Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Timberrrrrrrr

A Shropshire Lad wrote: »

Rory Stewart is the only one that doesnt seem like a complete cnut

That's why he will probably go out in the next round unfortunately.

listermint

Aidric wrote: »

The format is flawed and plays in to Johnson's hand. A live studio dynamic with participants reacting to what they've heard and moreover challenging the speakers on what they've said is much more a litmus test.

This has been nothing more than a shouting match with little in the way of coherence or more importantly nothing in the way of the rhetoric being held to account because of timing restrictions.

Johnson is the winner despite saying nothing of consequence. The format was ultimately a forlorn exercise for his challengers.

You've got to feel the editors did this on purpose to line it up for him.

The BBC is stacked with brexit promotors.

Joe_ Public

Way I see it the worst thing for Rory Stewart would be to somehow win this contest and inherit the obscene mess that is the current brexit impasse from which there is no credible means of escape. Because he's an obviously highly intelligent guy, i believe he knows this and from the outset his campaign was all about creating a brand for any future contest. So far it will have exceeded all his expectations and best thing now will be to exit gracefully over next couple of days and put his backing behind whoever stands the best chance of beating johnson and hoping for the best.

54and56

I wanted Stewart because i think he's the candidate who would do least damage to the UK and internationally implementing Brexit but if he's not going to make the last two the spiteful part of me which enjoys watching characters like Basil Fawlty and David Brent embarrassingly self implode desperately wants BoJo to win.

If the Brits (Tory party) are truly determined to leave on a no deal part of me hopes BoJo makes it the biggest clusterfcuk in history.







The adult in me however acknowledges the economic and social pain a no deal Brexit would cause to so many including friends and family of mine here and in the UK so let's hope BoJo and co see sense once they are off the fence and faced with making some tough decisions.

Sam Russell

Deleted User wrote: »

If the UK does not import these items, then it's a non issue.
The UK could insist on the same or higher food standards than the EU wrt to trade with other countries, they'll be within their rights to do so.

The UK does not have the resources to police those countries that produce beef, chicken, or soya. They would require to have vets in place at abattoirs all over the world. They do not have enough for their own abattoirs. And that is just beef.

Without a FTA with the EU, they would have to open their borders to Brazil and Argentina, both with problems with EU standards with regard to F&M among other things.

If they want a FTA with the USA, agriculture has to be in play which means chlorinated chicken, hormone fed beef and pork, and GMO food, all banned in the EU.

The only way the UK will insist on EU standards is if they revoke.

Buer

Johnson is a lock after that. They didn't put a finger on him. His biggest opponent is himself. The others were far too concerned with self preservation and trying to kill off Rory Stewart ahead of tomorrow's vote. And they succeeded. He was browbeaten into submission.

Johnson was very tame but he didn't need to deliver a strong performance. His coronation in waiting is based on his persona but, make no mistake, he is not going to be able to deliver anything as PM when dealing with Europe.

Gove and Hunt spoke very well but gave nothing concrete or anything that would shift votes.

Stewart tried to play the alternate view too hard and his body language was atrocious. Slumped and staring at the floor when not speaking came across terribly.

BBC News are doing a special following the debate interviewing Tory party members around the country. The only thing that appears unanimous is that Stewart is universally disliked by the membership. His race is run if the parliamentary members are taking note.

The only thing that would give me a little hope is that the membership voting isn't as forcefully supportive of Johnson. If it goes down to the two horse race and membership vote, it will be significantly closer than what we've seen thus far. But Johnson will succeed, no doubt.

Buer

Timberrrrrrrr wrote:

That's why he will probably go out in the next round unfortunately.

Nah, he'll go out because he made a balls of tonight. Body language was terrible, other candidates negated him easily and the moment where the member of the public openly criticised him specifically was a hammer blow. Shame as he is the only one approaching reality.

A Shropshire Lad

54&56 wrote: »

I wanted Stewart because i think he's the candidate who would do least damage to the UK and internationally implementing Brexit but if he's not going to make the last two the spiteful part of me which enjoys watching characters like Basil Fawlty and David Brent embarrassingly self implode desperately wants BoJo to win.

If the Brits (Tory party) are truly determined to leave on a no deal part of me hopes BoJo makes it the biggest clusterfcuk in history.

.

I agree. There has to come a time when the architects of Brexit have to actually own Brexit. When May was trying to get a deal threw BoJo did little but throw grenades from the sidelines

Aidric

Buer wrote: »

Nah, he'll go out because he made a balls of tonight. Body language was terrible, other candidates negated him easily and the moment where the member of the public openly criticised him specifically was a hammer blow. Shame as he is the only one approaching reality.

That's a bit harsh. He was defeated by the restrictive format. The debate was dominated by the participants shouting over each other due to the clock.

Why couldn't this debate be held over 2 hours as opposed to 1?

54and56

Buer wrote: »

the moment where the member of the public openly criticised him specifically was a hammer blow. Shame as he is the only one approaching reality.

I agree, when i heard that comeback comment by the questioner, which was the only time a questioner directly criticised a candidate, felt like a hammer blow but also felt a little pre determined or staged almost.

S.M.B.

Buer wrote: »

Nah, he'll go out because he made a balls of tonight. Body language was terrible, other candidates negated him easily and the moment where the member of the public openly criticised him specifically was a hammer blow. Shame as he is the only one approaching reality.

He's got a real issue with his body language, it was really noticeable when I saw him debate before, pulling faces as members of the public respond to his points

Tonight he was caught possibly randomly falling off his chair and petulantly throwing his eyes up to the sky while others were talking.

Really doesn't come across well.

Joe_ Public

I hope they're still filming Guy Verhofstadt and his team as they watched that debate tonight and we'll get another updated episode of the documentary. How they must have p"ssed themselves laughing at it, the man who is going to become the new PM, who couldnt even get his facts right tonight and mumbled and stumbled his way through the hour, is somehow going to convince the EU to reopen the WA and move the backstop into the political declaration. I can hear the laughter from brussels from here!

Professor Moriarty

What was interesting is how Johnson emphasised that Britain must leave by the 31st. Yet, when repeatedly pressed by Maitlis, he refused to guarantee to leave by the 31st.

Dante7

54&56 wrote: »

I agree, when i heard that comeback comment by the questioner, which was the only time a questioner directly criticised a candidate, felt like a hammer blow but also felt a little pre determined or staged almost.

That member of the public was always going to criticise Stewart regardless of what answer he gave.

Buer

54&56 wrote:

I agree, when i heard that comeback comment by the questioner, which was the only time a questioner directly criticised a candidate, felt like a hammer blow but also felt a little pre determined or staged almost.

Stewart should have been smarter though. He openly stated that he had voted for the Brexit Party. That should have been enough for Stewart to identify trouble and play it with a straight bat. Instead, he came back immediately to Brexit.

The follow up programme on BBC News interviewed the questioner. He's obviously a fairly hard line Brexit supporter and Stewart was never going to get a fair shake from him. He took pleasure in bringing up his rebuke to Stewart. He said Stewart was trying to criticise him for voting Brexit by stating that was the reason there woukd be no tax cuts. Of course, Stewart was completely prudent to point that out but in those circumstances, it gained him no favour.

Buer

Aidric wrote:

That's a bit harsh. He was defeated by the restrictive format. The debate was dominated by the participants shouting over each other due to the clock.

I don't think so. The body language was atrocious. He looked like a sulky teenager being forced to go to mass.

He's the outside bet. He had two or three clear runs at talking without interruption. In his position he had to either land a body blow on someone or use his time to really connect with the public on a big issue. He did neither. Essentially, people will take two things from what he said.... that Britain needs to accept a deal with the EU if they want Brexit and that there will be no tax cuts.

Prudent and realistic but about as welcome to hear as a fart in a space suit.

Junkyard Tom

What's the rationale for seeking to be Tory leader, and UK PM, while HMS Britannia is still on a direct course to slam into the Brexit iceberg?

Professor Moriarty

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

What's the rationale for seeking to be Tory leader, and UK PM, while HMS Britannia is still on a direct course to slam into the Brexit iceberg?

Becoming Prime Minister is more important than anything else.

Dante7

I wonder is Stewart purposely scuppering his own campaign? As has been mentioned, he is not really fighting to win this campaign but rather the next one. He went from 28/1 a couple of weeks ago to second favourite at 7/1 today. He went back out to 10/1 after the debate. I don't think he really wants this poisened chalice.

Akrasia

Buer wrote: »

I don't think so. The body language was atrocious. He looked like a sulky teenager being forced to go to mass.

He's the outside bet. He had two or three clear runs at talking without interruption. In his position he had to either land a body blow on someone or use his time to really connect with the public on a big issue. He did neither. Essentially, people will take two things from what he said.... that Britain needs to accept a deal with the EU if they want Brexit and that there will be no tax cuts.

Prudent and realistic but about as welcome to hear as a fart in a space suit.

He asked them all how they would get a no deal through if parliament opposes it. Johnson completely ignored him and then nobody mentioned it ever again. Awful debate, terrible moderating, and the massive issue of the day, basically the only issue in this contest gets only half of the time with the rest filled with inane election promises that absolutely nobody thinks any of the candidates are serious about delivering

Junkyard Tom

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Becoming Prime Minister is more important than anything else.

Blind ambition writ large.

KildareP

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

What's the rationale for seeking to be Tory leader, and UK PM, while HMS Britannia is still on a direct course to slam into the Brexit iceberg?

It won't matter. Assume Johnson is going to win.
Johnson is going to the EU.
Johnson will *make* the EU change the WA.

Outcome (1)
Johnson will say, oh, look, that lazy good for nothing EU aren't even here to negotiate, look how lazy they are, its all their fault now we are going to crash out! Every negative thing that happens thereon in is 100% the EU/ROI fault.

Outcome (2)
Johnson will ask for an extension because the bullies in the EU won't agree because they are punishing the UK, oh, and the lazy parliament wasn't even here until Nov 1st anyway whixh delayed us! The delay is 100% the EU/ROI fault.

Outcome (3)
Johnson will be told to "get stuffed" by the EU. UK crashes out. EU/ROI are rude bullies. Every negative thing that happens thereon in is 100% the EU/ROI fault.

Outcome (4)
Johnson revokes under pressure from the bullying EU/ROI. Brexit being cancelled is 100% the EU/ROI fault.

Outcome (5)
UK calls the EU bluff. EU doesn't blink. Crash out by default. It is 100% the EU/ROI fault because they were intrasigent.

It's a victory for which you are utterly invincible. Who wouldn't want it!

hard copy

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

What's the rationale for seeking to be Tory leader, and UK PM, while HMS Britannia is still on a direct course to slam into the Brexit iceberg?

I suspect they suspect this will be the last time there is a Tory prime minister for a very long time so they're thinking f*ck it might as well

FrancieBrady

Stewart criticising others for using the 'Britain is great' (can't remember the exact phrase) but then indulging in the same platitudes himself at the end.

j8wk2feszrnpao

Akrasia wrote: »

He asked them all how they would get a no deal through if parliament opposes it. Johnson completely ignored him and then nobody mentioned it ever again. Awful debate, terrible moderating, and the massive issue of the day, basically the only issue in this contest gets only half of the time with the rest filled with inane election promises that absolutely nobody thinks any of the candidates are serious about delivering

Sadly, a recurring theme throughout the entire Brexit conversation within the media.

54and56

The problem with BoJo and Javid making 31st Oct a hard deadline is that it isn't and no matter how much you pretend it's an actual hard deadline it isn't. There are options to move it back and as long as those options exist pretending it's a hard deadline won't convince anyone, least of all the EU.

bilston

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

What was interesting is how Johnson emphasised that Britain must leave by the 31st. Yet, when repeatedly pressed by Maitlis, he refused to guarantee to leave by the 31st.

He tries to be all things to all men.

When push comes to shove I don't think he'll take Britain out on 31st October. Actually I've come to the conclusion that the only person likely to force Britain out of the EU on 31st October is Emanuel Macron. He could veto any extension and then the UK will be gone.

It crossed my mind that this weekend will see the 3rd anniversary of the referendum. At what point does the referendum become null and void? If the UK doesn't leave in October (and I'm less certain that Britain will leave in October) and it goes into 2020 we will be approaching 4 years since the referendum. In that scenario if I was someone aged 18-22 (over 3 million people) I'd be pretty pissed off that I wouldn't have had a say in the mess.

devnull

54&56 wrote: »

The problem with BoJo and Javid making 31st Oct a hard deadline is that it isn't and no matter how much you pretend it's an actual hard deadline it isn't. There are options to move it back and as long as those options exist pretending it's a hard deadline won't convince anyone, least of all the EU.

They're making the same mistakes as Theresa May, making many promises and commitments and red lines that they'll get stuck in later on strangled in them.

Professor Moriarty

bilston wrote: »

He tries to be all things to all men.

When push comes to shove I don't think he'll take Britain out on 31st October. Actually I've come to the conclusion that the only person likely to force Britain out of the EU on 31st October is Emanuel Macron. He could veto any extension and then the UK will be gone.

It crossed my mind that this weekend will see the 3rd anniversary of the referendum. At what point does the referendum become null and void? If the UK doesn't leave in October (and I'm less certain that Britain will leave in October) and it goes into 2020 we will be approaching 4 years since the referendum. In that scenario if I was someone aged 18-22 (over 3 million people) I'd be pretty pissed off that I wouldn't have had a say in the mess.

It's incredible to think it's three years as you say. I think Macron will huff and puff but a conditional extension will be granted. Essentially, there are only two options - an extension or crash out. There isn't time to renegotiate a deal that the EU won't renegoitiate anyway. May's deal is dead and revoke won't happen. So Johnson will threaten and bluster until mid October and then he will capitulate having been advised of the realities of a No Deal Brexit.

The can will go rattling down the road and the Brexiteers will rant and rave. Regarding your 18-22 year olds, the demographic clock will keep on ticking. Younger and more pro EU voters will come on stream and elderly Brexiteers will continue to die off until a GE comes round. All hell will then break loose.

Laois_Man

I know there are a lot of over-used soundbites made my Brexiteers...."GATT24", "The EU need us more than we need them", "Alternative arrangements", "The one we need to talk to is Merkel", "The Irish border is a non-issue dreamed up to twart us"...etc etc etc

But nobody has mentioned Sajid Javid point tonight, and it's rarely criticized, that the backstop is illegal in the terms of the EU's own article 50. It has been constantly shown that it isn't!