Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[Hiberno-Britannic Politics] Thanks For The Deal, I Hate It

19495969798100»

Posts

  • surrealitychecksurrealitycheck the search for the means to put an end to things an end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered User regular
    japan wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    The article 50 revocation thing that's doing the rounds is the Advocate General's opinion on the case. It's a recommendation to the court that they are not obliged to follow (but usually do).

    The actual ruling is sometime in December, I think.

    broadly it would be astonishing if they said anything other than what he said simply because the drafter has made clear his intention (kerr), and the only real reason they could come up with to stop unilateral revocation is that it would render article 50 a procedural nonsense because it could be abused by a bad faith actor. the latter is already covered by the ags opinion; the court itself has no real reason to go much further i would have thought, not least because that would involve agreeing with the uk gov which would be fairly ridiculous for them to do...

    I think it matters in a tactical sense because it means that revocation won't be a definitively available option at the time of the "meaningful vote".

    Though it is interesting that the government hasn't made the argument that it isn't a sure thing (yet), instead choosing to argue that they simply refuse to acknowledge it as an option.

    problem is parliament isnt constraining itself to things the eu has agreed anyway. things like trying to amend the withdrawal agreement to let parliament escape backstop is a far shakier thing that unlateral article 50 revocation...!

    obF2Wuw.png
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    edited December 2018
    japan wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    The article 50 revocation thing that's doing the rounds is the Advocate General's opinion on the case. It's a recommendation to the court that they are not obliged to follow (but usually do).

    The actual ruling is sometime in December, I think.

    broadly it would be astonishing if they said anything other than what he said simply because the drafter has made clear his intention (kerr), and the only real reason they could come up with to stop unilateral revocation is that it would render article 50 a procedural nonsense because it could be abused by a bad faith actor. the latter is already covered by the ags opinion; the court itself has no real reason to go much further i would have thought, not least because that would involve agreeing with the uk gov which would be fairly ridiculous for them to do...

    I think it matters in a tactical sense because it means that revocation won't be a definitively available option at the time of the "meaningful vote".

    Though it is interesting that the government hasn't made the argument that it isn't a sure thing (yet), instead choosing to argue that they simply refuse to acknowledge it as an option.

    problem is parliament isnt constraining itself to things the eu has agreed anyway. things like trying to amend the withdrawal agreement to let parliament escape backstop is a far shakier thing that unlateral article 50 revocation...!

    Apparently, neither is the public...



    Edit: I suppose this nearly illustrates the problem with referendums. We have a government that has bound itself to an apparent public demand that is materially impossible to deliver.

    japan on
    FencingsaxscherbchenCommander ZoommonikerShadowenMr RaytynicH3KnucklesCasualElldrenArdol
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    This is why a 2nd referendum is a fucking stupid idea

    AegisBurnageCommander ZoomElldren
  • Bad-BeatBad-Beat Registered User regular
    When the initial referendum was proposed, the thought process was that if Remain won, it would simply secure power for Cameron and Co.

    If Leave lost, it was always known there would be 1000 different decision trees to work through that just couldn't be decided based on a simple binary choice.

    However, Cameron and Co never imagined they would lose the vote and so, never bothered to prepare to mitigate the 1000 decisions.

    Jump to yesterday, and that failure to prepare for losing the vote suddenly caught up to Co sans Cameron in the worst way possible.

    Co sans Cameron is only held together by time. Once that runs out (next Tuesday), chaos ensues.


    ...and a partridge in a pear tree~~

    FencingsaxCommander ZoomH3KnucklesElldren
  • surrealitychecksurrealitycheck the search for the means to put an end to things an end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered User regular
    Solar wrote: »
    This is why a 2nd referendum is a fucking stupid idea

    we find ourselves in a world where literally all options are stupid

    obF2Wuw.png
    HerrCronFencingsaxBurnageCommander ZoommonikerjapanJazzAegisRhesus PositiveshrykeShadowenYoutubeMr RaytynicH3KnucklesZilla360ElldrenArdol
  • surrealitychecksurrealitycheck the search for the means to put an end to things an end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered User regular
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular

    What is this strange beast, some manner of 'politician' you say? Someone who looks at a forecast which says, "Everyone everywhere who knows anything agrees that remaining in the EU is literally better for every person in the UK than ANY possible alternative" and says, "Then we will stay in the EU and PERSUADE the public of its benefits"

    Remain! Its not a question. The other options are WRONG! Every single other option. They are all worse on every level. There is nothing but an endless ocean of shit. Lets just remain.

    That poll is clearly junk by the way, everything else I've seen shows FAR more support for remain and second referendum than that one.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
    Commander ZoomaltidSolarFencingsaxJazzAegisSporkAndrewShadowenH3KnucklesZilla360
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    Solar wrote: »
    This is why a 2nd referendum is a fucking stupid idea

    we find ourselves in a world where literally all options are stupid

    I'll take a punt on a second ref as the best shot of calling the whole thing off

    Plus I'd feel marginally better about a stupid brexit of it had been voted for explicitly, as opposed to interpreted from a referendum mandate by the current shower that is this Tory government

    Of course, in the back of my head I have that sneaking thought of ".. well there's always independence" however that is an urge I'm trying to ignore

    Casual
  • kaidkaid Registered User regular
    japan wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    The article 50 revocation thing that's doing the rounds is the Advocate General's opinion on the case. It's a recommendation to the court that they are not obliged to follow (but usually do).

    The actual ruling is sometime in December, I think.

    broadly it would be astonishing if they said anything other than what he said simply because the drafter has made clear his intention (kerr), and the only real reason they could come up with to stop unilateral revocation is that it would render article 50 a procedural nonsense because it could be abused by a bad faith actor. the latter is already covered by the ags opinion; the court itself has no real reason to go much further i would have thought, not least because that would involve agreeing with the uk gov which would be fairly ridiculous for them to do...

    I think it matters in a tactical sense because it means that revocation won't be a definitively available option at the time of the "meaningful vote".

    Though it is interesting that the government hasn't made the argument that it isn't a sure thing (yet), instead choosing to argue that they simply refuse to acknowledge it as an option.

    problem is parliament isnt constraining itself to things the eu has agreed anyway. things like trying to amend the withdrawal agreement to let parliament escape backstop is a far shakier thing that unlateral article 50 revocation...!

    Apparently, neither is the public...



    Edit: I suppose this nearly illustrates the problem with referendums. We have a government that has bound itself to an apparent public demand that is materially impossible to deliver.

    This is why when you want to do something that has this long lasting of impacts to your country and economy it should require a super majority. If you can get 60% of the country to tell you to move one way that is enough of a mandate to actually drive something like this through to completion. Short of that though its whichever way the wind blows and however the question was asked on any given day.

    SharpyVIImonikerMillH3Knuckles
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    I wonder of how many people against the second referendum just want the goverment to have the balls to just ignore the referendum results as not binding.

    Direct democracy is a failure, which is why people vote for leaders so they, you know, lead. Which is why I don't believe in referendums, they are just cover for politicians to do what they want anyways.

    Fencingsax
  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    I wonder of how many people against the second referendum just want the goverment to have the balls to just ignore the referendum results as not binding.

    Direct democracy is a failure, which is why people vote for leaders so they, you know, lead. Which is why I don't believe in referendums, they are just cover for politicians to do what they want anyways.

    The modern trend is also to hold the referendum and then have legislators interpret the results in whatever way they want to anyway.

    FencingsaxYoutubeMr RayH3KnucklesElldren
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    Also, dear God, Farange is a snob:
    He predicted "absolutely calamitous" scenes of drunken thugs brawling outside Downing Street will be used to discredit leaving the EU "for years to come".
    He really just quit UKIP just because it was getting too prole for him.

    Shadowen
  • surrealitychecksurrealitycheck the search for the means to put an end to things an end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered User regular
    edited December 2018
    japan wrote: »
    Solar wrote: »
    This is why a 2nd referendum is a fucking stupid idea

    we find ourselves in a world where literally all options are stupid

    I'll take a punt on a second ref as the best shot of calling the whole thing off

    Plus I'd feel marginally better about a stupid brexit of it had been voted for explicitly, as opposed to interpreted from a referendum mandate by the current shower that is this Tory government

    Of course, in the back of my head I have that sneaking thought of ".. well there's always independence" however that is an urge I'm trying to ignore

    yes i am screamingly sceptical of polls about second ref intentions done now

    1) the "meaningful" vote hasnt happened yet and this will shift prefs
    2) anybody thinking you can predict stable uk vote prefs even 10 weeks ahead of a vote is smonking the BIG herbs
    3) the options on a second ref are hugely important
    4) all result predictions rely on turnout predictions... that will be hugely unstable

    surrealitycheck on
    obF2Wuw.png
    RMS OceanicFencingsaxBurnageCasual
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    Also, dear God, Farange is a snob:
    He predicted "absolutely calamitous" scenes of drunken thugs brawling outside Downing Street will be used to discredit leaving the EU "for years to come".
    He really just quit UKIP just because it was getting too prole for him.

    Because his own motives for Brexit were highminded philosophical stances on sovereignty.

    Youtube
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    Hot take: In Farage's mind, UKIP just got Trump'd

    I'd actually agree with him, but our definitions for the verb "to Trump" differ a smidge

  • surrealitychecksurrealitycheck the search for the means to put an end to things an end to speech is what enables the discourse to continue ~ * ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) excelsior * ~Registered User regular
    edited December 2018
    fszrzgo5md0w.png

    mark carney obviously getting increasingly irritated by brexiter mp questions

    "this is something you learn in 5 minutes..."

    surrealitycheck on
    obF2Wuw.png
    JazzBethrynaltidFencingsaxRMS OceanicAegisBurnageshrykeShadowennever dietynicRchanenH3KnucklesZilla360CasualJuliusElldrenFryArdol
  • JazzJazz UKRegistered User regular
    Expert troll by Carney, right in the stinger.

    H3Knuckles
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Solar wrote: »
    This is why a 2nd referendum is a fucking stupid idea

    we find ourselves in a world where literally all options are stupid

    The only point of a 2nd referendum is to give enough MPs cover to do the thing they know they should do anyway and kill Brexit.

  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    I love that this article makes a point of listing Ross Thomson's other feats of idiocy at the end

    https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/1624720/aberdeen-mp-ross-thomson-tricked-by-underhanded-yet-blindingly-obvious-tv-prank/

    JazzdanxShadowen
  • Desktop HippieDesktop Hippie ATOMIKA! IT’S ME! IT’S DESKTOP HIPPIE!Registered User regular
    Thread request title: Only three more Brexit secretaries until Christmas!

    muhqxj.jpg
    shrykeShadowenForarRMS OceanicFencingsaxH3KnucklesZilla360SnicketysnickElldren
  • TastyfishTastyfish Registered User regular
    Put me down for another "Stuff is happening", just so that all of 2018s brutal plot threads begin to converge just in time for the subforums to disappear for christmas...

    RMS Oceanic
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Tastyfish wrote: »
    Put me down for another "Stuff is happening", just so that all of 2018s brutal plot threads begin to converge just in time for the subforums to disappear for christmas...

    I thought the problem was that stuff isn't happening?

  • Desktop HippieDesktop Hippie ATOMIKA! IT’S ME! IT’S DESKTOP HIPPIE!Registered User regular
    We're on page 100. I'm gonna close out this thread with a story.

    In 1492 in Ireland, two families went to war; the FitzGeralds and the Butlers.

    This wasn't terribly unusual. Medieval Ireland was filled with rival clans who often warred with one another. In fact, the dispute between these two families was so minor it was something that would never even make the history books; One family had a candidate for the position of Lord Deputy. The other family objected.

    That's it. That's all it took to start a war back then.

    It started with a skirmish outside the walls of Kildare town. It ended with the Butlers realizing they were defeated. Panic stricken, they fled to St. Patrick's Cathedral, relying on the ancient protocol of sanctuary to keep them safe.

    The FitzGeralds, in the meantime, followed the Butlers to their shelter. Everyone assumed that the victorious FitzGeralds would finish their rival clan within days. Instead, at some point during the conflict, the head of the Clan, Gerald Fitzgerald, grew sick at heart and sued for peace.

    It would have been the perfect reconciliation if it weren't for one minor problem; the Butlers didn't trust the Fitzgeralds. They didn't believe that they truly sought peace.

    Gerald Fitzgerald knew a gesture of trust and reconciliation was the only thing that could ensure trust and reconciliation. So he decided to provide one. As the Butlers cowered inside the cathedral, he ordered one of his soldiers to cut a hole in the wooden door. Once a hole wide enough had been carved, he announced himself and thrust his arm through it.

    Any Butler would have known him. Any Butler could have hacked his arm off at that moment and maimed him, possibly even killed him, and thrown his clan into disarray.

    Gerald Fitzgerald's advisors no doubt warned him against such a reckless gesture, but it all worked out in the end. The Butlers and the Fitzgerlads made peace. Both became two of the most prominent noble families in Ireland. And Gerald Fitzgerald's gesture of peace and reconciliation was remembered for generations afterwards. It even became a popular saying.

    Lads, I won't lie. We're all a bit pissed off about Brexit on this side of the Irish Sea. We're all a bit demoralized about it all. Even so, we'd probably let it go, if you let it go. If you found some way to revoke Article 50, we'd slag you off for about a decade afterwards, but we wouldn't actually do anything else.

    What I'm saying here is, if you're willing to let this whole Brexit thing go...

    ...I'm pretty sure we'd be willing to chance our arm.

    muhqxj.jpg
    Captain InertiaCommander ZoomShadowenJazztynicAldoaltidRhesus PositiveRMS OceanicKneelFencingsaxSolarautono-wally, erotibot300H3KnucklesBad-BeatMoridin889Dis'pezgenZilla360SnicketysnickHerrCronElldrenabotkinFrySkeithArdol
  • TastyfishTastyfish Registered User regular
    edited December 2018
    moniker wrote: »
    Tastyfish wrote: »
    Put me down for another "Stuff is happening", just so that all of 2018s brutal plot threads begin to converge just in time for the subforums to disappear for christmas...

    I thought the problem was that stuff isn't happening?

    Depends on your view, there's a lot of stuff that could be happening I'm glad isn't - but I think historical contempt charges and Parliament deciding they're going to come up with their own plan when May's gets voted down next Monday (or when it reaches the Lords) counts as stuff. Feels like a lot of time has been spent with nothing happening, and now the floodgates are starting to open.

    Plus we get the Spiderman and Avengers trailers soon, so they could also become "Stuff is happening" threads.

    Tastyfish on
  • Bad-BeatBad-Beat Registered User regular
    Bets on whether the next thread will last longer than this Government...?

    I'm honestly not sure!!

    Desktop Hippie
  • Desktop HippieDesktop Hippie ATOMIKA! IT’S ME! IT’S DESKTOP HIPPIE!Registered User regular
    Bad-Beat wrote: »
    Bets on whether the next thread will last longer than this Government...?

    I'm honestly not sure!!

    Throwing down my forum cred and betting the next Hiberno-Britannic politics thread outlives the next UK government.

    There! I've said it!

    muhqxj.jpg
    YoutubealtidFencingsaxSolarH3KnucklesZilla360JuliusElldren
  • ThirithThirith Registered User regular
    I have a question for those of you in the UK: at present, what do you think is the scenario that is both reasonably likely and most positive in your opinion? Some of the media I read and people I have on my FB feed seem to think that a second referendum with a Remain option is reasonably likely, but I get the impression that they're more optimistic than the situation suggests.

    webp-net-resizeimage.jpg
    "Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    Thirith wrote: »
    I have a question for those of you in the UK: at present, what do you think is the scenario that is both reasonably likely and most positive in your opinion? Some of the media I read and people I have on my FB feed seem to think that a second referendum with a Remain option is reasonably likely, but I get the impression that they're more optimistic than the situation suggests.

    I think a No Deal Brexit is more likely than May's deal, I think that a Norway deal seems possible, I think a 2nd Referendum seems possible.

    Anyone who says they can tell you what will happen is kidding themselves I think though. We're very much off the script here. I will say that since the Referendum I think the liklihood of Brexit going through have actually gone down.

  • CroakerBCCroakerBC YorkRegistered User regular
    edited December 2018
    Solar wrote: »
    Thirith wrote: »
    I have a question for those of you in the UK: at present, what do you think is the scenario that is both reasonably likely and most positive in your opinion? Some of the media I read and people I have on my FB feed seem to think that a second referendum with a Remain option is reasonably likely, but I get the impression that they're more optimistic than the situation suggests.

    I think a No Deal Brexit is more likely than May's deal, I think that a Norway deal seems possible, I think a 2nd Referendum seems possible.

    Anyone who says they can tell you what will happen is kidding themselves I think though. We're very much off the script here. I will say that since the Referendum I think the liklihood of Brexit going through have actually gone down.

    The Times did an amazing flowchart this morning that probably best describes the complexity of our current situation:

    (Twitter because the Times is paywalled, but it’s such a good graphic; Henry Zeffman is a Times political correspondent)

    Nobody knows; if I was betting, I’d say Norway Plus, or maaaaybe Ref2; But I’ve Been wrong this whole way, so....dunno, mate.

    CroakerBC on
    Zilla360
This discussion has been closed.