yes, you keep repeating how it was manufactured. An opinion most Brits don't share with you so really an irrelevancy where it comes to the overall perception of May and the EU. I'm not saying she will succeed in pushing the perception to one where other people than May will be blamed but it seems the strategy of the British political parties at this time to be concerned with who to blame more then to cooperate and reach a sensible agreement.

I think there's 0 chance the UK will revoke the article 50 notice as there's no majority support for it in Parliament. There's no democratic legitimacy for the government to revoke it without that support and as such would be political suicide for the already estranged, English political elite if they did do it. The result of the referendum cannot be ignored like that.

I think there's 0 chance the UK will revoke the article 50 notice as there's no majority support for it in Parliament. There's no democratic legitimacy for the government to revoke it without that support and as such would be political suicide for the already estranged, English political elite if they did do it. The result of the referendum cannot be ignored like that. — Benkei

Since the parties are shying away from even a second referendum for fear of being branded enemies of the people in the next election, I'd say that analysis is right on.

Really shows the folly of holding a referendum with no provision on how the decision is going to be implemented or how binding it is for how long.

Can the British vote to rejoin the EU immediately after Brexit? On the face of it, this would not be contrary to the earlier vote, but that won't stop people from claiming it's antidemocratic.

Sadly, she does not, and after the Supreme Court's ruling on the Miller case, parliamentary approval may be required to ask for an extension. Revocation of Article 50 would require repeal of the Withdrawal Act. To think that the Miller case seemed like a good idea at the time.

What May needs to do is have that vote, and plead for an extension to A50. In the meantime put in place legislation to repeal the Withdrawal Act, then she can revoke A50. Then she better call a general election. — Evola

She could always use Royal Prerogative!

yes, you keep repeating how it was manufactured. An opinion most Brits don't share with you so really an irrelevancy where it comes to the overall perception of May and the EU. — Benkei

I can't speak for most people. I can only speak to the facts. It's amazing you can tell what most people think. There's a lot of people claiming to speak for a lot of people, and the the only people not getting a say are the people themselves. They were lied to, incited, cajoled, seduced, deceived, manipulated and harried into voting Leave in 2016 - and only did so by the narrowest of margins. There's no genuine democratic consent for brexit.

I'm not saying she will succeed in pushing the perception to one where other people than May will be blamed but it seems the strategy of the British political parties at this time to be concerned with who to blame more then to cooperate and reach a sensible agreement. — Benkei

It seems to me they're trying to walk off the no deal cliff, while pretending it's someone else's fault. The will of the people, the EU, Remoaners - they'll blame anyone but themselves for what they are doing - because they know damn well the consequences will be catastrophic for a great many people.

think there's 0 chance the UK will revoke the article 50 notice as there's no majority support for it in Parliament. There's no democratic legitimacy for the government to revoke it without that support and as such would be political suicide for the already estranged, English political elite if they did do it. The result of the referendum cannot be ignored like that. — Benkei

I don't agree, but we'll see. There's no good way forward from here. Someone is going to end up very much put out, and bear mind that 3/4 of people didn't vote Leave. This bitterness will drag on and on - if Article 50 isn't revoked, the economy crashes and people lose jobs, homes, businesses - because 26% of the population got conned by corrupt billionaire tax dodgers.

She could always use Royal Prerogative!
— karl stone

She can't. It was established in the Miller case that prerogative powers do not extend to changing domestic law or affecting domestic rights. — Evola

Yes, I think you might be right. Although strictly speaking:

"Revocation of Article 50 would require repeal of the Withdrawal Act."

...it's the Notification of Withdrawal Act (2017). The Withdrawal Act is something else, and follows from the Withdrawal Agreement in a given set of circumstances.

According to Sap it's just a negotiating tactic and they'll relent eventually. — Michael

It is a negotiating tactic, but whether or not they'll relent is much less certain. Now more than ever, in this world of Brexit and Trump, it isn't safe to assume that politics will be in tune with what's sensible. But I'm more confident that there will be relenting from someone somewhere in order to avoid a no deal Brexit.

Again, we have to just wait and see.

...it's the Notification of Withdrawal Act (2017). The Withdrawal Act is something else, and follows from the Withdrawal Agreement in a given set of circumstances.
— karl stone

Nope, it's the Withdrawal Act. The Notification Act is spent. — Evola

Nope. It's the Notification of Withdrawal Act (2017) that prevents May from unilaterally revoking Article 50. It's the Notification of Withdrawal Act (2017) that followed from the Gina Miller case.

The European Union Withdrawal Act (2018) is something else entirely, and only comes into force after successful ratification of the Withdrawal Agreement. (i.e. the deal....that isn't in fact a deal.)

I don't care. I'm not willing to go into the granular detail of the matter. I'd have to examine the EU court's decision, that says in general terms - the UK can revoke Article 50, and compare that to the powers given under the Notification of Withdrawal Act 2017, and that's a lot of work - only to get noped!

only if it personally hurts them. So probably not. The rich are insulated from most everyday problems.

I don't care. I'm not willing to go into the granular detail of the matter. I'd have to examine the EU court's decision, that says in general terms - the UK can revoke Article 50, and compare that to the powers given under the Notification of Withdrawal Act 2017, and that's a lot of work - only to get noped! — karl stone

Yes, don't let facts get in your way of feeling righteous about how stupid all the politicians and Brexiters are.

This is like the summer before WW1. Anybody with any sense can see where we're heading, but no one with any sense can see a way out. Cries of 'they can't let this happen' proved false then, and are false now.

https://www.npr.org/2013/04/23/178616215/stumbling-into-world-war-i-like-sleepwalkers?t=1549475941500

Yes, don't let facts get in your way of feeling righteous about how stupid all the politicians and Brexiters are. — Benkei

The point at issue is a minor one, hidden in the comparison of two lengthy legal documents - and it's just not worth the effort. I haven't called anyone stupid. But don't let that fact get in the way of your inferiority complex.

The point at issue is a minor one, hidden in the comparison of two lengthy legal documents - and it's just not worth the effort. I haven't called anyone stupid. But don't let that fact get in the way of your inferiority complex. — karl stone

Or perhaps you can not be so opiniated about matters you don't know the details of.

Or perhaps you can not be so opiniated about matters you don't know the details of. — Benkei

I don't think that's likely. I'll gladly run the risk of being wrong on such a minor point of fact. It's almost inescapable. Can you tell me off the top of your head how the EU court's decision, that Article 50 can be revoked, plays out with regard to the specific powers afforded Theresa May in the Notification of Withdrawal Bill - not to be confused with the Withdrawal Bill, or the Withdrawal Agreement? Would you spend two days researching it, just to make some minor point on an obscure forum? No? Well, neither would I.

This is like the summer before WW1. — unenlightened

Not only is it winter, but even so, this is a bit too dramatic.

Perhaps the no-deal-Brexit is something equivalent to the Y2K scare? Not something to get hysterical about.

Perhaps the no-deal-Brexit is something equivalent to the Y2K scare? — ssu

Perhaps. Do you live in the UK? My experience is that there are a lot of people living on the edge already. I dare say we can survive the death of a few hundred thousand, and that's nothing to the millions of WW1. But the similarity is in the predictable yet somehow unavoidable nature of the thing, the mindset rather than the extent.

Even if I don't live in the UK, I do presume that the British media, as just like any media for that matter, will portray the whole event bigger than life to get people simply to follow the media. And unfortunately some older people will likely believe that food will become scarce, riots will take place and the whole thing will be something equivalent to the wartime Blitz.

Theresa May is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

I don't think that's likely. I'll gladly run the risk of being wrong on such a minor point of fact. It's almost inescapable. Can you tell me off the top of your head how the EU court's decision, that Article 50 can be revoked, plays out with regard to the specific powers afforded Theresa May in the Notification of Withdrawal Bill - not to be confused with the Withdrawal Bill, or the Withdrawal Agreement? Would you spend two days researching it, just to make some minor point on an obscure forum? No? Well, neither would I. — karl stone

Or you can try not taking a position on a minor point you're running a risk of being wrong on and instead try to find out the answer by asking a question. Just taking a position whichever one strikes your fancy in the moment just makes you sound like a loudmouth that thinks his opinion is relevant on every (minor) topic. Just a tip, eh!

She crafted that rock herself.

Perhaps the no-deal-Brexit is something equivalent to the Y2K scare? Not something to get hysterical about. — ssu

These myopic references to the "Y2K scare" are a pet peeve of mine. If people didn't get hysterical about it and didn't spend hundreds of billions of dollars and untold hours working overtime on fixing the problem, the story would have had a different ending. But since the threat was successfully averted, a lot of people somehow came to the conclusion that it was nothing to worry about. And now it's a cautionary story about how when experts tell you about an imminent threat, you can just tell them to go where the sun don't shine.

Or you can try not taking a position on a minor point you're running a risk of being wrong on and instead try to find out the answer by asking a question. Just taking a position whichever one strikes your fancy in the moment just makes you sound like a loudmouth that thinks his opinion is relevant on every (minor) topic. Just a tip, eh! — Benkei

Thanks ever so much for the tip - only to bring you up to speed, I'm not wrong. I'm in dispute with someone who thinks I'm wrong, but I'm not. ...probably. It would take vast amounts of research to settle the matter. I'm not doing that. You all caught up? Good.

I'm not wrong — karl stone

You don't know and it would behove you to act accordingly. If you don't know for certain and argue the way you did then you're not doing philosophy but you're just bluffing.

We are certainly aware that bad policy put into effect can have disastrous consequences.

What Brexit seems to mean is that a lot of people are going to get totally screwed.

You don't know and it would behove you to act accordingly. If you don't know for certain and argue the way you did then you're not doing philosophy but you're just bluffing. — Benkei

It's behoove. And as you raise the idea, does it behoove you to wade into the middle of someone else's disagreement? What's it got to do with you? Are you saying you know how the EU court's decision that Article 50 can be revoked, interacts with the powers provided by the Notification of Withdrawal Bill? If you don't know, for certain, then by your own standards - does it not behoove you to mind your own business?

https://en.bab.la/conjugation/english/behove

http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-beh1.htm

As a forum participant it behoves you to act in good fate which you're not when you're bluffing. I call it out. And you can pretend it was just a discussion between you and another person but it wasn't as you posted it in a forum which is a free for all for anybody to react to anything.

Edit: anyway, I've made my point. You can expect another reaction to your next unsubstantiated claim posited as fact.

As a forum participant it behoves you to act in good fate which you're not when you're bluffing. I call it out. And you can pretend it was just a discussion between you and another person but it wasn't as you posted it in a forum which is a free for all for anybody to react to anything. — Benkei

It's good faith. And as you raise the idea, do you think wading into someone else's disagreement without a clue what it's about, like a troll - trying to get a rise, is acting in good faith? If it's not acting in good faith, and if you don't know, for certain - what the answer to the disagreement is, by both your own standards, should you not shut up now?

Backing Brexit will cost Labour more votes than Iraq war, leaked poll warns
Written by: Matt Foster Posted On: 7th February 2019

Backing Brexit would be more damaging to Labour's electoral fortunes than the Iraq war, a stark poll handed to Jeremy Corbyn's top team has warned.

ITV News and the Guardian report that the confidential document was sent to pro-Corbyn pressure group Momentum by the TSSA union, and has been circulating among Shadow Cabinet ministers.

It warns Labour that backing Brexit will cost the party 45 seats at a snap election, compared with 11 for opposing Britain's departure. "There can be no disguising the sense of disappointment and disillusionment with Labour if it fails to oppose Brexit and there is every indication that it will be far more damaging to the party’s electoral fortunes than the Iraq war," it says.

“Labour would especially lose the support of people below the age of 35, which could make this issue comparable to the impact the tuition fees and involvement in the coalition had on Lib Dem support.”

The party would also risk losing five of its seven MPs in Remain-supporting Scotland if it supports Brexit, the study says.

Amid calls for Mr Corbyn to back a second referendum, the poll claims that three-quarters of Labour voters would vote to 'Remain' if one were called.

It also suggests any new centrist party vowing to oppose Brexit could hoover up Labour voters, with 17% of Jeremy Corbyn's 2017 supporters saying they would be "very likely" to back a new party that came out against Britain's EU exit.

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/101666/backing-brexit-will-cost-labour-more-votes-iraq

It's good faith. — karl stone

It is. See? Not so hard to admit you're wrong is it?

And as you raise the idea, do you think wading into someone else's disagreement without a clue what it's about, like a troll - trying to get a rise, is acting in good faith? If it's not acting in good faith, and if you don't know, for certain - what the answer to the disagreement is, by both your own standards, should you not shut up now?

Yes, it's precisely because this is a forum it is in good faith to take issue with someone pretending to know the answer when in fact they don't. That doesn't require me to know the answer to the discussion but here it is any way: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2017-2019/0306/cbill_2017-20190306_en_2.htm#l1g3

You're welcome.

It's good faith.
— karl stone

It is. See? Not so hard to admit you're wrong is it? — Benkei

You tell me. What are you admitting you're wrong about? Is it just just the 'good fate' thing? Because to my mind, that's the least of the things you're wrong about. I think you should apologize for your behavior, and stop trolling people - don't you?

Yes, it's precisely because this is a forum it is in good faith to take issue with someone pretending to know the answer when in fact they don't. That doesn't require me to know the answer to the discussion but here it is any way: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2017-2019/0306/cbill_2017-20190306_en_2.htm#l1g3

You're welcome. — Benkei

To begin with, your link doesn't answer the question. The question concerns the EU court's decision that Article 50 can be revoked, by whom - given the powers conferred by the Notification of Withdrawal Act. Your link has many of the same words in it - but is a Bill, concerned with a possible referendum, that provides, in the event of a Remain vote, for automatic repeal of all the Withdrawal Acts.

You've shed absolutely zero light on the subject, behaved like a complete idiot, gone out of your way to offend me repeatedly, and you presume thanks are due! You're not welcome. Not in the least. Stop trolling.