UK Politics Mega-thread - Page 494

On March 21 2019 05:10 Zaros wrote:


barely any conservatives will support revoking and Labour front bench is against so it won't happen.

On March 21 2019 05:43 Slydie wrote:


You are talking like she had all the time in the world to put her deal together, and plenty of opportunities to consult her obviously dysfunctional parlament along the way. Many doubted she would get any kind of sensible deal on the table at all with the time she had in her hands.

The biggest factor is that Brexit is an awful idea, but the Brits still voted for it, probably blinded by a distant past as a superpower.

On March 21 2019 05:41 Gorsameth wrote:
What has Parliament agreed on?
Only that it doesn't agree on anything.

If May went to Parliament 2 years ago to get there opinion the process would be in the exact same place it is now because there is no majority for any deal in Parliament that can also pass in the EU, which is not to say she shouldn't have done that and that it was a mistake to not consult them after it became clear any deal needed to be approved by Parliament.

I'm not saying she has done amazing or even good. But I'm not going to blame the one person willing to actually do something at all while everyone stands on the sidelines shouting how bad she is and how much better they would do without actually doing anything.

The only plan the opposition came forward with , that I know of, is Corbyn's "Lets not really have a Brexit at all" and that came out last month?

On March 21 2019 05:50 Sermokala wrote:

Theres no way that they'd chose a no deal brexit over revoking brexit right?

On March 21 2019 05:59 Zaros wrote:


The whole point of No deal is they don't have to choose it, they need to agree something else to stop it. Conservatives and Labour will not dare to revoke article 50 and there isn't time for a referendum so they can pass the buck. They would rather let no deal happen and blame May and Corbyn.

On March 21 2019 05:53 Jockmcplop wrote:


Yes Brexit was a bad idea, but it was achievable, and May's deal was achievable, but she left it far too late. She is the PM, the number of opportunities to consult Parliament (no matter how dysfunctional it is) is entirely her choice.

I'm not saying she wasn't in a bad position to begin with,she was, but she has made a huge number of incredible mistakes. Hiring David Davis as Brexit minister was the first one, the guy was showing up to negotiations having done zero preparation. No wonder it took so long to get a deal together.

Everyone in parliament is saying the same thing, whether they are for or against the deal that May has put on the table, and that is that her strategy has been catastrophic, disorganized and incompetent.

Just because a guy is stuck down a well it doesn't mean you should praise him for sawing his leg off in the hope that he will magically reappear in his house when he wakes up.



The opposition is nearly as guilty as May in this, I agree.

What I'm saying is that it takes a long time to build consensus on an issue like Brexit. Leaving it until the last minute and then being surprised that you don't have enough time to build that consensus is incredibly bad strategy.

On March 21 2019 05:43 Slydie wrote:


You are talking like she had all the time in the world to put her deal together, and plenty of opportunities to consult her obviously dysfunctional parlament along the way. Many doubted she would get any kind of sensible deal on the table at all with the time she had in her hands.

The biggest factor is that Brexit is an awful idea, but the Brits still voted for it, probably blinded by a distant past as a superpower.

On March 21 2019 07:01 Longshank wrote:

She had time to waste X months on a GE but wasn't able to invite the opposition to a single meeting? Right. And parliament works as it's supposed to. A PM who only commands a minority in the parliament isn't meant to be able to jam through decissions with no regards to the will of other MPs. She's supposed to at least try to build a consensus and she has not once even hinted at doing so.

On March 21 2019 06:52 Slydie wrote:


But then they will go down in history as the parlament who splintered and crushed the "United" Kingdom.

On March 21 2019 07:10 Zaros wrote:


To be fair to May our system isn't built for Compromise its built so one dominant side can ram through its agenda and freezes up whenever there isn't a dominant party.

A PM who was truly in search of a solution would have held votes in parliament 2 years ago for ALL possible brexit options, and tried to look for crossparty solutions, instead of opting for a hard brexit by herself and only starting to figure out what majority in parliament there could be literal months before the deadline.

On March 21 2019 18:21 Pandemona wrote:
The vote was to leave the EU plain and simple. It comes down to how you interpreted it with or without a deal, but it was straight up voted for as a divorce from the EU due to the money we were spending etc etc.

Now whether wrong or right, that is the "will of the people" they are calling for in Parliament, which is right.

The giving people a vote back will do nothing but cause more mayhem, it will again be another close vote and again each side will cause uprorar when they lose/win. Lots of people have "changed sides", i went from voting to stay first time round, to now if i had another choice i would vote to leave, but that works both ways, people who voted to leave will now vote to stay.

Most of the general consensus in the UK right now, is that this has gone on so long and our government is so stupid that we just want it over, regardless of staying in or leaving, just make a freaking decision. Mr Speaker has now delayed that even further with not allowing May to bring her deal back again which in fairness might have actually gotten through, even if it didn't nothing would have been lost. We are now going to delay until June 30th and nothing will change in the mean time.

UK hasn't shot themselves in the foot either, we survived more than long enough before the EU came along and we will survive without it again if that becomes the case.

On March 21 2019 18:21 Pandemona wrote:
The vote was to leave the EU plain and simple. It comes down to how you interpreted it with or without a deal, but it was straight up voted for as a divorce from the EU due to the money we were spending etc etc.

Now whether wrong or right, that is the "will of the people" they are calling for in Parliament, which is right.

The giving people a vote back will do nothing but cause more mayhem, it will again be another close vote and again each side will cause uprorar when they lose/win. Lots of people have "changed sides", i went from voting to stay first time round, to now if i had another choice i would vote to leave, but that works both ways, people who voted to leave will now vote to stay.

Most of the general consensus in the UK right now, is that this has gone on so long and our government is so stupid that we just want it over, regardless of staying in or leaving, just make a freaking decision. Mr Speaker has now delayed that even further with not allowing May to bring her deal back again which in fairness might have actually gotten through, even if it didn't nothing would have been lost. We are now going to delay until June 30th and nothing will change in the mean time.

UK hasn't shot themselves in the foot either, we survived more than long enough before the EU came along and we will survive without it again if that becomes the case.