EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

That's fucking tragic

Probably just a troll account?

Probably just a troll account gammon?

Ftfy

No chat for 3 days - Brexit fatigue?

I don't think anything's going to happen really til MPs come back in Sept. Lots of idiocy about who'll be PM of caretaker government but I feel the issue is more about whether or not MPs have the power to actually force a new government in the first place

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/this-is-not-project-fear-its-what-we-face-after-no-deal-brexit-3p2cdq9zd?shareToken=499d147f914408e2c7cc879f9a9841e5&fbclid=IwAR2egO90aqvgaCsxYUO_G1s1rqTS2BPS00gwU0rABcjPCBP1hJlHbz8YPVc

The times was always remain (but also a Murdoch paper) they are putting lots of alarm stories out.

The other problem is that the news is really groundhog deal.... BJ going back saying the uk needs a new deal but offering (probably nothing mentioned) no change in red lines again...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49385263

So the government's own current planning (Yellowhammer) says food and fuel shortages, hard Irish border and chaos at ports. The government says this (its own planning) is Project Fear - archcunt Gove is saying it's an old doc (it's from this month) and it's absolute worst case scenario (it's not - they've got Project Black Swan for that). But he's using his soothing voice and saying we should think positive, so let's just do that.

This Britain...

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/brexit-secretary-signs-order-to-scrap-1972-brussels-act-ending-all-eu-law-in-the-uk

And this. I posted it on news but it belongs here. Published this morning. I haven't seen any news about it anywhere

Surprised by how little chat there is about the government of national unity chat.

because it might mean having to agree with corbyn?

just a hunch.

Until the majority of Tories agree to vote for Corbyn it’s useless noise.

Or Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman.

There seems a delightful irony in suggesting a leader who has struggled to unite his own party uniting all the parties. Although he does straddle the leave-remain divide.

doesn't he only need a handful of tories to abstain to secure a majority?
granted, i can't see it happening, all plans have been libdemmed.
looks like no deal to me.

Ffs is it really reasonable to say they've been "libdemmed"?

As if in a world where they'd been unequivocally positive, those rogue Tories would have voted him in?

He's a ridiculously divisive figure and would never have got any reasonable number of Tories onside. He isn't viewing this as a government of national unity but a labour government. Painfully clear from his, and his supporters', statements.

sorry, the news report i read said everyone agreed to talk to corbyn apart from the libdems, because they said no one else would talk to corbyn. Seemed like a bit of an own goal. I turned off when they did the arithmetic and it seemed to hinge on chukka's vote carrying it through.

No matter what party you are "I have this great plan... but I have to be the leader!" often does not go down well.

OK he's the leader of the opposition, but there is nothing that then makes him leader in a government of national unity as there is no clear rulebook .

So what would be fair, every party nominates 3 people and you then do rounds of voting and pick 2 leaders from those who get most votes, one labour, one conservative?

The rulebook says that when a vote of no confidence happens queenie turns to the leader of the opposition to see if they can form a government.

Libdemmed is perfectly fair, they've been harping on about stopping brexit as their main policy, and picking up votes on it, making it almost their only idea, bollocks to brexit and all that. But actually they're more worried about having Corbyn in charge for a couple of weeks when he's said that he'll sort out a second referendum and a general election, 2 things the libdems said they want but Ken Clarke is against, yet they prefer him.

Agreed - but he can't, not unless he can bring a decent number of Tories onside as well as everyone else (it would need to be enough to offset the labour leavers).

If he can show evidence that he can do that, fair enough. But as far as I can see he can't, and yet is still insisting it has to be him in charge. Which is ludicrous, if he doesn't have majority support.

I agree they could have handled it better. But unless Corbyn can show he can command support from a decent number of Tories, then their position is fair - we need someone who can. Do you honestly think that's Corbyn?

I'm still kinda surprised at the surprise that the LD's will not back labour

He's the leader of the opposition, that's kinda how it works, there should definitely be a proper attempt by him to make that work before not following convention and looking to other people. Anyone who can't look past their dislike of the man to have him in charge for a few weeks to avoid catastrophy comes out of things looking much worse than he does.

This. No way will Corbyn pick up Tory support - he’s less popular than a no deal brexit (however bonkers that is). From that perspective the lib dem stance is rational

If Corbyn wanted to stop brexit and follow the majority of his party, he’d step aside (insert appropriate smiley...)

Right, I read somewhere it doesn't work that way. Though putting yourself forward is less subtle than "we let queenie sort it" and the she says "hey Corby..."

But it is known the Tories aren't supporting a vote of no confidence atm... so hopefully there is a plan b. Or the rebels finally actually really resign...