What's up with England

[*bfine32*]

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/09/uk/theresa-may-brexit-turmoil-analysis-intl/index.html

Can somebody give me the cliff notes?

From what I can garner:

Britain voted to leave the EU and that cannot be undone.

Since then May has been pushing for a "softer" exit

Yet her senior staff are pushing for a "harder" exit

Parliament can vote to hold a PM election whenever they want?

Anybody an expert of the British system? I would have put this in an older Brexit thread but those are all locked.

[GMDino]

(07-09-2018, 07:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/09/uk/theresa-may-brexit-turmoil-analysis-intl/index.html

Can somebody give me the cliff notes?

From what I can garner:

Britain voted to leave the EU and that cannot be undone.

Since then May has been pushing for a "softer" exit

Yet her senior staff are pushing for a "harder" exit

Parliament can vote to hold a PM election whenever they want?

Anybody an expert of the British system? I would have put this in an older Brexit thread but those are all locked.

From what they said on NPR today (as I am no expert) when BREXIT was voted for no one knew exactly what it meant.  How it would be done and what it would entail.

[Benton]

(07-09-2018, 09:34 PM)GMDino Wrote: From what they said on NPR today (as I am no expert) when BREXIT was voted for no one knew exactly what it meant.  How it would be done and what it would entail.

Yeah, it's hard to wrap around all of it as most of us on this board aren't British.

But, from what I understand, it was a divisive issue with "Exit" or "No Exit." And many of the pro-exit folks pushed the (now apparently false) belief that it could be a soft exit. Sort of 'yeah, you can tell the EU to stick it, but still keep all the parts that benefit you, like trade agreements.' But in the year (?) since, the party is splitting up because there's no real soft exit. It's more of 'exit now or exit later.'

It's kind of like Obamacare. People here used it as a wedge issue. Candidates got elected on both sides of it, and just about all of them lied about what Obamacare was and what chipping away at it would cause, notably people losing healthcare or paying more for it. 

[Belsnickel]

(07-10-2018, 01:23 AM)Benton Wrote: Yeah, it's hard to wrap around all of it as most of us on this board aren't British.

But, from what I understand, it was a divisive issue with "Exit" or "No Exit." And many of the pro-exit folks pushed the (now apparently false) belief that it could be a soft exit. Sort of 'yeah, you can tell the EU to stick it, but still keep all the parts that benefit you, like trade agreements.' But in the year (?) since, the party is splitting up because there's no real soft exit. It's more of 'exit now or exit later.'

It's kind of like Obamacare. People here used it as a wedge issue. Candidates got elected on both sides of it, and just about all of them lied about what Obamacare was and what chipping away at it would cause, notably people losing healthcare or paying more for it. 

This is kind of there. The issue is that a soft exit is possible, but not likely. Due to the sour grapes on both sides, the EU is not going to give much to the UK without major concessions, concessions that would make Brexit pointless. A hard exit is likely to be harmful to the UK moreso than the EU, so the EU is in the better bargaining position.

The tl;dr version of it all is that the hardliners made promises they couldn't keep, and now they are mad because May is trying to make Brexit happen with as little negative impact to the UK as possible.