-
I enjoyed this for a read, one part of it:
Hand-in-hand with this concept goes the other universal rule of Westminster politics: that is, you want to avoid an ascendant opponent in the first place. You want to keep your opponent weak enough to get beaten on polling day but not so weak that their own party replaces them with someone who could beat you.
This is precisely why the Coalition never went for the jugular on Bill Shorten.
But of course both these concepts are far too complex for Jeremy Corbyn, a man whose density is rivalled only by the bottom half of the periodic table.
The UK Labour leader's refusal to co-operate with Theresa May on a soft Brexit both dramatically increased the likelihood of a hard one and rendered her position so untenable that it effectively ensured her replacement by the far more popular Boris Johnson.
Not only that, Mr Corbyn's own position on Brexit was so hopelessly compromised and confused that his only tactic of the past two years was to loudly and constantly demand the Conservatives go to the polls, apparently blissfully unaware of the possibility that when they finally granted his wish, it might be under a different leader.
Now of course his bluff has been called and sooner or later, he will have no choice but to send himself to his doom. Honestly, anyone who ever gets the chance to play cards with this guy should immediately take him up on it and chuck their car keys in the pot. A five-year-old could beat him with pair of deuces.
www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12265853
-
I liked this bit...
"The far more disturbing thing to emerge from this whole sorry sh*tshow is the outrageously elitist attitude that the masses were not educated enough to know what they were voting for in the 2016 referendum and their error must be corrected by their intellectual betters.
Even Orwell himself would marvel that in 21st century Britain, supposedly enlightened politicians are arguing that people should be able to vote any way they want as long as it's the right one. Some pigs are indeed more equal than others.
The good news is that if these people really want a government that decides what's good for them without the pesky nuisance of democracy, then there's a very big and powerful country they can move to.
The only catch is it's not in Europe."
-
Opposition parties would love to delay an election until November or early next year. Another postponement to Brexit would see Conservative support drift to Farage
I don’t think it would. Farage is a bit of a bystander at the moment and hasn’t really got anything to offer other than a no deal alliance.
Another quarter of negative growth figures and the UK is in recession which would be helpful for Corbyn and Labour's electoral fortunes. Lib Dems still lack finance and organisation to target more than about 60 seats, but are in conversations with some ex-Tory donors who are pro-EU.
Fascinating to see who prevails tomorrow.
He’s in Ireland speaking to Vadrakar which will be interesting for public support. Macron snd Merkel comments after BoJo meetings were quite optimistic. If he gets similar from Leo it could be a big deal momentum swing.
-
Problems there.
- Trump doesn't really like free trade and resents UK trade surplus with US.
- Deal would need to be approved by House. Democrats in House won't support a deal if UK breaks Good Friday Agreement.
- Deal would need 67 votes in the Senate where again the Democrats will back Ireland.
-
@MajorRage Brexit Party still polling about 13%. Watch that go up if Brexit delayed beyond October.
Farage has promised not to stand against Conservative MPs who voted against Withdrawal Agreement three times and promise not to support any deal.
Rumour has it that Farage is preparing to stand in Uxbridge, Johnson's own constituency. Farage is very skillful at positioning always a bit to the right of the Tories.
-
Problems there.
- Trump doesn't really like free trade and resents UK trade surplus with US.
- Deal would need to be approved by House. Democrats in House won't support a deal if UK breaks Good Friday Agreement.
- Deal would need 67 votes in the Senate where again the Democrats will back Ireland.
On point 1, I think his dislike for Macron, Merkel, and EU commision outweighs anything else. He'd love to get one over them. I've just finished his book, one thing that strikes me he doesn't mind losing out a bit financially in order to stand up for what he thinks is right, especially against whom he views as bullies.
-
-
If the political class don't want something to happen, then it's hard for it to happen.
Agreed - and interesting stats!
The thing about a referendum, is that it is generally not legally binding. So the sitting government can choose to ignore its outcome if not what they wanted - obviously with the accompanying risks to their future power hopes.
So a referendum is "getting a sense of what people want" as opposed to what must then legally be done.
This bit is often ignored by Brexiteers in their arguments with the Remoaners when they seem to hold that the referendum is some legally binding moment / declaration.But the fun twist with the Brexit referendum though, was if I recall correctly, that the government of the time had promised - pre the referendum - to implement the outcome... So they morally (although not legally) bound themselves to a non-binding vote. Cue the circus.
-
-
@Billy-Webb said in Brexit:
So a referendum is "getting a sense of what people want" as opposed to what must then legally be done.
This bit is often ignored by Brexiteers in their arguments with the Remoaners when they seem to hold that the referendum is some legally binding moment / declaration.But the fun twist with the Brexit referendum though, was if I recall correctly, that the government of the time had promised - pre the referendum - to implement the outcome... So they morally (although not legally) bound themselves to a non-binding vote. Cue the circus.
The trouble with that stance is not only did the government say it would be implemented but many, if not all of the freelancing conservative MPs were on the record saying they would too. This also puts aside there has been a general election in the interim where conservative candidates ran on a platform of delivering Brexit.
I haven't really heard this point made before (at least at this late stage, maybe in the immediate aftermath of the vote), because even the modest ardent remainer accepts that any avenue to reversing Brexit would need to go through a second referendum.
-
-
God Femi is painful the way he just shouts over people and demands they answer his "yes/no" question with no tolerance of any nuance. FFS who chants "name one, name one" over and over at someone and expects to have a reasonable discussion? Moron.
Left at 2.55
What a knob
Femi's throries are facts, UKIP guy's opinions are not answering the question.
-
@Billy-Webb said in Brexit:
So a referendum is "getting a sense of what people want" as opposed to what must then legally be done.
This bit is often ignored by Brexiteers in their arguments with the Remoaners when they seem to hold that the referendum is some legally binding moment / declaration.But the fun twist with the Brexit referendum though, was if I recall correctly, that the government of the time had promised - pre the referendum - to implement the outcome... So they morally (although not legally) bound themselves to a non-binding vote. Cue the circus.
The trouble with that stance is not only did the government say it would be implemented but many, if not all of the freelancing conservative MPs were on the record saying they would too. This also puts aside there has been a general election in the interim where conservative candidates ran on a platform of delivering Brexit.
I haven't really heard this point made before (at least at this late stage, maybe in the immediate aftermath of the vote), because even the modest ardent remainer accepts that any avenue to reversing Brexit would need to go through a second referendum.
I think the hope was that the referendum would be very close, but lose. And this would be enough for the EU to budge on their freedom of movement policies, which is arguably the biggest issue with the EU principle as a whole.
Nothing wrong with Spanish, Italians, Dutch, French citizens having unequivocal freedom to move around and seek out the best opportunities. There is something inherently wrong with one country deciding to to give out passports as part of their own policy, and those people then being entitled to entire EU freedoms and movement.
I've always wondered if at point in time, behind closed doors if May pointed out to them that a shift in this policy could have avoided this whole clusterfuck. If Tusk had simply changed to something like countries have the right to reject residency to those without jobs, assets, family in countries, this whole thing would have been avoided.
-
So it's a three horse race
Tories - Leave under any means
Labour - we'd rather stay in, but if we do go out we don't want a no deal
Lib Dem - Remain, and we'll revoke Article 50 to make sureIt will be interesting to see whether Leave or Remain voters will change allegiance to get the Brexit result they hope for or whether party allegiance is too strong.
A reliable source has told me the Leave voters he's spoken with in S Wales are ready to vote The Brexit Paty or even Conservative to see us leave the EU despite coming from a multi-generational Labour voting background.
Brexit