I think you are bang on the money there.

That is the idea of our democracy and some do such as me. However, I think the majority of people in some areas certainly vote for the party, you must have heard comments like if I vote for the Tories or Labour my dad will turn inn his grave etc, etc

I am of then opinion that if I put a red rosette on in my constituency I would get elected.

She'll need to check in with a good quack first. The last 2 and a half years have aged her by about 15.

While some would undoubtedly prefer to remain, the issue, in the first instance, is how, not whether, we leave.

For example, the ERG are contributing to preventing May’s deal passing, not because they don’t want Brexit (though, I do half wonder at times), but because they’d prefer to leave with no deal.

On the other side there are plenty who want a brexit, but a softer one.

Add in the 114 who opposed invoking article 50 the time and you’ve got a coalition big enough to stop stuff, but way too disunited to progress anything.

If the DUP switch, and can take about two thirds of the remaining Tory dissidents with them, it’ll need fewer than 20 more labour MPs to switch too for May’s deal to squeeze through at the third time of asking.

We have to learn from this and not take the same approach to the future relationship negotiations - assuming we do avoid no deal. This isn’t how to conduct negotiations. This isn’t even how to play poker when you’re holding a pair of 5s. The whole country, not just the government and not just parliament, has to get a grip and realise that we are not the centre of the universe, and that behaving like we are won’t make it so. Ambitious bespoke deal, my bottom.

I think you said in an earlier post that in your opinion the leave voters, voted to leave for many different
reasons and I think this is a casing point, the ERG can only see what we now refer to as a hard Brexit, however, I really don't see the problem with leaving the EU with a deal that will also appeal to some people that voted to remain for example we should be able to agree a form of the customs Union and a Trade Policy. Which is why we entered the Common Market originally.

We've had that option for months - the Labour offer is to leave and retain membership of *a* customs union; and all the stuff about workers rights, consumer and environmental protections etc. That would probably win a majority across the house, given that it solves the DUP's issue *and* appeals to Remainers in the sense that it's a soft Brexit. Furthermore, the EU leaders have welcomed it.

So - if we're to get an extension to A50, and comply with the EU condition that if we want one, they need to know what for - it would seem sensible to request an extension, then use time to achieve a cross-party consensus around a soft (Labour) Brexit, that can command a majority in the House.

But - Mrs May, it is reported, absolutely refuses to be seen to be working with JC on the Labour deal, because, I assume, party politics and her enslavement by the ERG. Madness.

The key with the Labour option is the customs union.

Corbyn describes it as "a" customs union, a bespoke Uk - EU deal. However, would this fulfil the commitment to actually leave or, would this be yet another way of The EU maintaining control over the UK and is there really consensus with in Parliament for this option ?

Where is it reported that May will not work with the hate filled, terrorist supporting socialist JC?

I agree, but, as we know, that cuts across two of May’s red lines - ECJ jurisdiction and regulatory/trade autonomy.

To get something like Norway, then we’d need to allow freedom of movement and contribute to the EU budget too.

We’re sort of stuck between stools. Norway is, even i’d admit, a brexit in name only. May’s plan for something roughly like a ‘Canada-plus’ approach would be ‘fine’ if, like Canada, we didn’t have a land border with the EU or even just if that border wasn’t in a really difficult place.

Right from the outset, we seem to have thought, ‘we’re a special country and so we deserve a special deal.’ Whereas, unsurprisingly, the EU pointed us straight to its standard and existing packages, and May’s red lines narrowed it down to one poorly fitting option.

People can call it a lack of imagination on their part. More realistically it was a lack of self awareness on ours, imo.

Well - we would have left the EU, and that's what it said on the ballot paper. I would think it was the responsibility of parliament to ensure that we enact the will of the people, in the most orderly, least damaging way possible - which seems at this stage to be Labour's plan. Some people wouldn't like it - but that's tough tits - more people would like it than like TM's deal, and maybe that's the best we can hope for.

It seems that people imagined very different things when they voted to Leave - and they'll stamp their feet and scweam until they're sick if Brexit doesn't turn out to be exactly as they imagined; we can blame that on people who lied about Brexit dividends, NHS funding, sunlit uplands and the easiest trade deal in human history - but they'll have to grow up, realise they were lied to, and perhaps next time they want to put two fingers up at the establishment, they'll pick a more appropriate way to do it.