Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Laois_Man

listermint wrote: »

Anyone listen to Edwina Curry on Newstalk this morning. Its been a while since ive heard as much unadulterated factless bluster. All nonsense about being a trading nation going back hundreds of years so we understand trade. Nothing will change.

Here it is....

https://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/highlights-from-newstalk-breakfast/edwina-currie-britain-can-bread-buttered-sides

One particular exchange that sums it all up:

Mark Cagney: "Edwina, you can't have your bread buttered on both sides"

Edwina Currie: "Well actually we can"

Other nuggets:

"The EU has just done a trade agreement with Japan - did they make Japan sign a WA before doing that deal"?

"There was a lovely piece on BBC TV yesterday about how we're going to be OK because there's large warehouses stuffed with large quantities of tins and tins of tomatoes bought in from Italy"

:D:D:D:D

P.S. Cagney was shoite!

Nody

murphaph wrote: »

I still think Johnson only has one viable path to take now. GE at the last minute, possibly even directly after crash out but before implications are felt widely. Neutralise the DUP by regaining a solid majority (Brexit party are dead once Brexit has actually happened) and ask the EU for an FTA based more or less on the NI only backstop.

No deal and no FTA with the EU (and the US based on what senior US politicians are saying) means the UK would collapse, like really collapse.

I agree on the GE but I think they want to push it to be as close to Brexit day (preferably a day or two before) as possible; if for no other reason it allows him to dump DUP and ask for an extension (look with our GE we have changes that needs to be discussed etc.) to get that deal (through "tough and hard negotiations") and not crash out. He'll say he delivered Brexit, he got UK to elect it's own way and here's a long list of bad things that would have happened if I allowed us to crash out so really I acted responsibly kind of approach.

lawred2

Laois_Man wrote: »

Here it is....

https://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/highlights-from-newstalk-breakfast/edwina-currie-britain-can-bread-buttered-sides

One particular exchange that sums it all up:

Mark Cagney: "Edwina, you can't have your bread buttered on both sides"

Edwina Currie: "Well actually we can"

Other nuggets:

"The EU has just done a trade agreement with Japan - did they make Japan sign a WA before doing that deal"?

"There was a lovely piece on BBC TV yesterday about how we're going to be OK because there's large warehouses stuffed with large quantities of tins and tins of tomatoes bought in from Italy"

:D:D:D:D

P.S. Cagney was shoite!

Newstalk are only interested in winding listeners up to generate reaction.. Best avoided.

Tell me how

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/eucopresident/status/1163757521582116864

Tusk has responded. Nothing new.

Simon Coveney hammering home the consistency element of EU position.

https://twitter.com/simoncoveney/status/1163759623515660288

Short, concise, no risk of obfuscation or misinterpretation.

hopefully Katya Adler will read both tweets and decline from saying 'There are signs the EU are wavering' on the next Brexitcast.

VinLieger

lawred2 wrote: »

Newstalk are only interested in winding listeners up to generate reaction.. Best avoided.

Yup their morning show has devolved into click bait for the ears

prawnsambo

lawred2 wrote: »

Newstalk are only interested in winding listeners up to generate reaction.. Best avoided.

That's probably true about some of their programming, but it's not universal. I doubt very much if Pat Kenny would have been as feeble as Mark Cagney.

FrancieBrady

Laois_Man wrote: »

Here it is....

https://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/highlights-from-newstalk-breakfast/edwina-currie-britain-can-bread-buttered-sides

One particular exchange that sums it all up:

Mark Cagney: "Edwina, you can't have your bread buttered on both sides"

Edwina Currie: "Well actually we can"

Other nuggets:

"The EU has just done a trade agreement with Japan - did they make Japan sign a WA before doing that deal"?

"There was a lovely piece on BBC TV yesterday about how we're going to be OK because there's large warehouses stuffed with large quantities of tins and tins of tomatoes bought in from Italy"

:D:D:D:D

P.S. Cagney was shoite!

Edwina is another of that curious UK breed - originally a Remainer but now fervent Leave. Impossible to pin down in a debate because she keeps going off on the imperial days/Empire/GREAT Britain tack.

prawnsambo

Tell me how wrote: »

Simon Coveney hammering home the consistency element of EU position.

https://twitter.com/simoncoveney/status/1163759623515660288

Short, concise, no risk of obfuscation or misinterpretation.

hopefully Katya Adler will read both tweets and decline from saying 'There are signs the EU are wavering' on the next Brexitcast.

Well the immediate reaction is that Tusk was too harsh.


An overreaction. Stating the obvious is OTT apparently.

Tell me how

lawred2 wrote: »

Newstalk are only interested in winding listeners up to generate reaction.. Best avoided.

Pat Kenny is still the leading current affairs presenter on any station in my view.

Edwina has been on the Breakfast show, Ivan Yates and Pate Kenny and behaves pretty much the same on all of them. She never retracts a position no matter how absurd it is and even when it is pointed out to her.

She's Kate Hoey, Julia HArtley Brewer, Isabel Oakshott only a few years older.

Brexit is where Brexit is because of the self-belief that those that want have to ignore reality and stick to their preferred narrative.

lawred2

What was too harsh?

Was just a repetition of an already stated and known position...

Either Sam Coates is telling fibs or these Brexiteers are of a very soft shelled variety

Tell me how

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well the immediate reaction is that Tusk was too harsh.

An overreaction. Stating the obvious is OTT apparently.

Sure sign what he said was on point.

lawred2

Tell me how wrote: »

Pat Kenny is still the leading current affairs presenter on any station in my view.

Edwina has been on the Breakfast show, Ivan Yates and Pate Kenny and behaves pretty much the same on all of them. She never retracts a position no matter how absurd it is and even when it is pointed out to her.

She's Kate Hoey, Julia HArtley Brewer, Isabel Oakshott only a few years older.

Brexit is where Brexit is because of the self-belief that those that want have to ignore reality and stick to their preferred narrative.

We all know who Eoghan Harris and Edwina Currie are and what they offer... You can't expect much else from a pig but a grunt.

In that context - entertaining them on the radio is for one purpose - to wind people up.

It isn't for balance.

Tell me how

lawred2 wrote: »

We all know who Eoghan Harris and Edwina Currie are and what they offer... You can't expect much else from a pig but a grunt.

In that context - entertaining them on the radio is for one purpose - to wind people up.

It isn't for balance.

I disagree, it lets people know just what the mentality of some are who are advocating for Brexit.
No point having moderates on or remainers. To have Edwina on once every two weeks or show touches base with the hardcore and their reaction (or lack of) to the evidence.

trellheim

No, its Cummings and Johnson reacting when the message gets picked up by EUCO when (as I said above) the audience was UK internal

"oh fk the EU actually is listening to this stuff".

Alternatively its all some Rasputin/Svengali bullcrap but I am not buying it

prawnsambo

lawred2 wrote: »

What was too harsh?

Was just a repetition of an already stated and known position...

Either Sam Coates is telling fibs or these Brexiteers are of a very soft shelled variety

Well the message was that Johnson and his government are lying. He didn't say it in so many words, but it's the obvious conclusion.

Enzokk

listermint wrote: »

Anyone listen to Edwina Curry on Newstalk this morning. Its been a while since ive heard as much unadulterated factless bluster. All nonsense about being a trading nation going back hundreds of years so we understand trade. Nothing will change.

Oh and the usual Ireland needs Britain more than Britain needs ireland. Felt like punching the radio as it was such utter crap.

They're in for no deal, simple as that. And they will expect the EU to fix it for them once it all goes belly up. That is their plan front and center folks. Its their plan because the people making it will profit from it financially and they wont have to adhere to standards anymore their backers can do what they like.

Its no more complicated than financial greed for a select few.

Laois_Man wrote: »

P.S. Cagney was shoite!

Actually I thought the questioning was better than the previous time she was on. She was allowed to spout how things would be great and the projections are just project fear and everything will be fine without so much as a whimper from the presenter. At least this time she has been shown to be a charlatan with the bread buttered on both sides line.

trellheim wrote: »

Remember folks

NO DEAL happens as we are right now - in 70 days UK are out without a deal - a huge move is required for any other outcome

Even if Johnson gets a deal through, which will not be different or he gets the WA through somehow, there is very little time for legislation and the EU must surely realize that once again giving a extension will not solve anything if the will isn't actually there. At least with May she wanted to get the WA and subsequent legislation done, with Johnson you get the feeling he and Cummings could scupper their own deal for the giggles.

endacl

Flex wrote: »

UK Prime Minister Johnson has this evening wrote a letter to Donald Tusk

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/boris-johnson/news/106014/read-full-boris-johnsons

In it he refers to the 'undemocratic backstop' as being nonviable and makes out that the backstop actually undermines and threatens the GFA. In exchange he suggests the backstop be replaced by commitments to implementing alternative arrangements.

Effectively its absolutely nothing new; 'replace the backstop with a pledge to seek alternative arrangements before the end of the transition period'. My feeling on this is that as others have mentioned here, the UK government and media is full steam ahead at its 1984 style brainwashing of the UK populace but is getting zero public reactions from the EU or EU capitals and is becoming frustrated. I believe this is an attempt to draw a public reaction that they can use to feed the propaganda machine at the moment, and as such I really hope its met with continued silence.

The only appropriate response:

“Dear Prime Minister.

Thank you for taking the time to write.

Yours sincerely.

The EU.”

Enzokk

If there is an election you don't need to be a highly paid consultant to know how to counter Johnson. You just show his lies and keep hammering that he is a liar who cannot be trusted.

Heathrow 3rd runway - "I will lie down in front of the bulldozers"

NHS - £350m per week

Voting against and then for the same deal when he said it was the UK becoming a vassal state of the EU. So he voted for the UK becoming a vassal state of the EU? Or did he lie about it before?

These are just the recent ones, you could have lots of videos of his lies and you just keep hammering on how much he lies and how his word cannot be trusted. When he makes a manifesto pledge you question whether it will be like his Heathrow pledge where he missed the vote and threw his constituents under the bus.

ArmaniJeanss

Nody wrote: »

On a different thread as I'm not a football fan but how do you all think Joe down the pub will react to the fact his favorite football team have to sell off some of their big names? The impact will go downwards as well as the English clubs will look at poaching players to fill the existing gaps as well from lower leagues creating a chain effect and of course the cost of players will go up (I can't see many players accepting GBP contracts for example).

Not a huge lot changes in football.
Salary contracts in Euro have been pretty standard for the best foreign players for a long while (pre Brexit). As long as they continue to pay the money they do then they will get their fare share of the top stars.
The last TV deal was super solid. Revenues streams around the world will somewhat mitigate against problems with sterling.

Minor issues would be that won't be easily able to sign underage players from EU countries any longer, and possible problems with away fans travelling.

Big potential issues would be that they no longer have EU protection against future FIFA/UEFA rule changes. e.g., if FIFA says only 3 foreigners per team then an exemption will always be made for the EU as it would contravene FOM.

Tell me how

Enzokk wrote: »

If there is an election you don't need to be a highly paid consultant to know how to counter Johnson. You just show his lies and keep hammering that he is a liar who cannot be trusted.

Heathrow 3rd runway - "I will lie down in front of the bulldozers"

NHS - £350m per week

Voting against and then for the same deal when he said it was the UK becoming a vassal state of the EU. So he voted for the UK becoming a vassal state of the EU? Or did he lie about it before?

These are just the recent ones, you could have lots of videos of his lies and you just keep hammering on how much he lies and how his word cannot be trusted. When he makes a manifesto pledge you question whether it will be like his Heathrow pledge where he missed the vote and threw his constituents under the bus.

You know that scene from the Simpsons where Marge questions Homer on what happened to the car and he says "You're living in the past Marge, quit living in the past"?
Even though Johnson's failings are plenty, to focus on them will allow the Tory to claim the high ground in that they are the ones looking to the future.

They will paint a picture of a socialist government (bordering on communism) where the successful must pay for everything and working class have everything handed to them with Corbyn nationalising everything he can which they say will lead to massive tax increases and cuts in infrastructure and development projects which will be needed to get past Brexit.

Corbyn is the Tories biggest arrow in their bag if he is Labour leader going in to a GE.

Enzokk

There has been a coordinated response to the Johnson letter. We have had the tweet from Tusk and there has been responses from diplomats as well.

https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/1163768799356739589?s=20

https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/1163769647033913344?s=20

https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/1163770469100793856?s=20

The interesting tweet for me is the second to last one. Sammy Wilson was also arguing this yesterday that because there are different monetary and VAT jurisdictions between Ireland the the UK but the border wasn't needed it meant that with other different regulations it would mean a border could be avoided as well. The reply from the EU is obvious and quite simple,

'EU doc says it is "misleading" to assert that Ireland has separate jurisdictions (legal, political, economic and monetary) can be managed with an open border.
"EU law provides the common framework needed to enable frictionless trade b/w member states today."'

So the reason for no border, apart from the single market and customs union is that all of this is underpinned by EU law and the ECJ. If you want to leave the SM and CU and jurisdiction of the ECJ then there is no way that you can guarantee no hard border. No amount of goodwill and spirit and can do attitude will change this.

Professor Moriarty

Enzokk wrote: »

If there is an election you don't need to be a highly paid consultant to know how to counter Johnson. You just show his lies and keep hammering that he is a liar who cannot be trusted.

Heathrow 3rd runway - "I will lie down in front of the bulldozers"

NHS - £350m per week

Voting against and then for the same deal when he said it was the UK becoming a vassal state of the EU. So he voted for the UK becoming a vassal state of the EU? Or did he lie about it before?

These are just the recent ones, you could have lots of videos of his lies and you just keep hammering on how much he lies and how his word cannot be trusted. When he makes a manifesto pledge you question whether it will be like his Heathrow pledge where he missed the vote and threw his constituents under the bus.

The Times fired him for making up a quote in an article he wrote. Michael Howard fired him when, as a minister, he lied about an affair.

Enzokk

Tell me how wrote: »

You know that scene from the Simpsons where Marge questions Homer on what happened to the car and he says "You're living in the past Marge, quit living in the past"?
Even though Johnson's failings are plenty, to focus on them will allow the Tory to claim the high ground in that they are the ones looking to the future.

They will paint a picture of a socialist government (bordering on communism) where the successful must pay for everything and working class have everything handed to them with Corbyn nationalising everything he can which they say will lead to massive tax increases and cuts in infrastructure and development projects which will be needed to get past Brexit.

Corbyn is the Tories biggest arrow in their bag if he is Labour leader going in to a GE.

Johnson's pitch for leadership was his past record in London. It is one of the positives he actually has, that he as a Conservative was able to win the Mayoral elections, twice, in Labour stronghold of London. So I don't know if his team will want to whitewash those victories from his record.

In any case you just have to point to the Garden Bridge as one of his future projects to see how the future under Johnson will look like. The problem is you have Corbyn on the other side and he had given so much ammunition as well. What is the best option now? A Lib Dem minority government?

prawnsambo

Enzokk wrote: »

If there is an election you don't need to be a highly paid consultant to know how to counter Johnson. You just show his lies and keep hammering that he is a liar who cannot be trusted.

Heathrow 3rd runway - "I will lie down in front of the bulldozers"

NHS - £350m per week

Voting against and then for the same deal when he said it was the UK becoming a vassal state of the EU. So he voted for the UK becoming a vassal state of the EU? Or did he lie about it before?

These are just the recent ones, you could have lots of videos of his lies and you just keep hammering on how much he lies and how his word cannot be trusted. When he makes a manifesto pledge you question whether it will be like his Heathrow pledge where he missed the vote and threw his constituents under the bus.

It actually doesn't matter to the brexit believers that he has done all these things. He's their man and he's going to deliver their democratic decision. A bit like the contradiction of Trump being supported by evangelical Christians. It doesn't matter that he's lied and philandered, he's going to deliver them from the libtards.

Johnson is spouting all the contradictory stuff that the brexiters have been primed with for years. Using no-deal as a bargaining chip (regardless of the fact that it's hugely damaging), refusing to negotiate with the EU (even though they've signed up not to), talking about alternative arrangements without any specificity, etc. He's ticking all their boxes for them and they're lapping it up. And it seems to me that he's made a pre-election deal with Farage where the BP will target Labour seats in leave constituencies in order to maximise the vote for both parties.

Calina

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The Times fired him for making up a quote in an article he wrote. Michael Howard fired him when, as a minister, he lied about an affair.

Michael Howard was never PM. He spent his Tory leadership in opposition. Johnson was a shadow minister not a minister.

Tell me how

Enzokk wrote: »

Johnson's pitch for leadership was his past record in London. It is one of the positives he actually has, that he as a Conservative was able to win the Mayoral elections, twice, in Labour stronghold of London. So I don't know if his team will want to whitewash those victories from his record.

In any case you just have to point to the Garden Bridge as one of his future projects to see how the future under Johnson will look like. The problem is you have Corbyn on the other side and he had given so much ammunition as well. What is the best option now? A Lib Dem minority government?

That's a big question.
Maybe, but I don't think Joe Swinson is cut out to be PM (certainly not at this point).

I think best option would be a labour revolt to remove Corbyn and then a Labour/Lib dem coalition of sorts.

Bear in mind, next Parliament will probably include several Brexit Party members so it's going to be aggressive.

Edit, I just realised that if Corbyn stays as Labour leader, I don't think I actually know what the best option would be after a GE.

Valhallapt

Tell me how wrote: »

Simon Coveney hammering home the consistency element of EU position.

https://twitter.com/simoncoveney/status/1163759623515660288

Short, concise, no risk of obfuscation or misinterpretation.

hopefully Katya Adler will read both tweets and decline from saying 'There are signs the EU are wavering' on the next Brexitcast.

She should be in jail, I can’t believe how much she has mislead the general population.

Don’t bother worrying about the no deal stuff... I have heard that the EU will blink on the 28th of March....

Professor Moriarty

Calina wrote: »

Michael Howard was never PM. He spent his Tory leadership in opposition. Johnson was a shadow minister not a minister.

Correct. I forgot to put in 'shadow'.

Infini

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well the immediate reaction is that Tusk was too harsh.


An overreaction. Stating the obvious is OTT apparently.

The simple truth is too many of them in that goverment are either in total denial of reality, are completely incompetent, are just plain braindead stupid or are intentionally malicious and are driving this purely for personal profit.

What need's to be hammered home consistently and constantly is that this is a British Goverment decision to leave the EU, leave the single market and reestablish a border in a province that for decades was essentially a disputed region. Ireland only asked for this for Northern Ireland, they were given a UK wide backstop as a concession by the EU. This was their idea not the EU.

What also needs to be hammered home is that any and all consequences of the British Goverment's decision to crash out with no deal is just that: Consequences of their failure to be realistic. Any carryon about "anti-democratic" backstop and such should simply be countered by the fact the British Government proposed this. Make them own their decisions and not try and escape them. Any and all fallout of this will also fall on the British Government too as they'll be diplomatically, politically and possibly economically Bankrupt from such a failed excercise in Vainglory and Stupidity.

Laois_Man

Tell me how wrote: »

That's a big question.
Maybe, but I don't think Joe Swinson is cut out to be PM (certainly not at this point).

I'm serious and not trying to be funny

The current PM and most recent former PM isn't/wasn't cut out to PM either!


It won't happen anyway. It will have to be a labour PM, but somehow, not Corbyn!