Rayvin

I just want to say that the Daily Mail comment section makes for glorious reading on this. Full of the usual "traitors", "will of the people", blah blah but also those certain individuals who believe that within a few years, the EU will send troops into the UK to kill them. Some who think that we will have a second referendum and that if remain wins it will have been rigged. "The people will erupt if this goes through". "We're now worse than Iran, Russia and North Korea(!)" I don't know if we'll get any kind of Brexit that will satisfy me - probably we won't. But I'm going to enjoy the apoplexy over this for all the schadenfraude I can get from it.

Then the queen I think I read My thinking is that this would mean the Tories, if faced with Revoke or No Deal, have to revoke...?

Holy fuck. Majority of 1. Die, No Deal, Die.

Yeah I noticed that. Reassuring in a way since I don't trust Corbyn not to "compromise" on FOM.

I stand corrected. It seems they may have rejected an amendment to it. Even the Guardian doesn't know what's going on anymore.

And Cooper fails... What is the point in any of this.

The Labour Party is finished if it doesn't back a People's Vote, in my opinion.

It's finished if it doesn't back one IMO.

Some concerning signs that if Cooper succeeds later, Corbyn will abandon PV2. No need for him to go for it after that, apparently.

Isn't that the third time it's been 'killed' though? What does it actually mean?

I'm just relaying what I read in the Graun. Would be hilarious if that was overlooked though.

Confidence vote against May being mooted by 1922. No details whatsoever from Corbyn's meeting other than that it 'went well'. Fuck knows where we're ending up. I'm trusting Keir Starmer on all of this more than Corbyn, although apparently Sturgeon met with him beforehand and was reassured by what he said. Though she could just be over selling it as a pressure move.

If that remains the case, then Corbyn is destroying Labour.

I think the signs are starting to look like we might get out of this with a PV or election... Merkel has just indirectly signalled that the EU shouldn't give us a short extension. May has just made clear that EU elections are on the table if the EU insist on a long extension. Government supposedly ready to back Cooper's bill in some form. EDIT - Apparently not on the last point, although still, I think we're looking at a long extension.

Because she's fucked and he can see that? Because it doesn't do him any harm and has a lot of potential upsides for Labour? It's certainly not because she shamed him. I mean he walked out of the last meeting and has refused to meet her previously I believe.

I guess it's possible that May is doing this to ratchet up pressure on the ERG and DUP though. Threaten them with a Soft Brexit and see if they return.

Does shame work on Corbyn?

Tbf, this is completely true. But with her position being what it was, I don't think it would have made sense for Labour to enter into an early cross party solution with her.

They all want power though, would a resignation count against them? Also, from what I've read about May she's really guarded even with the cabinet (probably because she's making it up as she goes along). It's quite possible she said basically nothing and they're not going to pull the trigger before they know exactly what she's about to agree to. And since she won't know herself yet, maybe that's all it is.

I mean, I don't know if Corbyn is sufficiently mentally equipped for the term 'risk free' to be thrown about, but yes

Yeah true but there's no chance they would have both agreed PV2. And Corbyn's position to go for a softer Brexit would have surely attracted much more ire with leavers? Wouldn't the Tories have just slammed Labour over this? Whereas now they can't really slam them because they've failed themselves.

Would it fly though? I mean if Corbyn sticks to his guns about Labour's policies then it's not really a 'win' for May, is it? And seriously, she must be getting fucked off with a good number of Tories by now. Why she would want to do that pack of cunts any favours is beyond me. So Corbyn comes out of the meeting and says they couldn't agree anything, while simultaneously saying that a People's Vote on her deal would be something he would support - so his standing position. I don't see how she successfully pins No Deal on him for that position. That's a really fair position from Labour given the impasse in parliament. Also I note that Barclay just said this: The Lib Dem MP Wera Hobhouse goes next. Q: If a confirmatory referendum were attached to the PM’s deal, would you vote against it? Barclay says there are no preconditions to the talks with Labour. But he says a second referendum would prolong uncertainty, and could take the UK back to the starting point. He goes on: But we will need to look at this.

Are the Tories competent enough for this? But then, is Corbyn competent enough to avoid it... What kind of trap though, I'm struggling to think of one short of trying to blame the whole thing on him if we crash out with No Deal. Which would support the majority votes cast by the cabinet now I think about it.

I figured I would have been. If it had happened then do you think we would have had a soft Brexit? Or any chance of PV2? I do concede incidentally that your ability to remember random things people have said on here over the years is unparalleled

In defence of KCG's point, you'd have a hard time finding anyone who thinks that anything going on in Parliament now is "sane".