Brexit Discussion Thread.

[Innovindil]

43 minutes ago, Barky said:

So 1 in 4 brexiters are in no doubt that they want existing eu immigrants to not be given staying rights and almost every single brexiter demands full border control and yet we're supposed to carry on pretending that foreigners aren't the main issue.

 

What planet is this? Seriously.

Who's pretending foreigners aren't the main issue?

 

The vast majority of brexiters have cited it as a main issue. 

 

It's just not the only issue. 

[Guest MattP]

54 minutes ago, Barky said:

What planet is this? Seriously.

Earth. Although that's an idea, we'll be on Mars soon, maybe you could all go there, no borders, no racism, away from all us.

 

We could call the project "Remain Emigration Mars, Overtly Against Nationalism, Eroding Racial Stereotypes" - too long though so we'll just use the initials,

 

Knowing your recent luck they'll probably have installed immigration controls as you arrive.

[Innovindil]

7 minutes ago, MattP said:

Earth. Although that's an idea, we'll be on Mars soon, maybe you could all go there, no borders, no racism, away from all us.

 

We could call the project "Remain Emigration Mars, Overtly Against Nationalism, Eroding Racial Stereotypes" - too long though so we'll just use the initials,

 

Knowing your recent luck they'll probably have installed immigration controls as you arrive.

Heard the price of a trip to Mars is going up 3-5% though so unfortunately it prices out us poor uneducated brexit peasants. Pretty convenient. 

[leicsmac]

23 minutes ago, MattP said:

If they try to batter the wife because she wants a divorce then that's probably just as risky as giving us a good deal, maybe more, history tells us that any political union held together by fear isn't one that manages to last, I'm certain they know that.

 

I fully agree any reliance on Putin and Trump (or Le Pen) would be madness, but as I say, if their (often ugly) politics does play into our hands it would be foolish not to make the most of it given where we find ourselves in, the enemy of your enemy in poliics has always been used to gain advantageous positions.

 

I don't think anyone had said they want to be a poodle to America, we saw enough of that to last us a lifetime under the last Labour government, but if they are open to a trade deal and to work with us then of course we should, despite the distance we have far more in common with places like America, Australia and Canada than we do with Europe.

 

As has been discussed before, why is it thought that the current incoming US administration would give us any kind of a sweetheart deal on trade? They've made it pretty clear what their economic stance is, why would the UK be an exception?

 

Also...does the UK really want to cuddle up to that incoming administration anyway, given what it might have lined up domestically? Still, once again we've got into bed with countries before with human rights records that would put Trump to shame, so...

[Guest MattP]

4 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

As has been discussed before, why is it thought that the current incoming US administration would give us any kind of a sweetheart deal on trade? They've made it pretty clear what their economic stance is, why would the UK be an exception?

No one has said sweetheart deal, but a trade deal could work for both of us. Trump is going to have to send a message out that he isn't "anti free trade" - we want a deal, he'll want a deal, he likes us, he doesn't like the EU, of course there is scope there for a deal. Just for one second try to consider that he might not be the complete and total Lucifer that you imagine him to be and it is possible. If Trump behaves like you think he will he won't have a friend in the World left, he isn't completely stupid.

 

If you read any of Gove's interview with him in the Times, he was extremely positive about the prospect of this, so is Farage, these are people who have his ear and have sat down with him and talked at length, they are in a far better position to judge than the same people that just want to tell over and over again how bad Donald Trump is going to be for everybody, they are believing their own press when they don't even have a clue on how he is going to approch things.

 

I don't know if you watched the Daily Politics at lunchtime but there was a good section about why the left is in dire straits and this is part of it, it's so negative about everything, even when World leaders say positive things like we'll do trade deals they brush it off and claim it's not going to happen just because they don't like the people saying it.

 

There seems to be a complete intransigence than anyone not into their brand of politics can do anything that's mutually beneficial and it's getting really tiresome.

[Barky]

22 minutes ago, MattP said:

Earth. Although that's an idea, we'll be on Mars soon, maybe you could all go there, no borders, no racism, away from all us.

 

We could call the project "Remain Emigration Mars, Overtly Against Nationalism, Eroding Racial Stereotypes" - too long though so we'll just use the initials,

 

Knowing your recent luck they'll probably have installed immigration controls as you arrive.

Your propensity towards division ("you" and "we" etc) just shows how good a job the politicians have done on you tbh.

 

Good idea though. Once "we" have gone maybe you can rename England as Land Of Wonder - Inclusive, Quality, Love, Absolutely No Discrimination. 

 

Quite long though.

[leicsmac]

26 minutes ago, MattP said:

No one has said sweetheart deal, but a trade deal could work for both of us. Trump is going to have to send a message out that he isn't "anti free trade" - we want a deal, he'll want a deal, he likes us, he doesn't like the EU, of course there is scope there for a deal. Just for one second try to consider that he might not be the complete and total Lucifer that you imagine him to be and it is possible. If Trump behaves like you think he will he won't have a friend in the World left, he isn't completely stupid.

 

If you read any of Gove's interview with him in the Times, he was extremely positive about the prospect of this, so is Farage, these are people who have his ear and have sat down with him and talked at length, they are in a far better position to judge than the same people that just want to tell over and over again how bad Donald Trump is going to be for everybody, they are believing their own press when they don't even have a clue on how he is going to approch things.

 

I don't know if you watched the Daily Politics at lunchtime but there was a good section about why the left is in dire straits and this is part of it, it's so negative about everything, even when World leaders say positive things like we'll do trade deals they brush it off and claim it's not going to happen just because they don't like the people saying it.

 

There seems to be a complete intransigence than anyone not into their brand of politics can do anything that's mutually beneficial and it's getting really tiresome.

Trump ran his entire platform on basically being the Millwall of the world - "no one likes us, but we don't care because we don't need anyone, we're the best". Now, he and his administration might not believe that (and you're right, he does need to make a keep friends even with the power that he has) and I'm sure he feels very warmly towards the UK, a good thing - but some of his legislature and a significant amount of his supporter base do, and he needs to tread very carefully to avoid pissing them off enough that they turn on him over the next four years.

 

Any deal that isn't incredibly US-centric is going to be seen, rightly or wrongly, as betrayal by those people. You're right with the point you made a while back about them being more concerned with keeping the Mexicans, Muslims and other assorted brown people out, but they also care very much (something I overlooked come election day) about their wallets, and a trade deal that would result in them losing either money or jobs in any fashion really wouldn't go down well over there, even if Trump used the excuse that we're their biggest ally and we should be nice to each other.

 

I'm not saying that a deal can't or shouldn't be made, but for everything that he says Trump has people that he is beholden to both on domestic and foreign policy (as was mentioned in the other thread about them requiring their pound of flesh for services rendered), and it is those people who really scare me, not the man himself, because they are the ones who would be in the way of a good deal with the UK. And they hold the balance of power right now.

 

I may be overestimating the power that they have, but given the picks Trump has made so far I'm not sure I'm wrong. I'd be happy to hear counterpoints though.

[Innovindil]

6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Trump ran his entire platform on basically being the Millwall of the world - "no one likes us, but we don't care because we don't need anyone, we're the best". Now, he and his administration might not believe that (and you're right, he does need to make a keep friends even with the power that he has) and I'm sure he feels very warmly towards the UK, a good thing - but some of his legislature and a significant amount of his supporter base do, and he needs to tread very carefully to avoid pissing them off enough that they turn on him over the next four years.

 

Any deal that isn't incredibly US-centric is going to be seen, rightly or wrongly, as betrayal by those people. You're right with the point you made a while back about them being more concerned with keeping the Mexicans, Muslims and other assorted brown people out, but they also care very much (something I overlooked come election day) about their wallets, and a trade deal that would result in them losing either money or jobs in any fashion really wouldn't go down well over there, even if Trump used the excuse that we're their biggest ally and we should be nice to each other.

 

I'm not saying that a deal can't or shouldn't be made, but for everything that he says Trump has people that he is beholden to both on domestic and foreign policy (as was mentioned in the other thread about them requiring their pound of flesh for services rendered), and it is those people who really scare me, not the man himself, because they are the ones who would be in the way of a good deal with the UK. And they hold the balance of power right now.

 

I may be overestimating the power that they have, but given the picks Trump has made so far I'm not sure I'm wrong. I'd be happy to hear counterpoints though.

Not really a counterpoint, but as you've mentioned somewhere in there he could do it under the name of us being their biggest ally, which is true. And from all that I've seen (admittedly very little since the man annoys me) it seems he mostly wants to target China, since they have been "stealing" the manufacturing jobs from us. 

 

The trumpets should have enough ego-boosting from bashing the big boys without needing to be overly heavy handed with us. (hopefully) 

[leicsmac]

32 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Not really a counterpoint, but as you've mentioned somewhere in there he could do it under the name of us being their biggest ally, which is true. And from all that I've seen (admittedly very little since the man annoys me) it seems he mostly wants to target China, since they have been "stealing" the manufacturing jobs from us. 

 

The trumpets should have enough ego-boosting from bashing the big boys without needing to be overly heavy handed with us. (hopefully) 

That is of course a possibility and could end up being a key one. In fact, that could be the only way in which the UK actually gets a reasonably close to par deal.

 

Guess we'll find out.

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

If they try to batter the wife because she wants a divorce then that's probably just as risky as giving us a good deal, maybe more, history tells us that any political union held together by fear isn't one that manages to last, I'm certain they know that.

 

I fully agree any reliance on Putin and Trump (or Le Pen) would be madness, but as I say, if their (often ugly) politics does play into our hands it would be foolish not to make the most of it given where we find ourselves in, the enemy of your enemy in poliics has always been used to gain advantageous positions.

 

I don't think anyone had said they want to be a poodle to America, we saw enough of that to last us a lifetime under the last Labour government, but if they are open to a trade deal and to work with us then of course we should, despite the distance we have far more in common with places like America, Australia and Canada than we do with Europe.

 

And 1 in 6 remainers don't forget, the racist bastards.

 

Nobody needs to batter anybody. An ungenerous divorce settlement is all that is required. The EU know that the UK is leaving, but they'll want to prevent any other country being tempted to join them. So, ensuring the terms of trade for EU members are much more generous than for non-members makes sense strategically.

 

The EU taking an ungenerous approach would doubtless be reciprocated by a lack of generosity from the UK, so both sides would lose out. I suspect we'd lose out much more as we rely on the EU for a much higher proportion of our trade than vice-versa....but that's debatable as payments and other types of cooperation come into play - and we might (but probably wouldn't) be able to do alternative trade deals quickly. However, there's a case that the EU stands to lose MORE by offering the UK a generous deal as it would encourage Euroscepticism in other member states.

 

It makes sense that 2 cynical, manipulative nationalist opportunists like Trump and Putin would find it easier to get their way with a fragmented Europe of smaller states, rather than a united bloc of more than half a billion people. You presumably disagree and feel that the UK would cope just fine, swimming alone in the shark-pool with Putin and Trump. 

 

Assuming we do leave the Customs Union, it certainly makes sense to look at any US trade deal on offer, but only to sign if it was in our interest. I'd expect any US trade deal to be less generous than the one we have with the EU.

 

Do we have more in common with the USA than with Europe? I don't know Canada or the USA (top of my travel list) and inevitably it's a matter of opinion. However, I always say that I didn't know how British (& Irish) I was until I spent time on the continent, and didn't know how European I was until I spent time in Australia (which I loved, but partly because it was so different to the familiar "old world" of UK and Europe). There's the language, but whole swathes of the USA are Hispanic now, aren't they? Then there's the unregulated free market ethic, high inequality and high levels of social segregation in much of the USA. I suppose that would appeal to some.

[bovril]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

I don't think anyone had said they want to be a poodle to America, we saw enough of that to last us a lifetime under the last Labour government, but if they are open to a trade deal and to work with us then of course we should, despite the distance we have far more in common with places like America, Australia and Canada than we do with Europe.

Who's 'we'? I've always found I have more in common with people from continental Europe than America, but I'm not arrogant enough to speak for the entire British Isles. Ultimately it depends on the individual, anybody that thinks all people living within a great swathe of continental terrirtory share the same ideas and customs is naive in the extreme.

[Guest MattP]

18 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

You presumably disagree and feel that the UK would cope just fine, swimming alone in the shark-pool with Putin and Trump. 

 

Assuming we do leave the Customs Union, it certainly makes sense to look at any US trade deal on offer, but only to sign if it was in our interest. I'd expect any US trade deal to be less generous than the one we have with the EU.

I said in the post you quoted reliance on Putin and Trump would be madness, so no I'm not feeling we'd be just fine in the shark pool with them. 

 

I think we all realise the US trade deal isn't going to be as good as the single market, that's missing the point though. Any trade deal with the US won't bound us to ideological commitments the population don't want, the US won't be telling us we'll be under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, demanding open borders for their citizens or saying the deal with them means we can't do a deal with anyone else.

 

People didn't have a problem with the economics of the single market, the had a problem with the protectionism of it and the control it sought over its members.

[Guest MattP]

7 minutes ago, bovril said:

Who's 'we'? I've always found I have more in common with people from continental Europe than America, but I'm not arrogant enough to speak for the entire British Isles. Ultimately it depends on the individual, anybody that thinks all people living within a great swathe of continental terrirtory share the same ideas and customs is naive in the extreme.

I meant the country as a whole. Every poll you read would bare out what I claim. 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26885743

[Alf Bentley]

4 hours ago, MattP said:

the most interesting line in the [Verhofstat] piece is that he firmly believe both Trump and Putin now actively seek to break up the European Union, [...], this can only play in our favour once negotiations start, if Marie Le Pen does win, which I still think is unlikely, it's leave the EU's defence under nothing more than a fractured NATO with the three countries holding nuclear protection openly in conflict with it.

The incoming US presidency coinciding with out withdrawal could be the best thing that ever happened to us, I get the feeling Clinton would have absolutely sold us down the river like Obama would have.

 

2 hours ago, MattP said:

I fully agree any reliance on Putin and Trump (or Le Pen) would be madness, but as I say, if their (often ugly) politics does play into our hands it would be foolish not to make the most of it given where we find ourselves in, the enemy of your enemy in poliics has always been used to gain advantageous positions.

 

 

8 minutes ago, MattP said:

I said in the post you quoted reliance on Putin and Trump would be madness, so no I'm not feeling we'd be just fine in the shark pool with them. 

 

You did indeed say that reliance on Putin and Trump would be madness.

 

But you also seemed to relish the scenario of Trump and Putin seeking to break up the EU. You seem to see that as beneficial to UK interests, particularly if Le Pen becomes French President.

You also seem to relish a "fractured NATO" allowing a combination of Trump, Le Pen and Brexit Britain to pressurise the rest of Europe.

 

You might not want to rely on Trump, but feel he "could be the best thing that ever happened to us". You say that the "(often ugly) politics [of Putin, Trump or Le Pen]" could "play into our hands" and relish that prospect.

Not reliance, but certainly sounds as if you relish the UK being alone in the shark pool with Putin & Trump - and Le Pen for good measure.

 

(Your relevant comments in bold) 

[Guest MattP]

4 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

 

 

You did indeed say that reliance on Putin and Trump would be madness.

 

But you also seemed to relish the scenario of Trump and Putin seeking to break up the EU. You seem to see that as beneficial to UK interests, particularly if Le Pen becomes French President.

You also seem to relish a "fractured NATO" allowing a combination of Trump, Le Pen and Brexit Britain to pressurise the rest of Europe.

 

You might not want to rely on Trump, but feel he "could be the best thing that ever happened to us". You say that the "(often ugly) politics [of Putin, Trump or Le Pen]" could "play into our hands" and relish that prospect.

Not reliance, but certainly sounds as if you relish the UK being alone in the shark pool with Putin & Trump - and Le Pen for good measure.

 

(Your relevant comments in bold) 

To be clear. 

 

I wouldn't want us going it alone relying on Trump and Putin.

 

I would use their positions against the EU to our advantage if possible.

 

No relish, just realism.

 

P.S If you've been following the French socialist primary polls Montebourg ie French Corbyn is surging, if he wins a Le Pen win becomes probable in a run off.

[Alf Bentley]

30 minutes ago, MattP said:

P.S If you've been following the French socialist primary polls Montebourg ie French Corbyn is surging, if he wins a Le Pen win becomes probable in a run off.

 

I haven't been following the French election much, but your claim isn't supported by the polling data at Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_French_presidential_election,_2017

 

Montebourg might win the Socialist nomination, but the polls suggest that neither he nor Valls (his centre-left rival for the Socialist nomination) has any chance of making the 2nd round run-off. 

They're both polling less than 10% for the first round - and both set to finish behind the non-Socialist Left candidate (Mélenchon) and the centrist (Macron) - and well behind Le Pen and Fillon.

 

Fillon and Le Pen are consistently polling around 25%, with Macron (centrist) just under 20% and Mélenchon (non-Socialist Left) about 14-15%.

Barring a truly dramatic change, I presume that Macron is the only other candidate capable of making the 2nd round run-off against Le Pen or Fillon - and he'd be strong odds-on to beat Le Pen.

[Guest MattP]

6 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I haven't been following the French election much, but your claim isn't supported by the polling data at Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_French_presidential_election,_2017

 

Montebourg might win the Socialist nomination, but the polls suggest that neither he nor Valls (his centre-left rival for the Socialist nomination) has any chance of making the 2nd round run-off. 

They're both polling less than 10% for the first round - and both set to finish behind the non-Socialist Left candidate (Mélenchon) and the centrist (Macron) - and well behind Le Pen and Fillon.

 

Fillon and Le Pen are consistently polling around 25%, with Macron (centrist) just under 20% and Mélenchon (non-Socialist Left) about 14-15%.

Barring a truly dramatic change, I presume that Macron is the only other candidate capable of making the 2nd round run-off against Le Pen or Fillon - and he'd be strong odds-on to beat Le Pen.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/french-corbyn-surges-in-lefts-race-for-presidency-j2jqf282b

 

It's not beyond the realms of possibility he could beat Valls, if that happens then surely either him or Macron then drop out to avoid the certainly of a Fillon-Le Pen run off?

[Guest MattP]

Forget that, no chance of a deal between those by the looks of it.

[Alf Bentley]

11 minutes ago, MattP said:

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/french-corbyn-surges-in-lefts-race-for-presidency-j2jqf282b

 

It's beyond the realms of possibility he could beat Valls, if that happens then surely either him or Macron then drop out to avoid the certainly of a Fillon-Le Pen run off?

 

- It would be unthinkable for the Socialist Party, the main centre-left party, not to have a candidate in the 1st round (Montebourg or Valls?), but Hollande is so discredited they'll surely be eliminated

- Given how discredited the Socialist government is (& internecine rivalries on the Left), I presume it would be equally unthinkable for Mélenchon (non-Socialist Left) to pull out 

- As a centrist and someone seeking to establish a new force in French politics, Macron has no reason to pull out either - particularly as he seems to have a chance of making the run-off, and even of getting elected

 

Most likely to be Fillon beating Le Pen in the 2nd round, chance of it being Macron beating Le Pen...or a close race between Fillon & Macron. That's my reading of it.

There's bound to be some tactical voting, but I still can't see any of the Leftist candidates making the 2nd round.....though I'm very out-of-touch with French politics, so might be wrong.

[Guest MattP]

This must the most polite "fcuk off" ever in politics.

 

[Alf Bentley]

On 1/19/2017 at 17:20, MattP said:

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/french-corbyn-surges-in-lefts-race-for-presidency-j2jqf282b

 

It's not beyond the realms of possibility he could beat Valls, if that happens then surely either him or Macron then drop out to avoid the certainly of a Fillon-Le Pen run off?

 

A week's a long time in politics....

 

Montebourg hasn't even made the run-off for the French Socialist candidacy: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/23/french-election-hamon-vallswill-battle-belefts-candidate/

 

Almost certainly irrelevant, anyway. Whether Hamon or Valls is Socialist candidate, neither is likely to make the national run-off due to Hollande's unpopularity.

[Alf Bentley]

On 1/19/2017 at 13:28, MattP said:

Earth. Although that's an idea, we'll be on Mars soon, maybe you could all go there, no borders, no racism, away from all us.

 

We could call the project "Remain Emigration Mars, Overtly Against Nationalism, Eroding Racial Stereotypes" - too long though so we'll just use the initials,

 

Knowing your recent luck they'll probably have installed immigration controls as you arrive.

 

Only just seen this post.

 

When we're on Mars, I presume your lot will all be on Saturn, will you?

Your project: Bigots, Racists, Englanders, Xenophobes, Inward-looking Tossers & Embittered Reactionaries on Saturn....more commonly known by its acronym....  

[Guest MattP]

4 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Only just seen this post.

 

When we're on Mars, I presume your lot will all be on Saturn, will you?

Your project: Bigots, Racists, Englanders, Xenophobes, Inward-looking Tossers & Embittered Reactionaries on Saturn....more commonly known by its acronym....  

I have no idea what BREXIITAEROS is

Is it a splinter group of Brexit supporters from the Costa Del Sol?

[Alf Bentley]

12 minutes ago, MattP said:

I have no idea what BREXIITAEROS is

Is it a splinter group of Brexit supporters from the Costa Del Sol?

 

I doubt it. They're all unlikely vote-deprived self-motivated Remain supporters out there, aren't they?

As things stand, they could all be deported from the Costa del Sol and sent back to the grey clouds of Britain. 

[Nick]

So, Supreme Court are ruling this morning, will Theresa be allowed to trigger article 50 or will it be a Parliamentary decision to give the go-ahead?

 

I'm genuinely unsure which way this will go.....