What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

So Brexit is really going to happen on June 23rd? (2 Viewers)

I swear the most amazing thing out of all this is the conscious calculus of risking really almost provoking a breakup of the United Kingdom to have this. It’s insane.

I remember the discussion with MSommer on the Queen’s action confirming Johnson’s parliamentary maneuver earlier and it’s really stunning that she did such a thing against the Crown’s self-interest.

I totally know and recognize her constitutional duty to do what she did and that it was ultimately reversed, but my god Liz and Charles are just watching their Kingdom crumbled up like a cookie. 

 
Scotland just seems inevitable, hardly worth discussing. I think the Nationalist party just got something like 48 of 52 seats or so, like a+20 seat swing.

Ulster really needs to think because they have one shot to break out of this England-Eire knot they’ve been in for centuries and they’ll probably blow it.

And Wales - why the hell not?

Cornwall? I’m joking but please tell me why not.

Mercia & Northumbria - just have your own country of Anglia.

 
proteus126 said:
I agree.  Running a carping old red against Trump would be beyond stupid (if you actually care about winning).  Things are pretty decent in this country overall, so selling "blowing up the system" won't fly.  Run a status-quo-small-tweaks candidate (a.k.a. corporate Dem) who will behave better than Trump at home and abroad and you are in the correct lane.

Yes, I am aware there are some mild and some serious issues, asymmetries, and unfairnesses in our land.  But citizens appear comfortable with their ability to get on with life under the current system.  The devil you know...
Click to expand...
I sort of understand what you're getting at, but the bolded was exactly the campaign Trump ran and won with.

 
shader said:
I think it’s significant to point out that it appears the Conservative party flocked to the polls.  Since dems in the us don’t really appear to have a strong candidate, it seems likely to me that the upcoming election will be much closer than many think and DT might just be the front-runner.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. I think Trump wins another term barring a major economic disruption.

 
Gr00vus said:
I agree with you. I think Trump wins another term barring a major economic disruption.
Click to expand...
I don’t. I’d agree if we ran a Jeremy Corbyn. And I’m not talking about his antisemitism, I’m talking about his leftism. But so long as the candidate is not Warren or Sanders I think the Democrat should win, barring unforeseen events. 

 
timschochet said:
I don’t. I’d agree if we ran a Jeremy Corbyn. And I’m not talking about his antisemitism, I’m talking about his leftism. But so long as the candidate is not Warren or Sanders I think the Democrat should win, barring unforeseen events. 
Click to expand...
We know Tim. That you keep saying this is part of what further convinces me of what I wrote. But mainly too many people still seem incapable of learning the lesson that personal interest, well being, etc. outweighs everything else in Presidential elections. All this other stuff that you think is important comes in a distant second, at best. If enough are sold that the economy is doing well for them, Trump wins. And he and the Republican leadership are excellent at controlling that narrative.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
I don’t. I’d agree if we ran a Jeremy Corbyn. And I’m not talking about his antisemitism, I’m talking about his leftism. But so long as the candidate is not Warren or Sanders I think the Democrat should win, barring unforeseen events. 
Click to expand...
I don't know much about British politics, but the people I trust who do have been laughing at the lazy US pundits who have been making this argument for the last two days.

Their main point seems to be that Corbyn was personally unpopular in a way that Sanders and Warren are not (Corbyn was like 40 points underwater), but also that Johnson won in part by moving to the center on a number of issues, including some on which he's basically to the left of mainstream Democrats. In his post-election speech he said that his top priority would be boosting the UK's nationalized health-care system with a new infusion of government spending.

This folds right in to my big complaint about our discourse these days: why is it always the left being told that it must move to the center, work in a bipartisan manner, try to understand the other guy's perspective, etc.?  I haven't heard anyone suggest the GOP should move to the center, work in a bipartisan manner or try to understand the perspective of the other side in at least 6 years. Why not? The GOP just got shellacked in the mid-terms because they lost support from a bunch of moderate centrist suburbanites who are turned off by Trump. That seems bad! Has anyone heard any prominent Republicans or pundits even gently suggesting to the GOP that they need to get rid of all the right-wing policies and rhetoric, move to the center, and try to appreciate the perspective from the other side of the aisle? I haven't.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TobiasFunke said:
I don't know much about British politics, but the people I trust who do have been laughing at the lazy US pundits who have been making this argument for the last two days.

Their main point seems to be that Corbyn was personally unpopular in a way that Sanders and Warren are not (Corbyn was like 40 points underwater), but also that Johnson won in part by moving to the center on a number of issues, including some on which he's basically to the left of mainstream Democrats. In his post-election speech he said that his top priority would be boosting the UK's nationalized health-care system with a new infusion of government spending.

This folds right in to my big complaint about our discourse these days: why is it always the left being told that it must move to the center, work in a bipartisan manner, try to understand the other guy's perspective, etc.?  I haven't heard anyone suggest the GOP should move to the center, work in a bipartisan manner or try to understand the perspective of the other side in at least 6 years. Why not? The GOP just got shellacked in the mid-terms because they lost support from a bunch of moderate centrist suburbanites who are turned off by Trump. That seems bad! Has anyone heard any prominent Republicans or pundits even gently suggesting to the GOP that they need to get rid of all the right-wing policies and rhetoric, move to the center, and try to appreciate the perspective from the other side of the aisle? I haven't.
Click to expand...
Because the Electoral College and the rules for the number of members of the Senate allow them not to.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Scotland just seems inevitable, hardly worth discussing. I think the Nationalist party just got something like 48 of 52 seats or so, like a+20 seat swing.
Click to expand...
Boris can delay a Scottish referendum at least until after the next election. So the anti British sentiment will fester for the next four years while the UK economy tanks - or until  Boris is kicked out by his own party.

 
msommer said:
Boris can delay a Scottish referendum at least until after the next election. So the anti British sentiment will fester for the next four years while the UK economy tanks - or until  Boris is kicked out by his own party.
Click to expand...
Thanks, are the conservatives really all pro-Brexit? is it possible some of those old labour ridings were just turning towards centrists?

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Thanks, are the conservatives really all pro-Brexit? is it possible some of those old labour ridings were just turning towards centrists?
Click to expand...
There might be some "John Major" acolytes left but to threaten Boris they need more than 40 defectors (plus all the rest of the House of Commons to stand united). That is unlikely to happen until the hard facts hits on the economy, which, due to the transition period is likely to only happen in 2021 or later (No Deal will bring the economy down faster than an EU deal, b ut let's not forget that the UK will have to make trade deals with everyone, from scratch - and to do just the EU one before the end of 2020 already seems like a tall order)

 
msommer said:
Boris can delay a Scottish referendum at least until after the next election. So the anti British sentiment will fester for the next four years while the UK economy tanks - or until  Boris is kicked out by his own party.
Click to expand...
I thought anti British sentiment was just a way of life for the Scots. Though I guess that's true of everyone who has spent time under the thumb of the Crown.

 
msommer said:
The protestants (the majority) in Northern Ireland will take up arms again to ensure no union with the South
Click to expand...
Age demographics are changing this, surprisingly.  Brexit may speed that up.  Young people who weren't alive for the Troubles want Ireland united.

I'm as surprised as anyone, but in a May poll over half of Northern Ireland said they wanted a unified Ireland. 

 
Henry Ford said:
Age demographics are changing this, surprisingly.  Brexit may speed that up.  Young people who weren't alive for the Troubles want Ireland united.

I'm as surprised as anyone, but in a May poll over half of Northern Ireland said they wanted a unified Ireland. 
Click to expand...
Both of these things can be true at the same time

 
Henry Ford said:
Age demographics are changing this, surprisingly.  Brexit may speed that up.  Young people who weren't alive for the Troubles want Ireland united.

I'm as surprised as anyone, but in a May poll over half of Northern Ireland said they wanted a unified Ireland. 
Click to expand...
Color me completely ignorant - so this would mean that Northern Ireland would become one with the Republic and break away from the UK?

 
I was talking to an Irish friend about this last week.  It's part of the Republic of Ireland constitution to accept northern Ireland if they want to join the RoI. All political parties in Ireland (ostensibly) have already established this as well.

However, not many in the Republic think much about the north.  Also, he said that if the north were to join, it would be a hit to the RoI's economy, as the north needs a lot of investment as had lagged the rest of the island for 20 years.

 
The Z Machine said:
I was talking to an Irish friend about this last week.  It's part of the Republic of Ireland constitution to accept northern Ireland if they want to join the RoI. All political parties in Ireland (ostensibly) have already established this as well.

However, not many in the Republic think much about the north.  Also, he said that if the north were to join, it would be a hit to the RoI's economy, as the north needs a lot of investment as had lagged the rest of the island for 20 years.
Click to expand...
I think more like a hundred.

 
The Z Machine said:
That might be closer to the truth. I was really thinking about the effect of the EU and EC in building the modern Republic of Ireland economy.  The "Celtic Tiger" of the late 90s and mid 2000s.
Click to expand...
They also got bailed out after '08 (due to some of the tiger policies, notably an unstable banking sector), though, still a bit of a debt burden after that

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brexit part two: The Trade Deal

It's no surprise really that the EU has declared itself willing to do a "quick and dirty" trade deal in goods. It has a trade surplus with the UK.

What is surprising is that the prime minister has barely mentioned services during the last months even though they make up 80% of the UK economy.

The EU is the UK's biggest customer for the service industry and Brussels does not intend to discuss most services before December.

A scaled-down deal may or may not be finalised in 2020.

A fudge may or may not be agreed between the two sides as to how to keep talking into next year.

Only one thing is certain. Brexit Stage Two: The Trade Deal - much like its prequel, Brexit Stage One: The Divorce - will be very far from plain sailing.
Click to expand...

 
SoBeDad said:
As Europe braces for Brexit, the Netherlands sees benefits.

The EU version of the FDA, EMA, has moved from London to Amsterdam, along with 700 jobs and some collateral companies. Same with some banking  companies. But there will also be some pain in the Netherlands. And there is jealousy in Italy as they wanted the EMA. Lots of uncertainity.
Click to expand...
Seriously. Anything EU-centric in the UK will inure you some other city’s benefit. The race is on.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And oops. Hard Brexit rears it's ugly head again

Britain, on trade collision course with EU, says it could walk away

After officially leaving the EU last month, Britain has until the end of the year to negotiate a trade deal and agreements on everything from fishing to transport, to replace more than 40 years of closely aligned political and economic relations.

Having accepted that, by leaving the EU’s customs union and single market, British businesses will encounter new “frictions” in trade with the bloc, the government has made its stance clear - self-determination must trump economic concerns.

So if, by June, “good progress” has not been made on Britain’s demand for what it calls a “standard” free trade agreement or even on the “least controversial areas” of the talks, London said it would focus on preparations for a sharp break with the EU.
Click to expand...

 
Disappointing progress in trade talks, says Michel Barnier

The progress made in post-Brexit trade talks between the UK and EU has been disappointing, Michel Barnier has said.

The EU's chief negotiator said "genuine progress" and a decision on whether to extend the transition period were both needed by June.

The UK said "limited progress" had been made and talks needed to "move forward in a constructive fashion".

The two sides will hold two further rounds of talks before the end of the transition period in December.

Mr Barnier said a joint decision would be taken on 30 June about whether to extend the transition period.

But the UK government has already said it will refuse to extend it beyond December, even if the EU requested a delay.

Following the talks - which took place using video-conferencing technology because of the coronavirus pandemic - Mr Barnier said: "The UK has affirmed once again this week its wish to make tangible progress between now and June and we're on the same wavelength on this and we respect the same timetable.

'Sovereign equals'

"That means that we need genuine progress by June if, at the end of this year, we want to strike an agreement which is commensurate to the level of our economic interdependence and geographical proximity."

But he said there were four areas where progress was "disappointing", including the level playing field (what kind of access the UK could have to the European single market after Brexit), justice and fisheries.

And he warned that the "clock was ticking".

Mr Barnier said the UK negotiating team keeps repeating that they are negotiating as "sovereign equals", but the "reality" was that an agreement was being sought between a massive bloc and a smaller nation.

On fisheries, Mr Barnier said the EU would not agree to a deal without a "balanced, sustainable and long-term agreement", describing it as an "inseparable part of the trade agreement, along with the level-playing field".

But he said "no progress" had been made on fisheries, as the UK has "not put forward a legal text".

"The UK did not wish to commit seriously on a number of fundamental points," he said.

Mr Barnier said the two sides "need to find solutions on the most difficult topics".

"The UK cannot refuse to extend transition and at the same time slow down discussions on important areas," he added.

Mr Barnier reiterated that the UK would have to pay a "lump-sum" contribution to the EU budget if the transition period is extended beyond 31 December.

And he said any deal agreed by December would have to be "smart" to "cushion the blow" of Brexit and coronavirus.
Click to expand...
Let's see if Boris really wants to have a hard Brexit. Starting to look like it.

 
Brexit brinkmanship

LONDON/BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The European Union told Britain on Thursday it should urgently scrap a plan to break their divorce treaty, but Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government refused and pressed ahead with a draft law that could sink four years of Brexit talks.

With chances growing of a messy end to Britain’s departure from the EU, the European Commission said London would be committing “an extremely serious violation” of last year’s Withdrawal Agreement if it went ahead with proposed legislation.

After emergency talks between Commission Vice President Maros Sefcovic and Britain’s Brexit supremo Michael Gove, the EU said Britain’s proposal had “seriously damaged trust” which London must now take steps to re-establish.

Gove, one of Johnson’s most senior ministers, said he refused the EU’s request to scrap the draft legislation.

“I explained to Vice President Sefcovic that we could not and would not do that,” Gove said.

EU diplomats and officials said the bloc could use the Withdrawal Agreement to take legal action against Britain, though there would be no resolution before the end-of-year deadline for Britain’s full exit from a transition period.

The British government says it is committed to the treaty and that a proposed law overriding parts of the Withdrawal Agreement merely clarifies ambiguities. Its main priority, it says, is the 1998 Northern Irish peace deal that ended decades of violence.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian told his British counterpart Dominic Raab a violation of the Withdrawal Agreement with the EU would be “unacceptable”, a spokeswoman said.

Europe’s leaders have been handed an ultimatum: accept the treaty breach or prepare for a messy divorce that could sow chaos through supply chains across Europe and spook global financial markets.

Britain signed the treaty and formally left the EU in January after more than three years of crises and wrangling over Brexit. But it is a member in everything but name until the end of the year when a transition agreement expires.
 

The pound fell against the dollar and the euro and the FTSE 100 share index fell. European Central Bank chief Christine Lagarde said she was monitoring Brexit developments.

BREXIT ULTIMATUM

European diplomats said Britain was playing a game of Brexit “chicken”, threatening to wreck the process and challenging Brussels to change course. Some fear Johnson views a no-deal exit as a useful distraction from the coronavirus pandemic.

One EU source said Britain would not succeed if it tried to use the planned breach of the Withdrawal Agreement as a threat to extract concessions from the bloc in trade talks.

“If they try to do that, it will fail,” the EU source said.

Goldman Sachs said it expected “the perceived probability of a breakdown in negotiations to escalate over the coming weeks,” but its base case remains a “thin” free trade agreement that steers both sides back from the brink.

Without a trade agreement, nearly $1 trillion in trade between the EU and Britain could be thrown into confusion at the start of 2021, compounding the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic.

But Britain is pressing one of the EU’s most sensitive buttons - fear that a post-Brexit Britain could become a much more deregulated free-market competitor with access to EU markets by using selective state aid.

The latest dispute centers on rules for Northern Ireland, which shares a land border with EU member Ireland, because under the divorce deal it remains within the EU’s orbit - a restriction Britain wants to remove.

Britain again on Thursday openly admitted it was ready to breach international law. Former British leaders Theresa May and John Major scolded Johnson for considering an intentional breach of international law.

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Britain would not get a trade deal with the United States if it did anything to undermine the 1998 Northern Irish peace agreement.

“This news comes to us... that the UK had decided to undermine the Good Friday Accords. What were they thinking?” she told reporters in Washington. “Whatever it is, I hope they’re not thinking of a UK-U.S. bilateral trade agreement to make up for what they might lose.”
Click to expand...
So, Boris not only wants to have a hard Brexit, he also wants to trash the exit agreement and is more than willing to sacrifice the Good Friday agreement (which stopped sectarian violence in Northern Ireland, a deal brokered by the US) and Britain's good name in international affairs to do it.

I'm pretty happy I'm not from the UK or living there. The next few years will be tough on the Brits.

 
EU ultimatum over UK withdrawal deal changes

The EU is demanding the UK ditches plans to change Boris Johnson's Brexit deal "by the end of the month" or risk jeopardising trade talks.

The UK has published a bill to rewrite parts of the withdrawal agreement it signed in January.

The EU said this had "seriously damaged trust" and it would not be "shy" of taking legal action against the UK.

But cabinet minister Michael Gove said the UK had made it "perfectly clear" it would not withdraw the bill.

The government says Parliament is sovereign and can pass laws which breach the UK's international treaty obligations.

EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier said "trust and confidence are and will be key", after the latest round of UK-EU trade talks wrapped up in London on Thursday.

His UK counterpart David Frost said "significant" differences remained over a free trade deal, but added discussions would continue in Brussels next week.

The source of the EU's concern is Mr Johnson's proposed Internal Market Bill, which was published on Wednesday.

It addresses the Northern Ireland Protocol - an element of the withdrawal agreement designed to prevent a hard border returning to the island of Ireland.

The bill proposes no new checks on goods moving from Northern Ireland to Great Britain. It gives UK ministers powers to modify or "disapply" rules relating to the movement of goods that will come into force from 1 January, if the UK and EU are unable to strike a trade deal.

The publication of the bill prompted emergency talks between Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove and Maros Šefčovič, the European Commission Vice-President.

Following the discussions, the EU issued a strongly-worded statement warning that the withdrawal agreement was a legal obligation, adding that "neither the EU nor the UK can unilaterally change, clarify, amend, interpret, disregard or disapply the agreement".

The EU rejected the UK's arguments that the bill is designed to protect peace in Northern Ireland arguing that "it does the opposite".

Mr Šefčovič said that if the bill were to be adopted, it would constitute an "extremely serious violation" of the withdrawal agreement and of international law.

He urged the government to withdraw the bill "by the end of the month", adding that the withdrawal agreement "contains a number of mechanisms and legal remedies to address violations of the legal obligations contained in the text - which the European Union will not be shy in using".

Germany's UK ambassador said he had not experienced "such a fast, intentional and profound deterioration of a negotiation" in his diplomatic career.

"If you believe in partnership between the UK and the EU like I do then don't accept it," he tweeted.

In its response, the UK government said it would "discharge its treaty obligations in good faith", but added that "in the difficult and highly exceptional circumstances in which we find ourselves, it is important to remember the fundamental principle of parliamentary sovereignty".

"Parliament is sovereign as a matter of domestic law and can pass legislation which is in breach of the UK's treaty obligations. Parliament would not be acting unconstitutionally in enacting such legislation.

"Treaty obligations only become binding to the extent that they are enshrined in domestic legislation. Whether to enact or repeal legislation, and the content of that legislation, is for Parliament and Parliament alone."
Click to expand...
Hard Brexit gets nearer and nearer

 
So much craziness going on but the UK trying to kill its own international treaty over something it knew at the time and always knew would have to happen if it took this stupid path is just part of the continuing insanity. Northern Ireland should probably get cut loose and it’s sad because Scotland and even Wales might one day. Way to kill a kingdom, I hope it doesn’t happen and they wake up.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
So much craziness going on but the UK trying to kill its own international treaty over something it knew at the time and always knew would have to happen if it took this stupid path is just part of the continuing insanity. Northern Ireland should probably get cut loose and it’s sad because Scotland and even Wales might one day. Way to kill a kingdom, I hope it doesn’t happen and they wake up.
Click to expand...
Let's see if the Troubles start up again. After all they've had nearly a generation to get used to not killing each other again

 
Last edited by a moderator:
msommer said:
Let's see if the Troubles start up again. After all they've had nearly a generation to get used to not killing each other again
Click to expand...
Not that I'm all that knowledgeable about these things, but I doubt there's a lot of score settling that the IRA (or whatever paramilitaries there are now) wants to do with Ulster.  They've been at peace for so long that I would imagine that paradigm would remain.

 
The Z Machine said:
Not that I'm all that knowledgeable about these things, but I doubt there's a lot of score settling that the IRA (or whatever paramilitaries there are now) wants to do with Ulster.  They've been at peace for so long that I would imagine that paradigm would remain.
Click to expand...
You never really know. E.g. there is that Orange march (commemorating some battle the protestants won oodles of years ago) which still makes people throw stones and get into violence.

The underlying issue, that the catholic minority wants to join the rest of Ireland and the protestant majority doesn't, hasn't been solved. It's been fudged with open borders.

If Boris now ####s the EU and the borders are closed again, who knows what will happen. 

ETA: I'm hoping nothing. I'm not certain

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Disturbing SPLC Poll On Partisanship & Violence - Rubio Campaign Violently Attacked (6/17/22 10:21 PST)
2
Replies
83
Views
4K
squistion
squistion
GordonGekko
Did Democrats Transition From Complacent 'Pro-Choice' To No Limit Pro Abortion Extremists? (6/28/22 21:38 PST)
Replies
11
Views
972
jon_mx
J
GordonGekko
Police Departments Struggle With Critical Staffing Shortages Is A Threat To National Security ( 7/19/22 22:43 PST)
2 3
Replies
100
Views
6K
Yenrub
Yenrub

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top