Hacker News Reader

Comment by raverbashing | Hacker News Reader

Thanks for exemplifying all the naivety of leavers

Before the referendum Norway "was out" and it was all good for them, recently any form of CU agreement is "in" (like May's deal). Funny how leavers forget that, seems like comprehension of anything besides "in" or "out" is too much for them.

"result clearly rules" hilarious, just hilarious. Even Farage said a close result would end up in more discussions. But of course they like to "forget" that.

We agree on Corbyn being a waste of space though.

View on HN

> Before the referendum Norway "was out" and it was all good for them, recently any form of CU agreement is "in" (like May's deal).

It wasn't leavers who voted down May's deal. Or do you think Parliament has a 230 majority for leaving with no CU agreement?

A 230 majority de facto voted to leave without a CU agreement. I don't know which possibility is more worrying: that they did so by mistake, or that they did so on purpose.

It was leavers (just check how the DUP and Tory brexiters voted) and some remainers together that voted down that agreement

> Or do you think Parliament has a 230 majority for leaving with no CU agreement?

Well, at least against that deal, that is a fact, more than 400 votes were against May's deal.

> Well, at least against that deal, that is a fact, more than 400 votes were against May's deal.

Do you think there is any deal that the remainers who voted against May's deal would vote for? Do you think they want a no-deal outcome? Do you think there's any other plausible outcome?

> Do you think there is any deal that the remainers who voted against May's deal would vote for?

I think a lot would vote for a "Norway" deal if it were available, but that would mean May and the anti-immigration faction surrendering.

My hypothesis is the "meat grinder": what has to happen is the slow wearing down and obliteration of options. The only way to get to Remain is for all the other options to be infeasible. Eliminating the deal raises the chances of both "no deal" and "remain". Similarly, "extend" would greatly increase the chances of "remain".

There was a slim chance for a no-confidence vote, then a re-election, a regime change, and then a cancelling of Article 50.

A slim chance.

Voting for that would have been a political vote though.

Also don't forget that "No deal is better than a bad deal"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com