What is the point of a new vote on May's deal when the indicative votes suggest she will not win?
So I am hearing that May wants another vote on her deal tomorrow.
When she held her last vote recently, 391 voted against and only 242 voted for.
Yesterday, indicative votes were held. Here are the results.
So, about 268 support a referendum. So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held.
However, most importantly, 160 voted in favor of no-deal, and there is no overlap between this group and those that want a new referendum (one group is many Labor-party, the other group is mainly Conservatives). These must be those Conservatives who dislike May's deal so much that they'd rather embrace a no-deal. So they will vote against her too.
160 + 268 = 428 votes against her deal. So the indicative votes suggest that she has pretty much already lost. Even if 1 hundred of those who prefer no-deal to May's deal changed their mind, May still wouldn't win.
So why does she want another vote when it is clear it cannot win?
.
united-kingdom theresa-may
edited Mar 28 at 14:33
Brythan
70.4k8147238
asked Mar 28 at 13:44
PaliPali
563
add a comment |
So I am hearing that May wants another vote on her deal tomorrow.
When she held her last vote recently, 391 voted against and only 242 voted for.
Yesterday, indicative votes were held. Here are the results.
So, about 268 support a referendum. So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held.
However, most importantly, 160 voted in favor of no-deal, and there is no overlap between this group and those that want a new referendum (one group is many Labor-party, the other group is mainly Conservatives). These must be those Conservatives who dislike May's deal so much that they'd rather embrace a no-deal. So they will vote against her too.
160 + 268 = 428 votes against her deal. So the indicative votes suggest that she has pretty much already lost. Even if 1 hundred of those who prefer no-deal to May's deal changed their mind, May still wouldn't win.
So why does she want another vote when it is clear it cannot win?
.
united-kingdom theresa-may
edited Mar 28 at 14:33
Brythan
70.4k8147238
asked Mar 28 at 13:44
PaliPali
563
6
She may think that she can win based on her offer to resign.
– Karlomanio
Mar 28 at 13:58
4
* So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held. * Given fluctuating positions expressed by some, and some seemingly illogical voting positions adopted by others, assumptions of that sort would appear to be premature
– Chris H
Mar 28 at 16:55
The extension the EU gave her also legally requires a meaningful vote on the deal this week.
– thosphor
Mar 29 at 8:42
It is deal or no-deal time for the House of Commons. Regardless of what the MPs want or don't want. There are only two options left: accept May's deal, or face a no-deal Brexit.
– Dohn Joe
Mar 29 at 9:42
Whatever about other people changing their minds I don't think you can assume that the people who voted for a second referendum won't vote for May's deal. A second referendum is very unlikely (despite apparently significant support) and some of those voters (possibly a lot of them) would prefer May's deal to no deal. Remember that no deal is still the default if they keep saying no to all the options on offer. As Barnier said, you can't just say "no" to no deal, you have to actually vote for a deal.
– Eric Nolan
Mar 29 at 10:32
add a comment |
So I am hearing that May wants another vote on her deal tomorrow.
When she held her last vote recently, 391 voted against and only 242 voted for.
Yesterday, indicative votes were held. Here are the results.
So, about 268 support a referendum. So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held.
However, most importantly, 160 voted in favor of no-deal, and there is no overlap between this group and those that want a new referendum (one group is many Labor-party, the other group is mainly Conservatives). These must be those Conservatives who dislike May's deal so much that they'd rather embrace a no-deal. So they will vote against her too.
160 + 268 = 428 votes against her deal. So the indicative votes suggest that she has pretty much already lost. Even if 1 hundred of those who prefer no-deal to May's deal changed their mind, May still wouldn't win.
So why does she want another vote when it is clear it cannot win?
.
united-kingdom theresa-may
edited Mar 28 at 14:33
Brythan
70.4k8147238
asked Mar 28 at 13:44
PaliPali
563
So I am hearing that May wants another vote on her deal tomorrow.
When she held her last vote recently, 391 voted against and only 242 voted for.
Yesterday, indicative votes were held. Here are the results.
So, about 268 support a referendum. So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held.
However, most importantly, 160 voted in favor of no-deal, and there is no overlap between this group and those that want a new referendum (one group is many Labor-party, the other group is mainly Conservatives). These must be those Conservatives who dislike May's deal so much that they'd rather embrace a no-deal. So they will vote against her too.
160 + 268 = 428 votes against her deal. So the indicative votes suggest that she has pretty much already lost. Even if 1 hundred of those who prefer no-deal to May's deal changed their mind, May still wouldn't win.
So why does she want another vote when it is clear it cannot win?
.
united-kingdom theresa-may
united-kingdom theresa-may
edited Mar 28 at 14:33
Brythan
70.4k8147238
asked Mar 28 at 13:44
PaliPali
563
edited Mar 28 at 14:33
Brythan
70.4k8147238
asked Mar 28 at 13:44
PaliPali
563
edited Mar 28 at 14:33
Brythan
70.4k8147238
edited Mar 28 at 14:33
Brythan
70.4k8147238
edited Mar 28 at 14:33
Brythan
70.4k8147238
70.4k8147238
asked Mar 28 at 13:44
PaliPali
563
asked Mar 28 at 13:44
PaliPali
563
asked Mar 28 at 13:44
PaliPali
563
563
6
She may think that she can win based on her offer to resign.
– Karlomanio
Mar 28 at 13:58
4
* So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held. * Given fluctuating positions expressed by some, and some seemingly illogical voting positions adopted by others, assumptions of that sort would appear to be premature
– Chris H
Mar 28 at 16:55
The extension the EU gave her also legally requires a meaningful vote on the deal this week.
– thosphor
Mar 29 at 8:42
It is deal or no-deal time for the House of Commons. Regardless of what the MPs want or don't want. There are only two options left: accept May's deal, or face a no-deal Brexit.
– Dohn Joe
Mar 29 at 9:42
Whatever about other people changing their minds I don't think you can assume that the people who voted for a second referendum won't vote for May's deal. A second referendum is very unlikely (despite apparently significant support) and some of those voters (possibly a lot of them) would prefer May's deal to no deal. Remember that no deal is still the default if they keep saying no to all the options on offer. As Barnier said, you can't just say "no" to no deal, you have to actually vote for a deal.
– Eric Nolan
Mar 29 at 10:32
add a comment |
6
She may think that she can win based on her offer to resign.
– Karlomanio
Mar 28 at 13:58
4
* So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held. * Given fluctuating positions expressed by some, and some seemingly illogical voting positions adopted by others, assumptions of that sort would appear to be premature
– Chris H
Mar 28 at 16:55
The extension the EU gave her also legally requires a meaningful vote on the deal this week.
– thosphor
Mar 29 at 8:42
It is deal or no-deal time for the House of Commons. Regardless of what the MPs want or don't want. There are only two options left: accept May's deal, or face a no-deal Brexit.
– Dohn Joe
Mar 29 at 9:42
Whatever about other people changing their minds I don't think you can assume that the people who voted for a second referendum won't vote for May's deal. A second referendum is very unlikely (despite apparently significant support) and some of those voters (possibly a lot of them) would prefer May's deal to no deal. Remember that no deal is still the default if they keep saying no to all the options on offer. As Barnier said, you can't just say "no" to no deal, you have to actually vote for a deal.
– Eric Nolan
Mar 29 at 10:32
6
6
She may think that she can win based on her offer to resign.
– Karlomanio
Mar 28 at 13:58
She may think that she can win based on her offer to resign.
– Karlomanio
Mar 28 at 13:58
4
4
* So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held. * Given fluctuating positions expressed by some, and some seemingly illogical voting positions adopted by others, assumptions of that sort would appear to be premature
– Chris H
Mar 28 at 16:55
* So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held. * Given fluctuating positions expressed by some, and some seemingly illogical voting positions adopted by others, assumptions of that sort would appear to be premature
– Chris H
Mar 28 at 16:55
The extension the EU gave her also legally requires a meaningful vote on the deal this week.
– thosphor
Mar 29 at 8:42
The extension the EU gave her also legally requires a meaningful vote on the deal this week.
– thosphor
Mar 29 at 8:42
It is deal or no-deal time for the House of Commons. Regardless of what the MPs want or don't want. There are only two options left: accept May's deal, or face a no-deal Brexit.
– Dohn Joe
Mar 29 at 9:42
It is deal or no-deal time for the House of Commons. Regardless of what the MPs want or don't want. There are only two options left: accept May's deal, or face a no-deal Brexit.
– Dohn Joe
Mar 29 at 9:42
Whatever about other people changing their minds I don't think you can assume that the people who voted for a second referendum won't vote for May's deal. A second referendum is very unlikely (despite apparently significant support) and some of those voters (possibly a lot of them) would prefer May's deal to no deal. Remember that no deal is still the default if they keep saying no to all the options on offer. As Barnier said, you can't just say "no" to no deal, you have to actually vote for a deal.
– Eric Nolan
Mar 29 at 10:32
Whatever about other people changing their minds I don't think you can assume that the people who voted for a second referendum won't vote for May's deal. A second referendum is very unlikely (despite apparently significant support) and some of those voters (possibly a lot of them) would prefer May's deal to no deal. Remember that no deal is still the default if they keep saying no to all the options on offer. As Barnier said, you can't just say "no" to no deal, you have to actually vote for a deal.
– Eric Nolan
Mar 29 at 10:32
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
It's not clear that supporters of no-deal will refuse to back May's deal at the 3rd time of asking. The indicative votes in particular allowed MPs to support several positions, some of which are mutually contradictory. If given a choice between deal vs remain then some of the "no-deal" supporters may fall into line with the Government position.
The BBC has a tool that will allow you to see how any MP voted in the indicative votes. If you enter Boris Johnson in here, you'll see he backed only No-deal or the so-called Malthouse 2, which other answers on the site explain is unacceptable to the EU.
And here you have Johnson explaining why he will back May's deal in Meaningful Vote 3. And Rees-Mogg saying he will back the deal if the DUP will, which is a little like saying he'll support it if it will pass.
So in summary MPs can and have changed their positions on May's deal between votes 1 and 2, votes 2 and potential 3 and since yesterday's indicative votes and today. All of which may add up to enough support to push the deal over the line.
answered Mar 28 at 14:39
JontiaJontia
4,2922034
add a comment |
The elephant in the room here is the conclusion of meeting of the European Council last week, in response to the UK's request to extend the Article 50 negotiation period beyond the 29th March. The third bullet point is the relevant one here:
- The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.
This effectively makes Friday the 29th into a mini deadline to do something which can be presented to the European Council as House of Commons approval of the withdrawal agreement. Precisely what this is going to be won't be clear until the Government announces precisely what motion is to be debated and voted on, but given the previous decisions by the Commons Speaker John Bercow, it's conceivable this won't actually be the same vote as last time.
answered Mar 28 at 15:01
origimboorigimbo
13.5k23354
2
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
Mar 28 at 23:40
add a comment |
May is hoping that MPs will feel they have no choice but to support her deal to avoid a no-deal crash out, which they think is even worse.
Now that the indicative votes have failed to produce a majority for anything, she seems to think that the time is right to put her scheme into action.
answered Mar 28 at 17:09
useruser
10.9k32543
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "475"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39925%2fwhat-is-the-point-of-a-new-vote-on-mays-deal-when-the-indicative-votes-suggest%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It's not clear that supporters of no-deal will refuse to back May's deal at the 3rd time of asking. The indicative votes in particular allowed MPs to support several positions, some of which are mutually contradictory. If given a choice between deal vs remain then some of the "no-deal" supporters may fall into line with the Government position.
The BBC has a tool that will allow you to see how any MP voted in the indicative votes. If you enter Boris Johnson in here, you'll see he backed only No-deal or the so-called Malthouse 2, which other answers on the site explain is unacceptable to the EU.
And here you have Johnson explaining why he will back May's deal in Meaningful Vote 3. And Rees-Mogg saying he will back the deal if the DUP will, which is a little like saying he'll support it if it will pass.
So in summary MPs can and have changed their positions on May's deal between votes 1 and 2, votes 2 and potential 3 and since yesterday's indicative votes and today. All of which may add up to enough support to push the deal over the line.
answered Mar 28 at 14:39
JontiaJontia
4,2922034
add a comment |
It's not clear that supporters of no-deal will refuse to back May's deal at the 3rd time of asking. The indicative votes in particular allowed MPs to support several positions, some of which are mutually contradictory. If given a choice between deal vs remain then some of the "no-deal" supporters may fall into line with the Government position.
The BBC has a tool that will allow you to see how any MP voted in the indicative votes. If you enter Boris Johnson in here, you'll see he backed only No-deal or the so-called Malthouse 2, which other answers on the site explain is unacceptable to the EU.
And here you have Johnson explaining why he will back May's deal in Meaningful Vote 3. And Rees-Mogg saying he will back the deal if the DUP will, which is a little like saying he'll support it if it will pass.
So in summary MPs can and have changed their positions on May's deal between votes 1 and 2, votes 2 and potential 3 and since yesterday's indicative votes and today. All of which may add up to enough support to push the deal over the line.
answered Mar 28 at 14:39
JontiaJontia
4,2922034
add a comment |
It's not clear that supporters of no-deal will refuse to back May's deal at the 3rd time of asking. The indicative votes in particular allowed MPs to support several positions, some of which are mutually contradictory. If given a choice between deal vs remain then some of the "no-deal" supporters may fall into line with the Government position.
The BBC has a tool that will allow you to see how any MP voted in the indicative votes. If you enter Boris Johnson in here, you'll see he backed only No-deal or the so-called Malthouse 2, which other answers on the site explain is unacceptable to the EU.
And here you have Johnson explaining why he will back May's deal in Meaningful Vote 3. And Rees-Mogg saying he will back the deal if the DUP will, which is a little like saying he'll support it if it will pass.
So in summary MPs can and have changed their positions on May's deal between votes 1 and 2, votes 2 and potential 3 and since yesterday's indicative votes and today. All of which may add up to enough support to push the deal over the line.
answered Mar 28 at 14:39
JontiaJontia
4,2922034
It's not clear that supporters of no-deal will refuse to back May's deal at the 3rd time of asking. The indicative votes in particular allowed MPs to support several positions, some of which are mutually contradictory. If given a choice between deal vs remain then some of the "no-deal" supporters may fall into line with the Government position.
The BBC has a tool that will allow you to see how any MP voted in the indicative votes. If you enter Boris Johnson in here, you'll see he backed only No-deal or the so-called Malthouse 2, which other answers on the site explain is unacceptable to the EU.
And here you have Johnson explaining why he will back May's deal in Meaningful Vote 3. And Rees-Mogg saying he will back the deal if the DUP will, which is a little like saying he'll support it if it will pass.
So in summary MPs can and have changed their positions on May's deal between votes 1 and 2, votes 2 and potential 3 and since yesterday's indicative votes and today. All of which may add up to enough support to push the deal over the line.
answered Mar 28 at 14:39
JontiaJontia
4,2922034
answered Mar 28 at 14:39
JontiaJontia
4,2922034
answered Mar 28 at 14:39
JontiaJontia
4,2922034
answered Mar 28 at 14:39
JontiaJontia
4,2922034
4,2922034
add a comment |
add a comment |
The elephant in the room here is the conclusion of meeting of the European Council last week, in response to the UK's request to extend the Article 50 negotiation period beyond the 29th March. The third bullet point is the relevant one here:
- The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.
This effectively makes Friday the 29th into a mini deadline to do something which can be presented to the European Council as House of Commons approval of the withdrawal agreement. Precisely what this is going to be won't be clear until the Government announces precisely what motion is to be debated and voted on, but given the previous decisions by the Commons Speaker John Bercow, it's conceivable this won't actually be the same vote as last time.
answered Mar 28 at 15:01
origimboorigimbo
13.5k23354
2
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
Mar 28 at 23:40
add a comment |
The elephant in the room here is the conclusion of meeting of the European Council last week, in response to the UK's request to extend the Article 50 negotiation period beyond the 29th March. The third bullet point is the relevant one here:
- The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.
This effectively makes Friday the 29th into a mini deadline to do something which can be presented to the European Council as House of Commons approval of the withdrawal agreement. Precisely what this is going to be won't be clear until the Government announces precisely what motion is to be debated and voted on, but given the previous decisions by the Commons Speaker John Bercow, it's conceivable this won't actually be the same vote as last time.
answered Mar 28 at 15:01
origimboorigimbo
13.5k23354
2
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
Mar 28 at 23:40
add a comment |
The elephant in the room here is the conclusion of meeting of the European Council last week, in response to the UK's request to extend the Article 50 negotiation period beyond the 29th March. The third bullet point is the relevant one here:
- The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.
This effectively makes Friday the 29th into a mini deadline to do something which can be presented to the European Council as House of Commons approval of the withdrawal agreement. Precisely what this is going to be won't be clear until the Government announces precisely what motion is to be debated and voted on, but given the previous decisions by the Commons Speaker John Bercow, it's conceivable this won't actually be the same vote as last time.
answered Mar 28 at 15:01
origimboorigimbo
13.5k23354
The elephant in the room here is the conclusion of meeting of the European Council last week, in response to the UK's request to extend the Article 50 negotiation period beyond the 29th March. The third bullet point is the relevant one here:
- The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.
This effectively makes Friday the 29th into a mini deadline to do something which can be presented to the European Council as House of Commons approval of the withdrawal agreement. Precisely what this is going to be won't be clear until the Government announces precisely what motion is to be debated and voted on, but given the previous decisions by the Commons Speaker John Bercow, it's conceivable this won't actually be the same vote as last time.
answered Mar 28 at 15:01
origimboorigimbo
13.5k23354
answered Mar 28 at 15:01
origimboorigimbo
13.5k23354
answered Mar 28 at 15:01
origimboorigimbo
13.5k23354
answered Mar 28 at 15:01
origimboorigimbo
13.5k23354
13.5k23354
2
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
Mar 28 at 23:40
add a comment |
2
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
Mar 28 at 23:40
2
2
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
Mar 28 at 23:40
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
Mar 28 at 23:40
add a comment |
May is hoping that MPs will feel they have no choice but to support her deal to avoid a no-deal crash out, which they think is even worse.
Now that the indicative votes have failed to produce a majority for anything, she seems to think that the time is right to put her scheme into action.
answered Mar 28 at 17:09
useruser
10.9k32543
add a comment |
May is hoping that MPs will feel they have no choice but to support her deal to avoid a no-deal crash out, which they think is even worse.
Now that the indicative votes have failed to produce a majority for anything, she seems to think that the time is right to put her scheme into action.
answered Mar 28 at 17:09
useruser
10.9k32543
add a comment |
May is hoping that MPs will feel they have no choice but to support her deal to avoid a no-deal crash out, which they think is even worse.
Now that the indicative votes have failed to produce a majority for anything, she seems to think that the time is right to put her scheme into action.
answered Mar 28 at 17:09
useruser
10.9k32543
May is hoping that MPs will feel they have no choice but to support her deal to avoid a no-deal crash out, which they think is even worse.
Now that the indicative votes have failed to produce a majority for anything, she seems to think that the time is right to put her scheme into action.
answered Mar 28 at 17:09
useruser
10.9k32543
answered Mar 28 at 17:09
useruser
10.9k32543
answered Mar 28 at 17:09
useruser
10.9k32543
answered Mar 28 at 17:09
useruser
10.9k32543
10.9k32543
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39925%2fwhat-is-the-point-of-a-new-vote-on-mays-deal-when-the-indicative-votes-suggest%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
6
She may think that she can win based on her offer to resign.
– Karlomanio
Mar 28 at 13:58
4
* So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held. * Given fluctuating positions expressed by some, and some seemingly illogical voting positions adopted by others, assumptions of that sort would appear to be premature
– Chris H
Mar 28 at 16:55
The extension the EU gave her also legally requires a meaningful vote on the deal this week.
– thosphor
Mar 29 at 8:42
It is deal or no-deal time for the House of Commons. Regardless of what the MPs want or don't want. There are only two options left: accept May's deal, or face a no-deal Brexit.
– Dohn Joe
Mar 29 at 9:42
Whatever about other people changing their minds I don't think you can assume that the people who voted for a second referendum won't vote for May's deal. A second referendum is very unlikely (despite apparently significant support) and some of those voters (possibly a lot of them) would prefer May's deal to no deal. Remember that no deal is still the default if they keep saying no to all the options on offer. As Barnier said, you can't just say "no" to no deal, you have to actually vote for a deal.
– Eric Nolan
Mar 29 at 10:32