To think thosevwanting no deal are extrodinarily selfish?

[malificent7]

If 48% of the electorate wanted to remain surely a softer brexit is better than nothing? Those who are wanting to crash out are determined to risk our future for an outdated world view.

Sorry for typos...

You couldn’t have posted on the other 1000+ threads about Brexit

"crash out" is rather loaded terminology and neither neutral nor factually accurate. It also leads to the assumption I assume that you are either after a bun fight or an echo chamber

I voted Remain, but really...

YABVVVU. I voted Leave, not because I wanted some soft namby pamby Brexit but because I wanted a No Deal Brexit. Same applies to everyone I know who voted Leave.

A soft Brexit gives no voter what they wanted.

I voted Leave and would much prefer a no deal Brexit rather than a wishy washy deal.

I hope this makes no deal more likely now.

It was 48% of the people who voted that voted Remain, not 48% of the electorate.
That's about 35% of the electorate. Nearly 28% didn't vote.

At least with a no deal brexit we aren't shackled by ties with the EU, and we'll know where we stand. And I call it "consciously uncoupling"!

Here we go again....

I think something like 6 in every 1000 votes were spoiled votes.

You couldn’t have posted on the other 1000+ threads about Brexit

The op likes to make faux political points without contribution that wants answers along the lines of "evil tories"

As it is, do you think if remain would have won that they would have paid attention to those who voted leave and made concession on their behalf?

I will caveat before i get jumped on for with the inevitable "what did you vote for" questions.

I'm a remainer, I know it's essentially a neoliberal project so don't try and blame the Tories for austerity and be pro remain, and don't try and paint it as a right leaning issue as it does disservice to Benn and Corbyn alike and the traditional left.

I think something like 6 in every 1000 votes were spoiled votes.

Spoiling a ballot is stupid in such a binary choice, but where have you got those numbers from, not that it means anything in the grand scheme of things.

If remain had won 52:48 and the government had immediately started to transfer more powers to the EU, leavers would have been very upset.

Yet 52:48 leave and hard brexit is apparently democratic notwithstanding that the leave compaign was unclear on exactly what leave would mean, with people like Dan Hannah explicitly saying we would stay in single market and the suggestion we would have to leave it allegedly being “project fear”.

And these people claim to give a damn about democracy.

If remain had won 52:48 and the government had immediately started to transfer more powers to the EU, leavers would have been very upset.

Not a valid comparison.

And these people claim to give a damn about democracy.

Oh the irony.

Regardless, the Mays deal has suffered an historic rejection, JC has been played into putting up the VONC, its pulled the rug under the feet of the People's Vote, their 'Roadmap to Brexit' report as it was based on a negotiated deal.

We are either going to stay in via some back door (which I am kind of hoping for) or go full no deal exit.

Whatever happens will be detrimental to politics and voters. Either way its exposed quite a lot of hypocrisy of voters on the right and left, however they voted.

I don't think 'No Deal' proponents are selfish.

I think they are insane.

2 things I don't understand -

1. If a hard border between Northern and Southern Ireland was of great concern to MP's, as per TM's proposed deal, I'm bloody sure there would definitely be a hard border if we left with no deal?

1. Under TM's deal we stood to pay up to £39bn as a divorce settlement. If we went with No Deal would we still have to pay?

Are there any politically minded posters on here, who know what they are talking about, who could answer these 2 questions please?

Thanks

Finnegans A hard border would be a no-no under the Good Friday Agreement. The Irish Govt. (backed by the EU, of course) would object and there is the very real risk that NI would erupt in violence again if we tried to enforce it.

Yes we still have to pay the £s. It represents (as I understand it) cash the UK committed to before the vote and also EU pensions etc for UK nationals who worked for the EU.

In lieu of someone who knows what they're talking about turning up yet: on 1) I should think so too. On 2), the EU would say yes, and pursue that through whatever process they can find. I believe they would have a strong legal case. The UK would say no. The UK, in pushing this, would essentially be in danger of becoming a rogue state.

Yes we would the UK have legal commitments as in we signed up for stuff and commented funding for them we can not simply say fuck legal contracts and walk away.

It would be like oh i dont want to pay my mortgage off but i want to keep the house. Fuck the bank I am keeping my house but not paying off what i owe they can go fuck themselves (i am using the mortgage terms so people can understand).

At international level you cannot make commitments agree to pay money for A, B , C and then slightly later saying fuck you i am not paying you haha tough shit on you (Even the USA cannot do that as their is conquences for that most pressing one is people / countries will not want to be doing bueness with you since you do no pay or debts / are flaky fucks not worth investing in)

So any deals we can make with others will take this all in mind and offer us for less nice stuff since we have proven to be flaky fucks and rightfully be shunned / offered much less generous deals. And the government IOUs become worthless with other nations demanding UP front benefits before offering deals rather then trust "our" good word with promises of future benefits in the future.

Like fuck anyone here would work for a company that does not pay the wages of workers and as a worker you would be beyond silly to work for a company like that before getting paid (it is no different at Nation level ethier) countries would ether have to be beyond desperate for deals or completely insane to trust the word of a Nation that pointy does not follow its own commitments.

By desperate i mean like North Korea level desperate.

1. Who actually intends to build this border? The UK government? The Irish government?

No-one is the answer. It's just a theoretical concept that No-one intends to build!

1. If we were a net recipient from the EU, would we continue to get money long after we left?

Thank you Beach and Dangermouse.

Why then did so many Mps vote against the deal if the only option left - seeing as TM kept saying we would be leaving the EU with her deal or with no deal?

Surely her deal gave the UK some sort of reassurances, as opposed to no deal. Especially as we still have to fork out for divorce bill.

Unless they are holding out for another referendum and hope the majority vote to remain? What if there is another referendum and brexit wins again? Back to square one??

not a valid comparison

Why not? Going on about “the will of the people” at the same time as arguing for a hard brexit and ignoring the fact that 48% of the vote disagreed and going for the hardest brexit possible is as outrageous as taking a 52% remain vote and going for the closest possible relationship with the EU.

If the “oh the irony” was aimed at me I am not sure why. I don’t want a second referendum. That is hugely problematic.
(I argued vociferously against a referendum in the first place but that ship has sailed).

Disquieted, stop quoting tabloid soundbites and listen to reality. The EU will protect its member state Ireland in this instance. The UK made financial commitments. It cannot walk away from them by international law. If it defaults: look at other countries that do that, they go into hyperinflation and turn into serious basketcases. Do you want to turn the UK into North Korea or Venezuela?

Finnegans now there you have me. Some Tories are obviously pushing their own agenda and for some reason believe that they can continue to be that obliviously selfish fighting to the top of a society collapsing behind them. Perhaps they are waiting for the right opportunity to present themselves as national saviours. I cannot understand anyone who genuinely believes that the chaos of a No Deal scenario would be good for the country, so I struggle with that possibility. Many MPs have come together and put forward measures to try and prevent that whatever happens. Of course May could be lying, or 'dissembling' more politely, there may be other deals possible. Labour look like they are pushing party politics over national interest, but they did publish their tests for a deal early on and May's deal genuinely does fail them.

The root cause is something I've grumbled about from the beginning. No one had any clear plan for Brexit. There is no precedent. The complexity of the EU was never appreciated - it's possible many junior MPs might not fully understand it themselves, I don't. They're playing this on the fly and there is no capacity for real debate in the British political system any more, only name calling and shit stirring and point-scoring. I don't believe there's much interest in the national good: I don't think many, certainly not in the top echelons, who are even fully aware that the rest of the country exists, let alone that it is inhabited, let alone that those people might matter. Insane.

oops long sorry!