tory motion (Angela Rayner on the record in this position).

three options appear clearer than ever: labour split ; tory split ; no deal.

Beginning to think this is the case. I don't think it's resilience that makes Tory split less likely, more that the country is naturally Conservative so they are always more likely to coalesce around a unifying idea.

Fine.

So yesterday, before the VONC, May invited every party leader apart from Corbyn to meet her (which all Lab MPs, even the ones who don’t like him that much, called out as bullshit) and then afterward he’s the bad guy for insisting that she commit to not crashing out with no deal? Is that how this works now?

I don't 'get' Corbyn's "get no deal off the table first" stance and it indeed feels like he's ducking. You can't get 'no deal' off the table, because it's not on the table. 'No deal' isn't a deal of it's own: it's just a reality of what will happen when there is no deal on March 29. So if you want 'no deal off the table', try and make sure you have a deal by that date! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

This is going to go nowhere.

This, basically. EU won't budge: the price of setting a precedent is way too high.

She can say “if we have nothing by March 28th we’ll ask to extend and if we can extend we will revoke” to take it off the table.

But that would require legislation and would certainly create a much larger run-out-the-clock incentive so you can see why she doesn’t want to.

"No Deal" could hypothetically be removed from the table by a number of means including an agreement to rescind or seek to extend A50 if a deal can't be got thru parliament in time.

The SNP clearly aren't interested in anything other than leveraging independence but that's what they're for I guess so whatevs.

I don't 'get' Corbyn's "get no deal off the table first" stance and it indeed feels like he's ducking. You can't get 'no deal' off the table, because it's not on the table. 'No deal' isn't a deal of it's own: it's just a reality of what will happen when there is no deal on March 29. So if you want 'no deal off the table', try and make sure you have a deal by that date! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Sorry basically repeated what stet said.

I suspect that ideas of EU willingness to give the UK time to change its mind are looking increasingly optimistic.

and lol repeating what stet and nv said.

Thx guys, I get that.

I suspect that ideas of EU willingness to give the UK time to change its mind are looking increasingly optimistic.

I'm not convinced by this yet tbh, but who knows really.

I think the EU will give the UK time to change its mind.

The EU does everything at the last minute.

There goes Hitachi

you know who I blame? Jeremy Corbyn.

is the idea of theresa may having a meeting with caroline lucas to get the all important green party input as funny to everyone else as i find it

an agreement to rescind or seek to extend A50 if a deal can't be got thru parliament in time.

And we're back at running down the clock again. All Remain would have to do is vote down any options put in front of them.

-- in a sane, rational world corbyn saying 'explicitly abjure a no deal exit' is wholly justified to anyone remotely rational by the leaked hammond conference call. but, as someone pointed out upthread, in a sane, rational world the irish backstop is at least a medium-to-good idea and also we wouldn't have had the referendum or

-- lol at the mail's WRECKER CORBYN this morning. weirdest soviet dog whistle?? or just someone operating on more levels of tabloid syntax than i can personally manage??

-- in general the right press's treatment of corbyn at this juncture v v restrained compared to where it could be, no? i have been out of england four years so i don't have the most up to the minute grasp of the media climate, but what i remember miliband going through at any moment of import was so much worse

The Greens get more votes than the DÜ fucking P.

How bitterly ironic would it be for the two parties with Unionist in their names to be responsible for the breakup of the UK?

The chances of the EU extending past July, because of the EU elections, are the square root of fuck all.

in fact “taking it off the table” seems a v sensible thing to ask. (strategically and generally)

Remember though that there's a significant cohort of Tories who consider negotiating in Trumpian terms - not waving No Deal around like a lit stick of dynamite means you'll have to put up with whatever they offer.

And a smaller cohort who consider May to be an ultra-remainder, tasked by Her Masters to bring back a deal even worse than remaining.

Remainder seems about right.

I've heard a lot of them inferring that the threat of no deal will induce some desperate last ditch flip-flop from the EU. I like playing lotteries as well.

xpost
Slight Liam Foxing to spine

the tories have used every possible occasion to personally attack corbyn and then complain that he's not keen to talk to them.

And not counting Disaster Capitalists, urging on a No Deal.

At the risk of sounding churlish, if Corbyn was so bothered about preventing No Deal he might have thought twice about whipping his own MPs to support triggering Article 50 in the first place.

Or indeed agitating for A50 to be invoked in the days immediately following the referendum whether there was a plan or not, knowing it was on a strict 24 month timetable.

Yeah, with 20/20 hindsight that looks like a bad call but at the time it looked like accepting democracy.

A lot of the disaster capitalists don’t want an A50 extension because in April, EU laws will make their tax affairs much more transparent.

It looked like a bad call at the time as well.

in general the right press's treatment of corbyn at this juncture v v restrained compared to where it could be, no?

I wouldn't say very, very restrained. But probably tomned it down a bit since last June.

http://www.electionanalysis.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/newspaper4.jpg

LOL huge.

This was basically Gove's attack yesterday, of course, so no doubt if there was an election (there won't be) this would be all wheeled out again.

In any case, the smaller parties all seem to be setting out new red lines for support, in both red and blue directions, so this whole thing is about to get about 100 times stupider.

I'm sure this is just another bunch of arseholes, but as regards coverage for your message, this is £400 well spent.

https://www.kentlive.news/news/kent-news/mysterious-posters-trolling-politicians-words-2436261.amp

Little Eddie Miliband got a bad time of it from the scum, but Corbyn's had it much worse, though you could say they had more material to work with.

I'll take Corbyn's brexit fuck-ups because in the face of this clusterfuck he still rails against unimportant little things like cuts to adult education budgets, UC and austerity in general and I know this winds up lots of over privileged myopic remainer types - but to his supporter base it's very important stuff.

looking at that Jon Worth flowchart it looks like the two most likely options are "no deal" or "extension of article 50 with conditions presumably election and/or referendum" at kind of 50% and 30%?

ore that the country is naturally Conservative so they are always more likely to coalesce around a unifying idea.

At the risk of sounding churlish, if Corbyn was so bothered about preventing No Deal he might have thought twice about whipping his own MPs to support triggering Article 50 in the first place.

She accused Britain's other political parties of "game playing", adding that this risks "our ability to make a success of Brexit and it will cause damaging uncertainty and instability to the country".

Also anyone describing this shambles as 'Plan B' should be embarrassed.

I'm not necessarily sure Corbyn's had it worse than Miliband did - this stuff is water off a duck's back with Corbyn to some extent, with Miliband it was nastier and much more personal.

nothing to do with UK antisemitism obv.

(xp to myself)

but what i remember miliband going through at any moment of import was so much worse

IDGI, only Labours do antisemitism surely?

However Corbyn has the press calling him a traitor and terrorist sympathiser, implying he cares more about immigrants than anyone else and in the post-referendum atmosphere that’s not just irresponsible, it’s dangerous. See the Finsbury Park attacker, see his mentions any day of the week, it’s all flowing from that.

While I agree that Ed Miliband had it worse, he also had either terrible instincts or gave an ear to advisors with terrible instincts - I don't believe for a second that (for example) he wouldn't have been bullied into calling for Article 50 immediately.

This stands out for Corbyn because he is far less reactive, it's standard to assume that everything is part of A Plan (when of course some things aren't, or are only backfilled into one).

fucked up that corbyn was willing to negotiate without precondition in order to end a three-decade war of imperialism that destroyed northern ireland, yet wont do it just so the tories can make sure brexit happens in march instead of september https://t.co/zefH8QQ3P6

— frank furtschool (@osamabishounen) January 17, 2019

Wtf.

History has shown the country is more likely to elect a Con govt than a Lab one and the last major Lab success was under a drive to embrace weak Con policies to get into power (and Blair is still a divisive figure today, not to mention bank bailout, austerity v1, ATOS etc taking place within that regime). That suggests to me the majority are sympathetic to those ideas so a party coalescing around those broad themes has the greatest chance of success. So despite fundamental differences the Tories are probably the ones least likely to split because they can find more other things in common.

Yeah, I’m not even touching that. That’s some “natural party of government” muck.

Neither Labour or the Tories are going to split. IMO.