-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
BREXIT |OT| ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Thread starter theaface
- Start date
- Status
Time for a reminder that the Tories own predictions put a no deal scenario, that we are less than two months from, at around -9% GDP. And that's probably optimistic. But no, carry on how Corbyn is going to Doom us with a GDP drop.
Well, it's not all of Bavaria, just Lower Bavaria. For some reason the NY Times chose to divide Germany along its administrative districts instead of its states, which is quite unusual. Even more so because they're using districts that were integrated into larger ones in 1999.
As for the question, I don't know the specifics, but it could be that Mecklenburg exports more agrarian products to the UK (them being at the Baltic Sea probably helps) than Lower Bavaria. The latter does have a BMW assembly though, so I really don't know why it's apparently unaffected by Brexit.
The selfish or short sighted generation, if there's anything good created in the post war era these idiots have flogged it off or broken it.
Pretty interesting article (particularly if you are currently teaching it) about how the Brexit vote mirrors the way the way the Reformation took hold in England. Worth a read even if I found some of the links a bit tenuous.
https://www.newstatesman.com/world/2019/02/europe-s-new-reformation
https://www.newstatesman.com/world/2019/02/europe-s-new-reformation
Holy fuck this article is trash, this guy is a professor? Fuck me, Cambridge academics need to taste some diversity in their lives.
all-in-all I think the map is bullshit. There is either 10% impact all over germany or no impact like lower bavaria, no increments at all. Industry/exporting hubs like Ruhr, south-west Germany, etc. have the same Brexit impact as Mecklenburg and Schleswig? Lower bavaria, Berlin and lower Saxony nothing? Saxony is like the powerhouse of East Germany. No way are they less impacted than Brandenburg or Anhalt.
Or do they assume that the border regions just sell their products to the nearest country? (the no impact regions are all on the border, lower bavaria to czech and Austria, Lower saxony to Poland and czech, Saarland and lower westphalia to Belgium/France
You've missed the point the poster was replying to, which is that it would be better to have a Remain but with a Tory PM, than a no-deal with Labour PM.
You've missed the point that the Tories are the ones who got us in this mess because of a squabble in their party.
... I really should put you on ignore. You're basically trolling at this point.
I replied to someone else, putting the context there, which they didn't seem aware of. Why are you trying to use circular logic to try and argue that context?
I don't think a single poster has argued that we weren't in this mess because of the Tories in the first place. But that isn't the point the initial poster was making, is it? I have a feeling you already know that though.
Question - Would Remain with Tory MP be better than a No Deal Brexit with Labour MP?
Answer - Yes. As 10% GDP drop, would be catastrophic and tie the hands of any leader, no matter how much they'd want to change things. Remember spending cuts during a 2-3% drop during the last recession and the pain and misery that caused. The prospect of that happening with 3x the drop? And for a much longer period? How anyone can possibly believe the impact would be less than what we've already had is beyond me.
But again, you're aware of the context, the question, and the fact this is pretty much an entirely fantasy scenario, as neither of these outcomes are possible. Yet you'll come back with "But Labour won't No Deal" and carry on being entirely disingenuous, by acting as if anyone was arguing that in the first place.
God kills 10 kittens when someone pops into a thread without even seeking context. Don't kill the kittens!
Do what you want, man, if you can discuss in all seriousness ''Tory Remain vs Labour Leave" then there's no point in talking about this. You fundamentally can't isolate 'Tory Remain' as some kind of option because, once again:
- Tories always put party over country
- Tories don't give two shits about anything other than power
- The Tory Party will never ever be united about Europe, a mythical Tory Remain would condemn the country to even more division and there's no guarantee there wouldn't be more pressure to leave.
- The Tories have proven time and again that the party functions as a massive public debating competition and none of them consider their actions to be anything other than existing within the sphere of Westminster (see the voting record of Woke Soubz vs her public proclamations)
- Tory politicians almost never have any kind of grip on reality
So yeah, it's always worth pointing out that the Conservatives got us in this mess precisely because of those bullet points and therefore any "Tory Remain" MP should have a massive asterisk next to their name. Because ultimately, you know that if Labour put forward a proposal to stay in the EU and all it needed was Tory Remainers to rebel, they never ever would.
Put me on ignore if it makes you feel better.
You did -exactly- what I posted you would. The question came up as an isolated, what if? Not an actual argument that it could happen. You know this, you've seen the context, it was even pointed out in my post. No one is arguing it could happen, what people are doing are saying "What if?"
You've just spent your entire post arguing it couldn't happen when no one asked that! This is why I can't decide whether you've disengenious or just missing that...
Yeah, I absolutely did miss that. They're absolutely right in that theoretical situation, I'm so bad at following chains of thoughts.
What's the point of the "what if?", though?
Remain is better than Leave, categorically. It's not a controversial (on here, I guess) or original position, but what's the point of planting your flag in the "I'd take Tory Remain over Labour Leave" hypothetical when it has no realistic chance of happening?
Y'know, other to express some sort of support for the Tories?
Remain is better than Leave, categorically. It's not a controversial (on here, I guess) or original position, but what's the point of planting your flag in the "I'd take Tory Remain over Labour Leave" hypothetical when it has no realistic chance of happening?
Y'know, other to express some sort of support for the Tories?
so what, supporting Labour even if they don't want to stop Brexit, means you are a Leaver with this kind of narrative.
It's just a dumb hypothetical, is all I'm saying. It's not worth planting a flag in as if it were a realistic position.
It's effectively saying "I'd support the Tories if they reversed their position on a national crisis they caused to save their party, in which the worst possible outcomes may be inflicted upon us because of their PM's red lines also to save the party" and also "fuck Labour for being compromised by a national division that doesn't exist on traditional party lines".
It's pitting Labour's unfortunate but very real dilemma over Brexit, against some fantasy version of the Tory party that doesn't exist. It is a child's view of Brexit. Black and white thinking.
Well I'm not sure why the initial poster did decide to come in with that stance, you'd have to ask them, but it inevitably spawned discussion, with funnily enough, differing points. I don't see why it's an issue to discuss on a forum, what if scenarios, albeit pointless, much like most of the discussions we have across the entirety of Era...
Implying you're a secret Tory because of that discussion is... a rather childish view, I'd say.
Yeah, I'm sorry about that post. I hoped to underline that I'm American and obviously learning about your government and your political situation. I've read other people at other places say that the EU was basically the final thing between the Tories and all-out Americanization of your social programs and your economy, and I know that there are obviously quite a few Tory remainers (which May was before she became PM and decided to resolutely stick to her exit plan) and that Labour is, in some part, unhappy with Corbyn's seeming willingness to leave.
I was reading an article on The Guardian maybe a couple weeks ago, I think it was, about the tight spot that Labour Leave MPs are in in terms of what their constituents who voted leave want and what the general party support wants re: Brexit. That, along with the discussions of the EU's role in keeping the Tories from enacting their plan and the news about upset Labour MPs who aren't happy with Corbyn signaling that he'll lead his party to play ball with May for the right Brexit plan, led me to asking what I asked. Maybe I should have asked that question with more of that context in mind. I didn't mean to offer up a political fantasy or cause discord. I apologize for that.
I was reading an article on The Guardian maybe a couple weeks ago, I think it was, about the tight spot that Labour Leave MPs are in in terms of what their constituents who voted leave want and what the general party support wants re: Brexit. That, along with the discussions of the EU's role in keeping the Tories from enacting their plan and the news about upset Labour MPs who aren't happy with Corbyn signaling that he'll lead his party to play ball with May for the right Brexit plan, led me to asking what I asked. Maybe I should have asked that question with more of that context in mind. I didn't mean to offer up a political fantasy or cause discord. I apologize for that.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-vote-backbencher-plan?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Back May's deal, then hold people's vote: plan to end Brexit deadlock
Back May's deal, then hold people's vote: plan to end Brexit deadlock
I would take that, it would take no-deal out of the equation completely. It would allow the public to ratify the decision of parliament. It would definitively seal the wound of the first referendum. I hope it happens.
Lol ERG would riot like hell because it essentially means a 2nd referendum with May's deal or Remain. She isn't going to go for it becasue it would split her party.
Said it several times this would be a good outcome. could definitely campaign on the back of being in the EU as the best deal
It won't pass as let's be honest. It is remain MPs way of winning the ref. Were this the first vote on Mays deal then maybe. But now it just looks like an obvious poker play
That's...actually a pretty good idea. No deal is taken off the table. Remainers get the second referendum and May supporters get their deal passed. Only people I see taking issue with this are the diehard brexiteers worried about giving the people another vote with an outcome they won't like.
Is there really any time to hold a referendum? I thought I'd read the whole process, from a purely organisational point of view, took two months or more?
A second ref would be enough for an extension. I think the EU would happily take it too as it's basically a win win for them.
I know it isn't Brexit but this dude is pretty good Brexit wise and I think some of you follow him.
But here he is defend terfs... so yeh
But here he is defend terfs... so yeh
British polite society is riddled with terfs. They're not all Graham Linehan level hateful but sadly pretty common because they all move in the same circles so when some of the big names in British feminism came out loudly as terfs they took a lot of people who'd never really thought about it with them.
Initially I was like "Oh fuck off... more bullshit.", but yeah, this is actually pretty smart. No-one really loses face for undermining the "will of the people".
This is definitely interesting, although it is clear as day that it is just cover for MPs to vote remain without seeming like they voted remain, the only way May deal would ever win out against Remain is if the EU wouldn't provide an extension, or the referendum wouldn't come to be in that time.
May's deal (which is just an 18 month can kick, with the vague intention of making a unicorn trade deal and ending free movement and using leprechauns to patrol the Irish border), then a vote to fix her deal seems very sensible.
Only the hard Brexiteers won't like it.
May would split her party, but hard brexit would destroy the Tory's reputation even more. People never forgave Labour for the winter of discontent. They won't forgive the Tories for the summer of shite if we crash out with no deal while the Tory old cunts brigade cheer it along.
The ERG failed in their coup and have little backbench support. May can survive their rebellion.
However, May is a coward and might just suffer hard Brexit because hard Brexit can be blamed on old Tories and (somehow) Corbyn opposing her deal, but if a compromise deal/vote went wrong then she gets the blame.
Only the hard Brexiteers won't like it.
May would split her party, but hard brexit would destroy the Tory's reputation even more. People never forgave Labour for the winter of discontent. They won't forgive the Tories for the summer of shite if we crash out with no deal while the Tory old cunts brigade cheer it along.
The ERG failed in their coup and have little backbench support. May can survive their rebellion.
However, May is a coward and might just suffer hard Brexit because hard Brexit can be blamed on old Tories and (somehow) Corbyn opposing her deal, but if a compromise deal/vote went wrong then she gets the blame.
Lol so if there was a GE tomorrow the Lib Dem's would hold the 2nd largest party. Corbyn has failed as the leader of Labour as he said to May, step aside.
British medical industry SURGES as EU health services TERRIFIED of no deal.
I'm not sure a no-deal Brexit would ruin the Tories. They clearly will have a core 30-35% of voters who will always vote for them. Any negative effects of no-deal will be successfully spun as the fault of the EU, Labour, Remainers, etc.
The Tories might lose the next election by a close amount but they will hang around like a bad smell.
The Tories might lose the next election by a close amount but they will hang around like a bad smell.
No, that's leader's favourability ratings. Nothing to do with general election voting intentions. Generally it's a measure you can use to sense check how enthusiastic a party's supporters are.
It tells me that voters have bizarre standards, she's an endless disaster zone, appoints idiots to jobs they shouldn't have, and like Grayling yesterday is incapable of getting rid of dangerously bad people.
She should be lower than everyone except the nutter in charge of ukip, I can only think it's the incumbency effect holding her figures up.
As long as the entire press and the BBC remain Tory propaganda, the party is shielded from any long-lasting consequence. The problem lies with the media of this country.
Eehhh...I wouldn't translate individuals' approval ratings to their respective parties. Labour would quite clearly be above LibDems.
Ah I thought it was poll ratings I see now.
lol
She is a disaster, She was terrible as Home Sec and an even worse PM. It really is a tussle between May and Cameron for the worse PM title.
Yeh I misread it at first I see now it's personal approval ratings, Corbyn has really sunk.
At this point I'm convinced that 50 years from now the descendants of Yvette Fielding and Derek Acorah will be attempting to exorcise the ghost of May from no 10.
Nobody would survive this shit usually but since 2016 anything goes in politics.
- Status