,
5 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
"Supporters of the two Conservative leadership candidates have sought to play down the chances of a no-deal Brexit, after business groups reiterated their warnings about the economic damage this could wreak." Weird, as they'll be the ones creating no deal. theguardian.com/politics/2019/…
In other words, although we're on a default path to no deal Brexit, it can still be stopped any time by revoking Article 50. So the probability of no deal is almost entirely dependent on the new PM's desire for no deal (no desire = no no deal; strong desire = big political fight)
So there is this wacky circularity to the argument because both candidates claim a no deal outcome is very very unlikely, while...
A) demanding no deal preparations be stepped up
B) failing to acknowledge their own central role in that no deal outcome happening in the first place
A) demanding no deal preparations be stepped up
B) failing to acknowledge their own central role in that no deal outcome happening in the first place
It's like someone in a car headed down a steep hill towards a cliff edge not acknowledging that they have the power to steer away or apply the brakes if they wanted to. The only way the car goes over the cliff is if they let it. They say "it's very unlikely to go over the cliff".
They also say "if necessary I won't hesitate to launch this rust-bucket right over the edge into the void."
Those two statements are inherently contradictory. If they're willing to steer or brake, the cliff edge probability is zero. If they're not, it's not. They're responsible.
Those two statements are inherently contradictory. If they're willing to steer or brake, the cliff edge probability is zero. If they're not, it's not. They're responsible.
