UK PM May looking at second Brexit vote options if talks fail - Telegraph

[Spidey]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

You are still getting this wrong even though I set it out for you recently. Cameron had the wind put up him by the big gains that UKIP made in the EU elections in 2014. These are the European Parliament elections that you say no one takes a blind bit of notice of!

 

The UK local elections were coincident with the GE of 2015, when Cameron already had pledged the EU referendum in the CON manifesto.

 

 

You are getting it wrong, I'm afraid.

[nauseus]

15 minutes ago, Spidey said:

You are getting it wrong, I'm afraid.

Explain that then. Take your time. 

[Spidey]

14 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Explain that then. Take your time. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_United_Kingdom_local_elections

 

Conservatives down 335. UKIP up 139.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282

 

Cameron pledges referendum 2013.

[aright]

3 hours ago, stephenterry said:

While the referendum result was democratic, 17 m out of 65 m (26%) is not a democratic rationale for leaving the EU or even staying in the EU if it had been reversed. 

 

If we were back in 2016, I would have expected the government to have set boundaries as to what would be an acceptable rationale to decide whether moving ahead with Brexit or not would be beneficial for the UK. That meant identifying and publicising all the pros and cons and effects on the UK population by either leaving or remaining - all of which were ignored by May and her government. That, IMO, is inexcusable.

 

In principle, had that been achieved, and people were made aware of the consequences, both positive and negative and the financial impact on the economy, I would have accepted whatever decision the government chose to take whether to leave or remain. 

 

Indeed, she never had a PLAN, still doesn't 3 years down the line. That is why, now, I am against leaving because it hasn't been thought through and proven with any certainty that Brexit would benefit Britain. Quite the contrary.

 

 

This is far too simplistic. Her plan was mandated...….leave. Her problem was the EU also had a plan...…. try to stop them leaving and if that is not possible make it as difficult and painful as possible.

Had the UK had a committed Brexiteer in charge of Project Leave we would be out by now

Sorry but there I go again blaming the EU. 

[transam]

1 minute ago, aright said:

This is far too simplistic. Her plan was mandated...….leave. Her problem was the EU also had a plan...…. try to stop them leaving and if that is not possible make it as difficult and painful as possible.

Had the UK had a committed Brexiteer in charge of Project Leave we would be out by now

Sorry but there I go again blaming the EU. 

My mum blamed a Junker for bombing her out of two East End  London houses....????

[Spidey]

5 minutes ago, aright said:

This is far too simplistic. Her plan was mandated...….leave. Her problem was the EU also had a plan...…. try to stop them leaving and if that is not possible make it as difficult and painful as possible.

Had the UK had a committed Brexiteer in charge of Project Leave we would be out by now

Sorry but there I go again blaming the EU. 

True regarding the EU plan. However, the EU held all the cards, the UK held none. Whoever led the negotiations for the UK would have come back with the same result. Always was a poison chalice. Why do you think Johnson and Gove ducked out of the leadership race? Same reason that May will not be able to stand down until Brexit is concluded. She's the Tories sacrificial lamb, who will be blamed for everything before being kicked into the long grass and the real leaders of the Tory party, white as the driven snow, step forward and claim their throne. Poor cow.

[DILLIGAD]

My mum blamed a Junker for bombing her out of two East End  London houses....[emoji1787]

Was it the Junker, or the Fokker who flew it? (Sorry, Old Joke)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[transam]

5 minutes ago, DILLIGAD said:

Was it the Junker, or the Fokker who flew it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Spidey said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_United_Kingdom_local_elections

 

Conservatives down 335. UKIP up 139.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282

 

Cameron pledges referendum 2013.

The 2013 locals were partial and minor, with Labour making the best gains.

 

But this is the real reason the referendum actually happened:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_European_Parliament_election_in_the_United_Kingdom

Results of the 2014 European Parliament election for the United Kingdom^[46][47]

Party		Votes			Seats
		Number	%	+/-	Seats	+/-	%
	UK Independence Party	4,376,635	26.6	10.6	24	11	32.9
	Labour Party	4,020,646	24.4	9.2	20	7	27.4
	Conservative Party	3,792,549	23.1	3.8	19	7	26.0

[aright]

36 minutes ago, Spidey said:

True regarding the EU plan. However, the EU held all the cards, the UK held none. Whoever led the negotiations for the UK would have come back with the same result. Always was a poison chalice. Why do you think Johnson and Gove ducked out of the leadership race? Same reason that May will not be able to stand down until Brexit is concluded. She's the Tories sacrificial lamb, who will be blamed for everything before being kicked into the long grass and the real leaders of the Tory party, white as the driven snow, step forward and claim their throne. Poor cow.

The most effective card the EU had was the deadline fixed by Article 50 which said we were out in 2 years. With so many people saying we would not leave without a deal the EU knew all it had to do was bide it's time.

[Spidey]

2 minutes ago, aright said:

The most effective card the EU had was the deadline fixed by Article 50 which said we were out in 2 years. With so many people saying we would not leave without a deal the EU knew all it had to do was bide it's time.

So why have they given us a number of extensions since then?

[Spidey]

7 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The 2013 locals were partial and minor, with Labour making the best gains.

 

But this is the real reason the referendum actually happened:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_European_Parliament_election_in_the_United_Kingdom

Results of the 2014 European Parliament election for the United Kingdom^[46][47]

Party		Votes			Seats
		Number	%	+/-	Seats	+/-	%
	UK Independence Party	4,376,635	26.6	10.6	24	11	32.9
	Labour Party	4,020,646	24.4	9.2	20	7	27.4
	Conservative Party	3,792,549	23.1	3.8	19	7	26.0

As I said in my post (with link) Cameron pledged a referendum in 2013.
 

 

[Spidey]

2 hours ago, mlkik said:

The pound devalued as soon as the brexit vote happened.

 

2 hours ago, transam said:

So why did it drop drastically in 2010.....Nufink to do with Brexit..

 

The pound dropped from near 70 in 2007 onwards, in 2010 it was in the 40's......????

The pound/ baht had been steady at 50 baht/GBP for several years. Days before the vote, a poll came out which predicted an easy win for remain. The £ immediately jumped to 55. As soon as the result was known the £ started to tank, not stopping until it reached the low 40s. Then the Baht strengthened against most Western currencies, leaving us with the Baht now floating around 40/£.

 

I wasn't here in 2010 and don't know why it tanked, definitely not Brexit, I can only guess that it was linked to the financial crash. Others may be better informed. 

 

It's my belief that if Brexit were abandoned, the £ would return to the upper 40s, but who knows.

[aright]

5 minutes ago, Spidey said:

So why have they given us a number of extensions since then?

All part of the continuance of the stop us leaving plan in the hope of a change of heart and to give the appearance of being genuine nice guys. Without the extensions we would have likely left with no deal and that's not what the EU want. I have done a little union negotiation myself in the USA and good faith is seldom on the table. 

[Jip99]

Just now, Spidey said:

 

The pound/ baht had been steady at 50 baht/GBP for several years. Days before the vote, a poll came out which predicted an easy win for remain. The £ immediately jumped to 55. As soon as the result was known the £ started to tank, not stopping until it reached the low 40s. Then the Baht strengthened against most Western currencies, leaving us with the Baht now floating around 40/£.

 

I wasn't here in 2010 and don't know why it tanked, definitely not Brexit, I can only guess that it was linked to the financial crash. Others may be better informed. 

 

It's my belief that if Brexit were abandoned, the £ would return to the upper 40s, but who knows.

 

 

It didn't actually reach 55 just prior to Brexit, it spiked at 53 for the reasons you rightly mention.  2010 and 2013 saw big drops on a step down from 55 to 46, then 50 to 44.

 

https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=THB&view=5Y

 

 

 

 

 

[nauseus]

17 minutes ago, Spidey said:

As I said in my post (with link) Cameron pledged a referendum in 2013.
 

 

So did Blair in 2004.

[Spidey]

4 minutes ago, aright said:

All part of the continuance of the stop us leaving plan in the hope of a change of heart and to give the appearance of being genuine nice guys. Without the extensions we would have likely left with no deal and that's not what the EU want. I have done a little union negotiation myself in the USA and good faith is seldom on the table. 

Likewise in the UK. I would generally agree.

[Jip99]

Just now, oilinki said:

And there I were, thinking that it was the government of UK which asked for the extensions.. Silly me.

 

Nobody wants no-deal. That's given. 

 

 

Actually,........................ I am beginning, reluctantly, to favour 'No Deal'.

 

It won't happen (and that is probably for the best) but in some ways I would rather have them sort a No Deal mess than have the current mess.

[Spidey]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

So did Blair in 2004.

Yep. Another paragon of virtue. 555.

 

Difference was Blair wisely didn't carry out his threat/promise.

 

Cameron bet his career on getting a remain vote. I'm sure he regrets calling a referendum to this day.

[Spidey]

3 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

Actually,........................ I am beginning, reluctantly, to favour 'No Deal'.

 

It won't happen (and that is probably for the best) but in some ways I would rather have them sort a No Deal mess than have the current mess.

What about remain? Think about it, you know it makes sense.

[aright]

6 minutes ago, oilinki said:

And there I were, thinking that it was the government of UK which asked for the extensions.. Silly me.

 

Nobody wants no-deal. That's given. 

Yes silly you. The government did ask for the extensions but it was only in the gift of the EU to give them. Had they wanted us to leave without a deal they could have said no. 

It's not given......We may be in the minority but I and many people like me would welcome a no deal and we are not nobody.

[transam]

3 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Yep. Another paragon of virtue. 555.

 

Difference was Blair wisely didn't carry out his threat/promise.

 

Cameron bet his career on getting a remain vote. I'm sure he regrets calling a referendum to this day.

Not on his pension and new job salary....Well I wouldn't....

[nauseus]

8 minutes ago, oilinki said:

And there I were, thinking that it was the government of UK which asked for the extensions.. Silly me.

 

Nobody wants no-deal. That's given. 

The UK asked, the EU gave, very easily and quickly. Can you not see the significance?    

[Spidey]

15 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

It didn't actually reach 55 just prior to Brexit, it spiked at 53 for the reasons you rightly mention.  2010 and 2013 saw big drops on a step down from 55 to 46, then 50 to 44.

 

https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/

Thanks for the chart. I converted it to a 10 year period and it became apparent that the 2 dips, 2010 and 2013 were relatively short lived and the £ soon recovered. I would estimate that in the period 2010 - 2016 the average rate for £/baht was around 50, if not higher. This is also how I remember it.

 

This time it's a much more sustained fall, and greater, with no sign of recovery.

[tebee]

29 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The UK asked, the EU gave, very easily and quickly. Can you not see the significance?    

2 reason

 

First no deal is much worse for many EU countries that some sort of deal.

 

Second No deal will be disastrous for the UK. The EU wants to make sure the UK does this entirely of it's own volition. It doesn't want to be seen  forcing the UK out and causing that disaster.  

[Jip99]

30 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Thanks for the chart. I converted it to a 10 year period and it became apparent that the 2 dips, 2010 and 2013 were relatively short lived and the £ soon recovered. I would estimate that in the period 2010 - 2016 the average rate for £/baht was around 50, if not higher. This is also how I remember it.

 

This time it's a much more sustained fall, and greater, with no sign of recovery.

 

 

I think you touched on the Baht strength factor.

 

I posted a little while ago that GBP/EUR at 1.28 June 2016 vs 1.17 this week  =  a fall of 8.50%  (and nowhere near parity that some muppets forecast).

 

GBP/THB  was 53 vs 41.5   -  a fall of over 21%.

 

 

GBP/USD  was  1.48  vs  1.30 this week  -  a fall of 12%

[DILLIGAD]

2 reason
 
First no deal is much worse for many EU countries that some sort of deal.
 
Second No deal will be disastrous for the UK. The EU wants to make sure the UK does this entirely of it's own volition. It doesn't want to be seen  forcing the UK out and causing that disaster.  

They don’t want to make it look too easy, otherwise other countries might do something the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[evadgib]

9 minutes ago, DILLIGAD said:

They don’t want to make it look too easy, otherwise other countries might do something the same.

Agreed, but methinks others will shortly follow regardless of what happens to UK.

[aright]

33 minutes ago, tebee said:

2 reason

 

First no deal is much worse for many EU countries that some sort of deal.

 

Second No deal will be disastrous for the UK. The EU wants to make sure the UK does this entirely of it's own volition. It doesn't want to be seen  forcing the UK out and causing that disaster.  

No teebee! It doesn't want to be seen forcing the UK out and jeopardizing future exports to the UK. They have no concerns beyond their vested interests. 

[evadgib]

8 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Fortunately for us, Brexit side's track record of offering correct predictions has not been that great. "Britons have had enough of experts" - Gove. 

 

 

They do master the skill of painting pretty unicorns, but that's about it. 

 

That's the difference between sciences and faith. 

The only Brit who routinely does that is Banksy.

Edited May 9, 2019 by evadgib