Rayvin

Seems CT is in good company with other Tories voters (well, members anyway) The month before last, 19 per cent of Party member respondents to our survey said that the agreement was acceptable to them. Last month, the total saying that MPs should vote for it touched 40 per cent. This month, it has reached 60 per cent. That’s the first time the deal has obtained the backing of a majority of replies in any form. Three in five is a clear-cut margin – although over one in three party members remain opposed, if our survey is anything to go by. Hard to accuse Tory voters of consistency, it has to be said.

Well you never know if some serious momentum gets behind Remain. Anyway, tbf to Nick Brown he voted for everything he should have last night apart from abstaining on revoking A50.

All Tories/DUP I assume? Did half expect to see Hoey's name in there, since she's usually synonymous with disappointment with MPs.

I dunno man, I watched the debate in HOC yesterday and each option was presented to MPs, with questions from the room to clarify certain points. Ken Clarke presented this one and he was pretty thorough. I think they know what they're voting for at this point, but a customs union does appear to have the potential to be politically worse than May's deal, even if aligning our standards to the EU would mean we can at least... avoid US chicken? Or am I wrong about that?

Hm. I could actually get behind Labour's plan, I just don't know if I trust them to stick to it.

Not exactly catchy is it? Also, will they even have enough people to put candidates in all constituencies? I can say now, unequivocally, that my final democratic vote will go to whoever intends to deliver the least hard Brexit, weighted against their strategic chance of success.

Some pundits saying that if May can't get her deal through, we're heading for a really long delay to Brexit. The alternative options won't be countenanced by May and we'll end up with a GE. That raises an interesting question. Who the fuck do we vote for?

The customs union is hardly better than May's deal though, is it not? Still huge loss of individual rights.

Yeah but the Party loyalists can't admit that yet. The non-rebel, non-ERG Tories don't get a free vote on this until May's deal is finished forever. What seems very apparent, is that PV2 is tantalisingly close. I notice 17 Labour MPs abstained on it, which means we need another 5 to swing. The customs union will get a majority post MV3 although as Renton says, it's not a good option. It's been tabled just to make sure that something gets through. Next best is Labour's deal, although I doubt many Tories will swing for that.

This has happened because of the Tories. May's deal needs to crash and burn a third time, THEN we can do this properly. Fucking morons.

So if her deal goes through, she resigns, Boris or something fuckhead takes over - we're basically in the next stage but more or less guaranteed no deal somehow - or something even more extreme than her arrangement. So we really are almost entirely at the mercy of the extremists unless Parliament manages to summon up the strength to deny her.

Ok no, 30 still opposed. She's still fucked for now.

I still don't see how she gets it through... have all of the ERG said they'll vote for it?

https://twitter.com/henrymance/status/1110917516623257600

I mean, that's basically the current reality anyway.

Sure but the government swinging for it would allow Labour to fall in behind without electoral punishment. And no, I don't expect them to lie. I just don't expect them to state things that don't need to be stated since we're in a high stakes game of chicken.

Apart from just trying to wind me up, those are two different issues. The government has a responsibility to do the best for the nation - that was my point. Revoking A50 clearly is that and the government can choose to carry it out. The opposition also have this responsibility, but lack the power to make it a reality. Therefore, the most responsible course of action for them is to position themselves as best they can to exert maximum influence on the process to the end of not destroying the country. Which I would argue, given the strategically null value of making the claim you want him to at this point, is exactly what they're doing. -drops mic-

You're just too reactionary ewerk. Honestly, say he makes that statement - "We will revoke A50 in that scenario". What useful strategic purpose does that statement serve? It boxes them in and grants the initiative to the Tories. It may well be true that they will revoke A50 in that situation (I'm actually kind of encouraged by the statement truthfully) but telling us now gives them no political advantage whatsoever.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/27/donald-tusk-majority-uk-stay-eu-article-50-brexit Donald Tusk fighting the corner of Remainers.

I don't see the harm in that statement tbh. It is actually probably quite important to Labour that they don't blink first. Someone is going to have to eliminate No Deal, and I can see why they want it to be May. I mean why would Labour want to broadcast either extreme option at this point when they're trying to go for a middle ground. I don't even think it's cowardly, I just think that if this all falls apart into a GE, statements like "we will revoke A50" would come back to bite them.

May considering purging Tories who vote against her. Sounds like the far left entryists have taken hold of the Tories too...

They can't revoke A50 because they will be "betraying" people like you.

Finally, someone understands my opposition to leaving the EU.

Fair point I guess. Still put FOM at the top though.

I think we decided that he wasn't a mackem because he was good humoured about the accusations instead of wildly defensive. Also, as far as I can tell, he isn't supportive of Mike Ashley (the usual giveaway).