Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Summary : August 2018

SystemSystem Posts: 11,015
edited August 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Summary : August 2018

Conservatives 6,874 votes (33% -6% on last time) winning 7 seats (-1 on last time) Labour 6,203 votes (30% +1% on last time) winning 3 seats (-1 on last time) Liberal Democrats 5,202 votes (25% +12% on last time) winning 3 seats (+1 on last time) Independent candidates 1,887 votes (9% +2% on last time) winning 1 seat (+1 on last time) Green Party 427 votes (2% -3% on last time) winning 0 seats (unchanged on last time) UKIP 298 votes (1% -5% on last time) winning 0 seats (unchanged on last time) Plaid Cymru 73 votes (0% +0% on last time) winning 0 seats (unchanged on last time) Conservative lead of 671 votes (3%) on a swing of 3.56% from Con to Lab

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Options
    It’s all about firehosing in 2018....

    https://youtu.be/nknYtlOvaQ0
  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/MattCartoonist/status/1035578268928364544

    Brilliant as always.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942
    Thanks Harry!
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942
    Fpt
    ydoethur said:

    surby said:

    ydoethur said:

    I don't know. We keep asking for more information about how they would implement Chequers and he's already rejected that.
    When did they reject Chequers ?
    Within about five minutes of its being announced.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/26/michel-barnier-tears-up-theresa-mays-brexit-customs-proposals
    I have no idea why we’re persisting with it.

    May should take Timothy’s advice and move towards Canada+ in order to avoid no deal...
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    Mortimer said:

    Fpt

    ydoethur said:

    surby said:

    ydoethur said:

    I don't know. We keep asking for more information about how they would implement Chequers and he's already rejected that.
    When did they reject Chequers ?
    Within about five minutes of its being announced.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/26/michel-barnier-tears-up-theresa-mays-brexit-customs-proposals
    I have no idea why we’re persisting with it.

    May should take Timothy’s advice and move towards Canada+ in order to avoid no deal...
    And stand back with popcorn as Barnier, Junker and Varakdar have the most almighty row about the “Border”.
  • Options
    Over on Facebook the fucking Kali Ma Corbynite wankers are celebrating Frank Field, egging on Mike Gaoes to follow suit and cheering on the idea of other Labour MPs going away.

    Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,190
    edited August 2018

    Over on Facebook the fucking Kali Ma Corbynite wankers are celebrating Frank Field, egging on Mike Gaoes to follow suit and cheering on the idea of other Labour MPs going away.

    Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs

    It's time to get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831

    Over on Facebook the fucking Kali Ma Corbynite wankers are celebrating Frank Field, egging on Mike Gaoes to follow suit and cheering on the idea of other Labour MPs going away.

    Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs

    The Labour Party world has gone mad. I was going to say 'slightly mad' but I think it is full on bat-shit crazy.

    And that is not good for any of us. Left, Right, Centre, whatever. We need a functioning party of the left - not this.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,597
    If only there was the prospect of a by election in a safe Labour seat on Merseyside...
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    Just posted over on the old thread so I will copy paste it over to here.

    I don't know if there is a good post to reply to specifically on this but it is more of a general point.

    The problem with pointing at Corbyn's rebellions is in the eyes of a majority of Labour members he was often right. To give an obvious example Corbyn's rebellion over the Iraq war is always considered a huge strength among the membership. Lesser ones such as his civil liberty stance over excessive anti terror legislation are also popular within the membership. I haven't looked through his entire rebellious record but I'm sure I remember Stepthen Bush talking about Iraq involving several votes (on which I assume he rebelled on each one) it quickly adds up and I suspect there is a reason his opponents in Labour just talk about the number of rebellions rather than the actual things he rebelled on.

    I think I also remember Stephen Bush talking about him only voting against Labour 2/10 times during his most rebellious period, I imagine this would range from things that Labour members would approve of to things they don't care about.

    The problem for Frank Field and the others that moves were made to deselect is not so much that they voted 'for Brexit' there are many more than the 4 who have voted for Brexit and will vote for Brexit. To give a somewhat popular on here (by the standards of Labour MPs who were for remain) example Caroline Flint, yet she managed not to vote against Labour on this issue.

    What they did, as Danny pointed out a few times, was unite Corbyn supporters and strong remainer types (some centrist types) against them, it left them without any real faction in their CLPs to back them. I think the vote against Kate Hoey in her CLP passed without a vote in her favour, Frank got a few in his favour but it was still a pretty overwhelming result against him.

    The idea from Labour opponents that Frank Field could stand and win against Labour in his seat is very optimistic I feel, he's in pretty solid Corbyn supporting territory, popularity among the residents of PB and the unpopularity of Corbyn and an MP who presumably is at least a bit more like him is generally not a good guide to what will happen electorally in Liverpool and places like it politically.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,597
    On topic, on these figures Vince should be the most secure party leader.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    As a man who doesn't care about running massive unfunded spending sprees on vanity projects, claims to care about the workers and has made a fortune out of dodgy property deals abroad, I would have expected him to fit right in.
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831

    On topic, on these figures Vince should be the most secure party leader.

    Yet is the one who is about to announce his retirement date...
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,767
    Sandpit said:

    Mortimer said:

    Fpt

    ydoethur said:

    surby said:

    ydoethur said:

    I don't know. We keep asking for more information about how they would implement Chequers and he's already rejected that.
    When did they reject Chequers ?
    Within about five minutes of its being announced.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/26/michel-barnier-tears-up-theresa-mays-brexit-customs-proposals
    I have no idea why we’re persisting with it.

    May should take Timothy’s advice and move towards Canada+ in order to avoid no deal...
    And stand back with popcorn as Barnier, Junker and Varakdar have the most almighty row about the “Border”.
    I don't think Barnier or Juncker care that much about the outcome. I'm sure that they have departments which care a great deal though - many a promising EU career could perish should there be a truly detrimental (for all) outcome. I can't understand the Irish position at all. (I wonder if I could copyright that phrase - I can't imagine it's anything but original!)
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840

    Over on Facebook the fucking Kali Ma Corbynite wankers are celebrating Frank Field, egging on Mike Gaoes to follow suit and cheering on the idea of other Labour MPs going away.

    Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs

    It's time to get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn
    I don't know if this may have escaped your notice but the target of your own personal cause, Corbyn and his allies, are also Labour MPs.

    You even have your own Kali Ma now with progress.

    Although I guess this could be the you have to become what you hate to beat it argument?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,612
    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,767

    On topic, on these figures Vince should be the most secure party leader.

    Yet is the one who is about to announce his retirement date...
    Having shafted all his parliamentary colleagues royally. They're not fit for his job. Which is a bit odd given what he's made of his job surely anyone could do it.
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831

    Over on Facebook the fucking Kali Ma Corbynite wankers are celebrating Frank Field, egging on Mike Gaoes to follow suit and cheering on the idea of other Labour MPs going away.

    Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs

    It's time to get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn
    I don't know if this may have escaped your notice but the target of your own personal cause, Corbyn and his allies, are also Labour MPs.

    You even have your own Kali Ma now with progress.

    Although I guess this could be the you have to become what you hate to beat it argument?
    Can you point us to the coordinated Progress -related abuse on Twitter so that we can compare it with the Momentum/#JC4PM/#JC9 abuse?
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
  • Options

    Over on Facebook the fucking Kali Ma Corbynite wankers are celebrating Frank Field, egging on Mike Gaoes to follow suit and cheering on the idea of other Labour MPs going away.

    Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs

    It's time to get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn
    Do the Labour Party get much of their money via membership fees, or is it an insignificant amount?
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited August 2018
    Omnium said:

    Sandpit said:

    Mortimer said:

    Fpt

    ydoethur said:

    surby said:

    ydoethur said:

    I don't know. We keep asking for more information about how they would implement Chequers and he's already rejected that.
    When did they reject Chequers ?
    Within about five minutes of its being announced.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/26/michel-barnier-tears-up-theresa-mays-brexit-customs-proposals
    I have no idea why we’re persisting with it.

    May should take Timothy’s advice and move towards Canada+ in order to avoid no deal...
    And stand back with popcorn as Barnier, Junker and Varakdar have the most almighty row about the “Border”.
    I don't think Barnier or Juncker care that much about the outcome. I'm sure that they have departments which care a great deal though - many a promising EU career could perish should there be a truly detrimental (for all) outcome. I can't understand the Irish position at all. (I wonder if I could copyright that phrase - I can't imagine it's anything but original!)
    It's basically a sort of Reverse Cowgirl position. They've been persuaded they're on top and therefore in charge, but the reality is they're being screwed by unseen forces.
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    edited August 2018
    Omnium said:

    Sandpit said:

    Mortimer said:

    Fpt

    ydoethur said:

    surby said:

    ydoethur said:

    I don't know. We keep asking for more information about how they would implement Chequers and he's already rejected that.
    When did they reject Chequers ?
    Within about five minutes of its being announced.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/26/michel-barnier-tears-up-theresa-mays-brexit-customs-proposals
    I have no idea why we’re persisting with it.

    May should take Timothy’s advice and move towards Canada+ in order to avoid no deal...
    And stand back with popcorn as Barnier, Junker and Varakdar have the most almighty row about the “Border”.
    I don't think Barnier or Juncker care that much about the outcome. I'm sure that they have departments which care a great deal though - many a promising EU career could perish should there be a truly detrimental (for all) outcome. I can't understand the Irish position at all. (I wonder if I could copyright that phrase - I can't imagine it's anything but original!)
    Domestic (very domestic) Irish politics. It’s very useful for FG to have an external enemy at this point in the cycle. Within FG Coveney very unsubtly thinks that he should be doing Varadkar’s job. It’s like TB and GB but on a more provincial scale (Dublin vs the rest).
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,938
    Scott_P said:
    Oh dear. I bet Tim's Twitter feed is melting.

    (I can never remember what it is)
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,767

    Over on Facebook the fucking Kali Ma Corbynite wankers are celebrating Frank Field, egging on Mike Gaoes to follow suit and cheering on the idea of other Labour MPs going away.

    Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs

    It's time to get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn
    Do the Labour Party get much of their money via membership fees, or is it an insignificant amount?
    Trade unions have historically been their main funding. They do get perhaps more large donation than one might thing though. Corbyn has boosted the importance of membership contributions. It's far from insignificant. I'm sure its easy to hunt down the current figures.

    The historical soul of Labour is thus more questionable than perhaps it is now. Interesting that less Union dominance is proving more troubling.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,954
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?
    If the Labour Party wanted to cause the government maximum problems it would attempt to implement a referendum in Northern Ireland on staying in the EU's customs union.

    Thank goodness they're a bunch of hopeless incompetents more concerned with the Jews.
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    edited August 2018

    Over on Facebook the fucking Kali Ma Corbynite wankers are celebrating Frank Field, egging on Mike Gaoes to follow suit and cheering on the idea of other Labour MPs going away.

    Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs

    It's time to get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn
    I don't know if this may have escaped your notice but the target of your own personal cause, Corbyn and his allies, are also Labour MPs.

    You even have your own Kali Ma now with progress.

    Although I guess this could be the you have to become what you hate to beat it argument?
    Can you point us to the coordinated Progress -related abuse on Twitter so that we can compare it with the Momentum/#JC4PM/#JC9 abuse?
    I don't know how that really works as a reply.

    Rochdale said, 'Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs'

    He then said 'It's time to get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn'

    I was pointing out the contradiction of his statement that if you are a tosser then enemy of the Labour party are Labour MPs before he stated his enemy was a Labour MP. Which isn't a contradiction if he is becoming a 'tosser' to fight the 'tossers' which is where my statement about becoming what you hate to beat it comes in.

    If you want to have a separate conversation about Progress and Momentum directed/coordinated abuse we can, I haven't seen proof of either organisation directing abuse, even if they wanted to I imagine they wouldn't because it would be bad PR, plenty of criticism back and fore but from the actual organisations and the head people abuse I imagine generally not.

    Edit: Unless the specific part you were referring to was Progress also being Kali Ma although to be honest I don't really know the full implication of the reference I just took it to mean the same as cult.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    Mortimer said:

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?

    Because of this:
    Mortimer said:

    May should take Timothy’s advice and move towards Canada+ in order to avoid no deal...

    A Canada+ deal necessarily involves customs borders, and they cannot be implemented on the Irish land border.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,938
    edited August 2018
    Ishmael_Z said:
    Thanks. There's nothing so far: perhaps he's just building up a head of steam ...
  • Options
    surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.

    That will soon be changed - by another vote.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,767
    matt said:

    Omnium said:

    Sandpit said:

    Mortimer said:

    Fpt

    ydoethur said:

    surby said:

    ydoethur said:

    I don't know. We keep asking for more information about how they would implement Chequers and he's already rejected that.
    When did they reject Chequers ?
    Within about five minutes of its being announced.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/26/michel-barnier-tears-up-theresa-mays-brexit-customs-proposals
    I have no idea why we’re persisting with it.

    May should take Timothy’s advice and move towards Canada+ in order to avoid no deal...
    And stand back with popcorn as Barnier, Junker and Varakdar have the most almighty row about the “Border”.
    I don't think Barnier or Juncker care that much about the outcome. I'm sure that they have departments which care a great deal though - many a promising EU career could perish should there be a truly detrimental (for all) outcome. I can't understand the Irish position at all. (I wonder if I could copyright that phrase - I can't imagine it's anything but original!)
    Domestic (very domestic) Irish politics. It’s very useful for FG to have an external enemy at this point in the cycle. Within FG Coveney very unsubtly thinks that he should be doing Varadkar’s job. It’s like TB and GB but on a more provincial scale (Dublin vs the rest).
    Delighted you can see some sense in their goings on. I'd not want to see a particularly poor outcome for the Irish people.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    surby said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.

    That will soon be changed - by another vote.
    That's clever William. Not only have you got into another account but you're posting in both of them at once!
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,807

    Just posted over on the old thread so I will copy paste it over to here.

    I don't know if there is a good post to reply to specifically on this but it is more of a general point.

    The problem with pointing at Corbyn's rebellions is in the eyes of a majority of Labour members he was often right. To give an obvious example Corbyn's rebellion over the Iraq war is always considered a huge strength among the membership. Lesser ones such as his civil liberty stance over excessive anti terror legislation are also popular within the membership. I haven't looked through his entire rebellious record but I'm sure I remember Stepthen Bush talking about Iraq involving several votes (on which I assume he rebelled on each one) it quickly adds up and I suspect there is a reason his opponents in Labour just talk about the number of rebellions rather than the actual things he rebelled on.

    I think I also remember Stephen Bush talking about him only voting against Labour 2/10 times during his most rebellious period, I imagine this would range from things that Labour members would approve of to things they don't care about.

    The problem for Frank Field and the others that moves were made to deselect is not so much that they voted 'for Brexit' there are many more than the 4 who have voted for Brexit and will vote for Brexit. To give a somewhat popular on here (by the standards of Labour MPs who were for remain) example Caroline Flint, yet she managed not to vote against Labour on this issue.

    What they did, as Danny pointed out a few times, was unite Corbyn supporters and strong remainer types (some centrist types) against them, it left them without any real faction in their CLPs to back them. I think the vote against Kate Hoey in her CLP passed without a vote in her favour, Frank got a few in his favour but it was still a pretty overwhelming result against him.

    The idea from Labour opponents that Frank Field could stand and win against Labour in his seat is very optimistic I feel, he's in pretty solid Corbyn supporting territory, popularity among the residents of PB and the unpopularity of Corbyn and an MP who presumably is at least a bit more like him is generally not a good guide to what will happen electorally in Liverpool and places like it politically.

    Hard to say. Blaenau Gwent was rock-solid Labour, until it wasn't. I think that Field would stand a good chance as an independent in a by-election, although a general election would be much tougher.

    His brand of Labour, both on the right of the party and anti-EU, is however, rare.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,807
    Scott_P said:

    That probably won't help Labour in Plymouth.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,850
    Sean_F said:

    Just posted over on the old thread so I will copy paste it over to here.

    I don't know if there is a good post to reply to specifically on this but it is more of a general point.

    The problem with pointing at Corbyn's rebellions is in the eyes of a majority of Labour members he was often right. To give an obvious example Corbyn's rebellion over the Iraq war is always considered a huge strength among the membership. Lesser ones such as his civil liberty stance over excessive anti terror legislation are also popular within the membership. I haven't looked through his entire rebellious record but I'm sure I remember Stepthen Bush talking about Iraq involving several votes (on which I assume he rebelled on each one) it quickly adds up and I suspect there is a reason his opponents in Labour just talk about the number of rebellions rather than the actual things he rebelled on.

    I think I also remember Stephen Bush talking about him only voting against Labour 2/10 times during his most rebellious period, I imagine this would range from things that Labour members would approve of to things they don't care about.

    The problem for Frank Field and the others that moves were made to deselect is not so much that they voted 'for Brexit' there are many more than the 4 who have voted for Brexit and will vote for Brexit. To give a somewhat popular on here (by the standards of Labour MPs who were for remain) example Caroline Flint, yet she managed not to vote against Labour on this issue.

    What they did, as Danny pointed out a few times, was unite Corbyn supporters and strong remainer types (some centrist types) against them, it left them without any real faction in their CLPs to back them. I think the vote against Kate Hoey in her CLP passed without a vote in her favour, Frank got a few in his favour but it was still a pretty overwhelming result against him.

    The idea from Labour opponents that Frank Field could stand and win against Labour in his seat is very optimistic I feel, he's in pretty solid Corbyn supporting territory, popularity among the residents of PB and the unpopularity of Corbyn and an MP who presumably is at least a bit more like him is generally not a good guide to what will happen electorally in Liverpool and places like it politically.

    Hard to say. Blaenau Gwent was rock-solid Labour, until it wasn't. I think that Field would stand a good chance as an independent in a by-election, although a general election would be much tougher.

    His brand of Labour, both on the right of the party and anti-EU, is however, rare.
    What odds would you want on Field
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    Omnium said:

    Over on Facebook the fucking Kali Ma Corbynite wankers are celebrating Frank Field, egging on Mike Gaoes to follow suit and cheering on the idea of other Labour MPs going away.

    Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs

    It's time to get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn
    Do the Labour Party get much of their money via membership fees, or is it an insignificant amount?
    Trade unions have historically been their main funding. They do get perhaps more large donation than one might thing though. Corbyn has boosted the importance of membership contributions. It's far from insignificant. I'm sure its easy to hunt down the current figures.

    The historical soul of Labour is thus more questionable than perhaps it is now. Interesting that less Union dominance is proving more troubling.
    I was under the impression that membership contributions are the primary source of Labours income these days, we have lost a few of our biggest donors in the last few years although I don't actually know how membership fees compare to other sources.

    I know the party made a killing with 2106 leadership election.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,954
    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:

    That probably won't help Labour in Plymouth.
    And I had no idea Roy Jenkins was (a) still alive, and (b) back in the Labour Party.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,807

    On topic, on these figures Vince should be the most secure party leader.


    Doing well in local by-elections is much easier than doing well across several thousand seats when an entire round of local elections is being fought.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    This is not exactly a great scoop by the Mail. I knew about this meeting as long ago as 2015:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6115547/amp/Jeremy-Corbyn-accused-misleading-Parliament-holding-private-meeting-Holocaust-denier.html?__twitter_impression=true

    However, what does appear to be a bit different is the accusation he has misled Parliament. Now that could be serious.
  • Options
    surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    ydoethur said:

    surby said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.

    That will soon be changed - by another vote.
    That's clever William. Not only have you got into another account but you're posting in both of them at once!
    ??
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:

    That probably won't help Labour in Plymouth.
    There are many announcements of legal challenges. Few succeed as the challenger hoped. Perhaps we could have an update later. Because this is no more than a posturing press release at this point.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited August 2018
    surby said:

    ydoethur said:

    surby said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.

    That will soon be changed - by another vote.
    That's clever William. Not only have you got into another account but you're posting in both of them at once!
    ??
    It was a brave but clearly not wholly successful attempt to make a humorous observation about William Glenn's obsession with a second vote becoming unstoppable due to rising popular demand.

    For the record, I didn't really think you were him.
  • Options



    I know the party made a killing with 2106 leadership election.

    Are you a time traveller? ;)

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,807

    Sean_F said:

    Just posted over on the old thread so I will copy paste it over to here.

    I don't know if there is a good post to reply to specifically on this but it is more of a general point.

    The problem with pointing at Corbyn's rebellions is in the eyes of a majority of Labour members he was often right. To give an obvious example Corbyn's rebellion over the Iraq war is always considered a huge strength among the membership. Lesser ones such as his civil liberty stance over excessive anti terror legislation are also popular within the membership. I haven't looked through his entire rebellious record but I'm sure I remember Stepthen Bush talking about Iraq involving several votes (on which I assume he rebelled on each one) it quickly adds up and I suspect there is a reason his opponents in Labour just talk about the number of rebellions rather than the actual things he rebelled on.

    I think I also remember Stephen Bush talking about him only voting against Labour 2/10 times during his most rebellious period, I imagine this would range from things that Labour members would approve of to things they don't care about.

    The problem for Frank Field and the others that moves were made to deselect is not so much that they voted 'for Brexit' there are many more than the 4 who have voted for Brexit and will vote for Brexit. To give a somewhat popular on here (by the standards of Labour MPs who were for remain) example Caroline Flint, yet she managed not to vote against Labour on this issue.

    What they did, as Danny pointed out a few times, was unite Corbyn supporters and strong remainer types (some centrist types) against them, it left them without any real faction in their CLPs to back them. I think the vote against Kate Hoey in her CLP passed without a vote in her favour, Frank got a few in his favour but it was still a pretty overwhelming result against him.

    The idea from Labour opponents that Frank Field could stand and win against Labour in his seat is very optimistic I feel, he's in pretty solid Corbyn supporting territory, popularity among the residents of PB and the unpopularity of Corbyn and an MP who presumably is at least a bit more like him is generally not a good guide to what will happen electorally in Liverpool and places like it politically.

    Hard to say. Blaenau Gwent was rock-solid Labour, until it wasn't. I think that Field would stand a good chance as an independent in a by-election, although a general election would be much tougher.

    His brand of Labour, both on the right of the party and anti-EU, is however, rare.
    What odds would you want on Field
    None, until I know if there will be a by-election.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,954

    Sean_F said:

    Hard to say. Blaenau Gwent was rock-solid Labour, until it wasn't. I think that Field would stand a good chance as an independent in a by-election, although a general election would be much tougher.

    His brand of Labour, both on the right of the party and anti-EU, is however, rare.

    What odds would you want on Field
    Well, it rather depends who the Labour Party put up as a candidate.

    Against a generic Labour Party politician, I'd reckon it would be a very close fight. If they parachuted someone in, and then flooded the constituency with clueless young Jezuits, then Field should probably be favourite. And if they picked a sensible local Leaver not called George Galloway, then the Labour Party would probably win it at a canter.

    So, probably Frank Field as narrow favourite.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited August 2018

    Omnium said:

    Over on Facebook the fucking Kali Ma Corbynite wankers are celebrating Frank Field, egging on Mike Gaoes to follow suit and cheering on the idea of other Labour MPs going away.

    Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs

    It's time to get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn
    Do the Labour Party get much of their money via membership fees, or is it an insignificant amount?
    Trade unions have historically been their main funding. They do get perhaps more large donation than one might thing though. Corbyn has boosted the importance of membership contributions. It's far from insignificant. I'm sure its easy to hunt down the current figures.

    The historical soul of Labour is thus more questionable than perhaps it is now. Interesting that less Union dominance is proving more troubling.
    I was under the impression that membership contributions are the primary source of Labours income these days, we have lost a few of our biggest donors in the last few years although I don't actually know how membership fees compare to other sources.

    I know the party made a killing with 2106 leadership election.
    If Corbyn's going to stay for 98 years, matters are worse than I realised.

    (On the substantive point, Labour has - very effectively and very sensibly - moved towards individual subs as a key source of income, but I would be surprised to learn they have overtaken union donations. I could be wrong though. Does anyone have the figures?)
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942

    Mortimer said:

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?

    Because of this:
    Mortimer said:

    May should take Timothy’s advice and move towards Canada+ in order to avoid no deal...

    A Canada+ deal necessarily involves customs borders, and they cannot be implemented on the Irish land border.
    The UK has no desire to have a hard border.

    Does the EU?
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100
    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:

    That probably won't help Labour in Plymouth.
    Not when the FOI request goes in to find how much money they have spent on this.....
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    matt said:

    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:

    That probably won't help Labour in Plymouth.
    There are many announcements of legal challenges. Few succeed as the challenger hoped. Perhaps we could have an update later. Because this is no more than a posturing press release at this point.
    So they’re spending Plymouth council taxpayers’ money on lawyers to talk about Brexit, rather than on funding social care in Plymouth?
  • Options
    surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/30/jeremy-hunt-plays-down-brexit-progress-michel-barnier-poland

    So racist Poland is now our supporter. The Swedish FM wants a second vote.

    I wonder if FoM is back if Poland is supporting the UK government position.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,767
    Sean_F said:

    Just posted over on the old thread so I will copy paste it over to here.

    I don't know if there is a good post to reply to specifically on this but it is more of a general point.

    The problem with pointing at Corbyn's rebellions is in the eyes of a majority of Labour members he was often right. To give an obvious example Corbyn's rebellion over the Iraq war is always considered a huge strength among the membership. Lesser ones such as his civil liberty stance over excessive anti terror legislation are also popular within the membership. I haven't looked through his entire rebellious record but I'm sure I remember Stepthen Bush talking about Iraq involving several votes (on which I assume he rebelled on each one) it quickly adds up and I suspect there is a reason his opponents in Labour just talk about the number of rebellions rather than the actual things he rebelled on.

    (small cut)

    The problem for Frank Field and the others that moves were made to deselect is not so much that they voted 'for Brexit' there are many more than the 4 who have voted for Brexit and will vote for Brexit. To give a somewhat popular on here (by the standards of Labour MPs who were for remain) example Caroline Flint, yet she managed not to vote against Labour on this issue.

    What they did, as Danny pointed out a few times, was unite Corbyn supporters and strong remainer types (some centrist types) against them, it left them without any real faction in their CLPs to back them. I think the vote against Kate Hoey in her CLP passed without a vote in her favour, Frank got a few in his favour but it was still a pretty overwhelming result against him.

    The idea from Labour opponents that Frank Field could stand and win against Labour in his seat is very optimistic I feel, he's in pretty solid Corbyn supporting territory, popularity among the residents of PB and the unpopularity of Corbyn and an MP who presumably is at least a bit more like him is generally not a good guide to what will happen electorally in Liverpool and places like it politically.

    Hard to say. Blaenau Gwent was rock-solid Labour, until it wasn't. I think that Field would stand a good chance as an independent in a by-election, although a general election would be much tougher.

    His brand of Labour, both on the right of the party and anti-EU, is however, rare.
    What outcome from the Iraq war would have proved Corbyn wasn't right? Voting against war, when it's going to happen anyway, is just a no-lose proposition. I think you can be sure that at least some bad things would have happened if the Iraq War hadn't happened. There were no WMD's though, perhaps there wouldn't have been by now, but then again maybe there would.

    I'm not sure Corbyn has ever voted for the painful choice - something that is right, but that is going to look wrong. Has he?
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,850
    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Hard to say. Blaenau Gwent was rock-solid Labour, until it wasn't. I think that Field would stand a good chance as an independent in a by-election, although a general election would be much tougher.

    His brand of Labour, both on the right of the party and anti-EU, is however, rare.

    What odds would you want on Field
    Well, it rather depends who the Labour Party put up as a candidate.

    Against a generic Labour Party politician, I'd reckon it would be a very close fight. If they parachuted someone in, and then flooded the constituency with clueless young Jezuits, then Field should probably be favourite. And if they picked a sensible local Leaver not called George Galloway, then the Labour Party would probably win it at a canter.

    So, probably Frank Field as narrow favourite.
    I will probably be offering about 3/1 when we have the candidates
  • Options
    surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Hard to say. Blaenau Gwent was rock-solid Labour, until it wasn't. I think that Field would stand a good chance as an independent in a by-election, although a general election would be much tougher.

    His brand of Labour, both on the right of the party and anti-EU, is however, rare.

    What odds would you want on Field
    Well, it rather depends who the Labour Party put up as a candidate.

    Against a generic Labour Party politician, I'd reckon it would be a very close fight. If they parachuted someone in, and then flooded the constituency with clueless young Jezuits, then Field should probably be favourite. And if they picked a sensible local Leaver not called George Galloway, then the Labour Party would probably win it at a canter.

    So, probably Frank Field as narrow favourite.
    Frank Field will lose big. In a general election, we would lose massively. He actually lives in Hertfordshire.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    surby said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/30/jeremy-hunt-plays-down-brexit-progress-michel-barnier-poland

    So racist Poland is now our supporter. The Swedish FM wants a second vote.

    I wonder if FoM is back if Poland is supporting the UK government position.

    I'm not sure Salvini will be on our side about the American Parmesan...
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    Sean_F said:



    What they did, as Danny pointed out a few times, was unite Corbyn supporters and strong remainer types (some centrist types) against them, it left them without any real faction in their CLPs to back them. I think the vote against Kate Hoey in her CLP passed without a vote in her favour, Frank got a few in his favour but it was still a pretty overwhelming result against him.

    The idea from Labour opponents that Frank Field could stand and win against Labour in his seat is very optimistic I feel, he's in pretty solid Corbyn supporting territory, popularity among the residents of PB and the unpopularity of Corbyn and an MP who presumably is at least a bit more like him is generally not a good guide to what will happen electorally in Liverpool and places like it politically.

    Hard to say. Blaenau Gwent was rock-solid Labour, until it wasn't. I think that Field would stand a good chance as an independent in a by-election, although a general election would be much tougher.

    His brand of Labour, both on the right of the party and anti-EU, is however, rare.
    Blaenau Gwent was won on the left v right contest, Field in a repeat of such a contest would not be running in the winning position, the left won. It was also during New Labour when the leadership were becoming unpopular on the left.

    If Corbyn was Blair and Frank Field was fighting this from the left he would have a very good chance, especially in a place that is like Liverpool politically. That is the exact opposite of what is happening though.

    It isn't even as if Lib Dem or Green voters are a natural switch to him. Even if you took every single Conservative and UKIP voter, which is obviously unrealistic Field would need a hell of a personal vote on top of that to beat the new potential Labour MP. I think the evidence from the last election showed about 6% of voters vote for their MP personally. Even in a by election with the media rooting for him I think his chances are very slim, some other constituency maybe, where he is, no.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited August 2018
    Sean_F said:

    Hard to say. Blaenau Gwent was rock-solid Labour, until it wasn't. I think that Field would stand a good chance as an independent in a by-election, although a general election would be much tougher.

    His brand of Labour, both on the right of the party and anti-EU, is however, rare.

    Blaenau Gwent was an unusual set of circumstances. Law's local profile was comparable. The parachuting in of an unknown outsider was extremely unwise. But I think what clinched it was his brain tumour, morbid though that sounds. It led to a huge swell of sympathy for him that later (after he died of it) transferred briefly to his wife Trish and his agent Dai Davies. Once that wave had subsided, they had no problem electing another Labour carpet bagger - indeed somebody who by any metric is unfit to hold elective office.

    So I don't think the comparison is a simple one - at least, I hope Field doesn't have terminal cancer.

    (Edit - my comments are not a reference to Nick Smith, btw.)
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,807

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    We persist because a very large majority of supporters of the governing party are happy with Brexit.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    But no voter in Rome or Rotterdam wants a border in the Irish Sea; it’s a stupid position for him to be taking.

    The EU’s overplaying a strong hand will backfire on them.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    surby said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/30/jeremy-hunt-plays-down-brexit-progress-michel-barnier-poland

    So racist Poland is now our supporter. The Swedish FM wants a second vote.

    I wonder if FoM is back if Poland is supporting the UK government position.

    More a product of Poland's rows with the EU over its judicial changes, May would not last 5 minutes if FoM was back in
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    But no voter in Rome or Rotterdam wants a border in the Irish Sea; it’s a stupid position for him to be taking.

    The EU’s overplaying a strong hand will backfire on them.
    Maybe so. Brexit is backfiring on us.

    Backfires all round :( It is so darn stupid.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was unlawfully appointed by the Head of the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country, and then confirmed by the Council whose actual appointment it was. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    Subtle alteration there.

    But he does, however wrong the process used, undoubtedly speak with the power of the Council.

    The only problem is as I warned Southam Observer at the time, he seems to speak mostly with Juncker's voice.
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    We persist because a very large majority of supporters of the governing party are happy with Brexit.
    Does a similar meme explain Labour's current behaviour? Does collective silliness make everything OK?
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,022
    edited August 2018
    Old Frankie just can't stop picking up those quality endorsements.

    https://twitter.com/IsabelOakeshott/status/1035566738543456256
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942
    edited August 2018

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    But no voter in Rome or Rotterdam wants a border in the Irish Sea; it’s a stupid position for him to be taking.

    The EU’s overplaying a strong hand will backfire on them.
    Maybe so. Brexit is backfiring on us.

    Backfires all round :( It is so darn stupid.
    I don’t agree with you that Brexit is a harmful policy; but just playing along for a second, if you’re going to persue a policy that some consider negative, wouldn’t you rather have the backing of your people?

    Brexit was voted for. An Irish Sea border was not. Which is going to be objected to more?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    We persist because a very large majority of supporters of the governing party are happy with Brexit.
    Conservative 2017 voters:

    84% think Brexit is a mess
    66% think promises of Brexit supporting politicians will be broken
    58% think we will get a bad deal
    48% think if we get a bad deal it will be the government's fault

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/rvih2zseqr/PeoplesVoteResults_Wave2_180821_GB_website2.pdf
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Over on Facebook the fucking Kali Ma Corbynite wankers are celebrating Frank Field, egging on Mike Gaoes to follow suit and cheering on the idea of other Labour MPs going away.

    Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs

    It's time to get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn
    Do the Labour Party get much of their money via membership fees, or is it an insignificant amount?
    Trade unions have historically been their main funding. They do get perhaps more large donation than one might thing though. Corbyn has boosted the importance of membership contributions. It's far from insignificant. I'm sure its easy to hunt down the current figures.

    The historical soul of Labour is thus more questionable than perhaps it is now. Interesting that less Union dominance is proving more troubling.
    I was under the impression that membership contributions are the primary source of Labours income these days, we have lost a few of our biggest donors in the last few years although I don't actually know how membership fees compare to other sources.

    I know the party made a killing with 2106 leadership election.
    If Corbyn's going to stay for 98 years, matters are worse than I realised.

    (On the substantive point, Labour has - very effectively and very sensibly - moved towards individual subs as a key source of income, but I would be surprised to learn they have overtaken union donations. I could be wrong though. Does anyone have the figures?)
    I had to read two posts mentioned the error before I could actually read the error.. sure I re read it as me saying 2016 at least once.

    My impression may well be wrong, I just remember being impressed by the amounts we were making from members and when I lined that up with what we spent on the general election guessed that the members were providing more than the Unions, although I'm probably disregarding too much the money spent outside GE's in my assumptions at the time, it wasn't exactly something I thought about too deeply.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    But no voter in Rome or Rotterdam wants a border in the Irish Sea; it’s a stupid position for him to be taking.

    The EU’s overplaying a strong hand will backfire on them.
    Maybe so. Brexit is backfiring on us.

    Backfires all round :( It is so darn stupid.
    There are no clear cut short term winners from Brexit, and that includes the Russians who need to sell the EU their gas.

    That being so it is pretty damning that the EU has not asked itself why the vote went against them. They keep wrapping themselves in the comfort blanket that it was all about immigration, or that the English have never really bought into Europe as a project, or that Cameron was unpopular, and therefore nothing else needs to change. The good ship EU can just carry on as before, and it's perfectly fine to continue to appoint disgraced former national leaders forced to resign for harassing their political opponents using the security services and appear in public roaring drunk on numerous occasions to key posts. Because nobody minds that. It's all about foreigners.

    I fear that the EU is riding for the hardest of falls. And now we're leaving there's absolutely nothing we can do about it.
  • Options
    Congratulations to TheJezziah on a fabulous piece of Whataboutery. Progress - as far as I can see - are not agitating against Labour MPs. Did not call for fealty to Tony Blair. Did not demand the removal of rebels. That's just Momentum.

    The enemy of the Labour Party are not Labour MPs. Or Labour officials. Or Labour councillors. We can trust Labour council leaders. We don't need a purge of Labour volunteers elected to run CLPs. And yet that is all that comes out of you fucking crazy entryist loons bent on ensuring the Tory party rule for ever. Class traitors they say about Field and Berger and Streeting. Say the people working flat out to get the Tories in for ever.

    You are a disgrace sir.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    But no voter in Rome or Rotterdam wants a border in the Irish Sea; it’s a stupid position for him to be taking.

    The EU’s overplaying a strong hand will backfire on them.
    If you want a Canada-style deal you must accept that this means a customs border in the English Channel. If you accept that Ireland is staying in the EU then you must accept that there has to be a customs border somewhere between Great Britain and Ireland. If you accept the fundamental basis of the Good Friday Agreement then that border cannot be within the island of Ireland.

    Therefore either you accept the necessity of an Irish sea customs border, or you stop being so silly about the feasibility of a Canada-style trade deal.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Mortimer said:

    Brexit was voted for. An Irish Sea border was not.

    One is a consequence of the other.

    You can't say you didn't vote for the consequences of Brexit.
  • Options

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    But no voter in Rome or Rotterdam wants a border in the Irish Sea; it’s a stupid position for him to be taking.

    The EU’s overplaying a strong hand will backfire on them.
    Maybe so. Brexit is backfiring on us.

    Backfires all round :( It is so darn stupid.
    So where is the promised recession or the empty supermarket shelves ?
  • Options
    Jeremy Corbyn is not the problem. His "supporters" are the problem
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Over on Facebook the fucking Kali Ma Corbynite wankers are celebrating Frank Field, egging on Mike Gaoes to follow suit and cheering on the idea of other Labour MPs going away.

    Apparently if you are a tosser the enemy of the Labour Party really are Labour MPs

    It's time to get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn
    Do the Labour Party get much of their money via membership fees, or is it an insignificant amount?
    Trade unions have historically been their main funding. They do get perhaps more large donation than one might thing though. Corbyn has boosted the importance of membership contributions. It's far from insignificant. I'm sure its easy to hunt down the current figures.

    The historical soul of Labour is thus more questionable than perhaps it is now. Interesting that less Union dominance is proving more troubling.
    I was under the impression that membership contributions are the primary source of Labours income these days, we have lost a few of our biggest donors in the last few years although I don't actually know how membership fees compare to other sources.

    I know the party made a killing with 2106 leadership election.
    If Corbyn's going to stay for 98 years, matters are worse than I realised.

    (On the substantive point, Labour has - very effectively and very sensibly - moved towards individual subs as a key source of income, but I would be surprised to learn they have overtaken union donations. I could be wrong though. Does anyone have the figures?)
    I had to read two posts mentioned the error before I could actually read the error.. sure I re read it as me saying 2016 at least once.

    My impression may well be wrong, I just remember being impressed by the amounts we were making from members and when I lined that up with what we spent on the general election guessed that the members were providing more than the Unions, although I'm probably disregarding too much the money spent outside GE's in my assumptions at the time, it wasn't exactly something I thought about too deeply.
    Labour needs to move away from union dependence for two very good reasons: 1) the unions are a pale shadow of what they were and still shrinking, so there's little hope for their future survival and (2) the key unions who support Labour - UNITE, PCSU, RMT - are all led by, shall we say, interesting figures who bring the party into disrepute by their - ahem - novel approaches to leadership. So subs and fundraising are the way to go.

    But I'm pretty sure that state hasn't come about yet.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    But no voter in Rome or Rotterdam wants a border in the Irish Sea; it’s a stupid position for him to be taking.

    The EU’s overplaying a strong hand will backfire on them.
    Maybe so. Brexit is backfiring on us.

    Backfires all round :( It is so darn stupid.
    So where is the promised recession or the empty supermarket shelves ?
    Where is the promised free trade zone vastly larger than the EU?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited August 2018

    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    We persist because a very large majority of supporters of the governing party are happy with Brexit.
    Conservative 2017 voters:

    84% think Brexit is a mess
    66% think promises of Brexit supporting politicians will be broken
    58% think we will get a bad deal
    48% think if we get a bad deal it will be the government's fault

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/rvih2zseqr/PeoplesVoteResults_Wave2_180821_GB_website2.pdf
    Conservative 2017 voters

    74% would vote Leave if there was a referendum today compared to only 58% of 2015 Tory voters who voted Leave at the actual referendum
    26% believe the May government wants to stay in the EU in reality though, 10% believe the government is neutral and only 45% believe it is fully committed to Leaving
    40% believe their children's generation will be better off after Brexit with only 22% worse off
    59% oppose a 'People's Vote' when the Brexit negotiations are completed

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/rvih2zseqr/PeoplesVoteResults_Wave2_180821_GB_website2.pdf

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Jeremy Corbyn is not the problem. His "supporters" are the problem

    Hitler wasn't the problem. His supporters were...
  • Options
    I came across this on YouTube:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfHucSYFoTg

    It was supposed to be the 'I, Claudius' on the 1980s.

    Let's just say there's a reason the BBC have never shown it since or released it on DVD.

    It certainly belongs in the 'so bad its good' category.
  • Options

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    But no voter in Rome or Rotterdam wants a border in the Irish Sea; it’s a stupid position for him to be taking.

    The EU’s overplaying a strong hand will backfire on them.
    Maybe so. Brexit is backfiring on us.

    Backfires all round :( It is so darn stupid.
    So where is the promised recession or the empty supermarket shelves ?
    Where is the promised free trade zone vastly larger than the EU?
    LOL

    Is that really the best reply you can think of ?

    Really ?

    We'll take that as an admittance that all your predictions have failed to happen.

    But tell us how disappointed are you that there wasn't a recession after the Referendum ?

    Come on WG we wont hold it against you.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052

    But tell us how disappointed are you that there wasn't a recession after the Referendum ?

    Come on WG we wont hold it against you.

    I'm intensely relaxed about the fact that within weeks of the referendum, Theresa May set about kicking it into the long grass. Her place in history will be assured.
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    edited August 2018
    Scott_P said:

    Jeremy Corbyn is not the problem. His "supporters" are the problem

    Hitler wasn't the problem. His supporters were...
    The catalyst is invariably the underlying problem.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    But no voter in Rome or Rotterdam wants a border in the Irish Sea; it’s a stupid position for him to be taking.

    The EU’s overplaying a strong hand will backfire on them.
    If you want a Canada-style deal you must accept that this means a customs border in the English Channel. If you accept that Ireland is staying in the EU then you must accept that there has to be a customs border somewhere between Great Britain and Ireland. If you accept the fundamental basis of the Good Friday Agreement then that border cannot be within the island of Ireland.

    Therefore either you accept the necessity of an Irish sea customs border, or you stop being so silly about the feasibility of a Canada-style trade deal.
    The UK has no problem with a soft customs border. Why is the EU obsessed with a hard customs border?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Mortimer said:

    The UK has no problem with a soft customs border.

    TAKE BACK CONTROL!!!!

    Oh, sorry, never mind...
  • Options

    Jeremy Corbyn is not the problem. His "supporters" are the problem

    To be fair he is the problem. He is taking no action to throw out the anti semetic members of the labour party or to take action against the vile abuse coming from those around him

    It gives me no pleasure to see labour in this mess but either Corbyn leads against all this or labour will cease to be an alternative to the conservatives
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942

    But tell us how disappointed are you that there wasn't a recession after the Referendum ?

    Come on WG we wont hold it against you.

    I'm intensely relaxed about the fact that within weeks of the referendum, Theresa May set about kicking it into the long grass. Her place in history will be assured.
    Wow, the delusion really is epic.

    You think the Lancaster House speech was a ruse, then, presumably?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    But no voter in Rome or Rotterdam wants a border in the Irish Sea; it’s a stupid position for him to be taking.

    The EU’s overplaying a strong hand will backfire on them.
    If you want a Canada-style deal you must accept that this means a customs border in the English Channel. If you accept that Ireland is staying in the EU then you must accept that there has to be a customs border somewhere between Great Britain and Ireland. If you accept the fundamental basis of the Good Friday Agreement then that border cannot be within the island of Ireland.

    Therefore either you accept the necessity of an Irish sea customs border, or you stop being so silly about the feasibility of a Canada-style trade deal.
    The UK has no problem with a soft customs border. Why is the EU obsessed with a hard customs border?
    Yes it does. The UK has even written into the EU Withdrawal Act that no new customs infrastructure or controls on the Irish border are permitted as a consequence of Brexit. You may have no problem personally with border posts, but you're not the dictator of the UK.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,850

    Congratulations to TheJezziah on a fabulous piece of Whataboutery. Progress - as far as I can see - are not agitating against Labour MPs. Did not call for fealty to Tony Blair. Did not demand the removal of rebels. That's just Momentum.

    The enemy of the Labour Party are not Labour MPs. Or Labour officials. Or Labour councillors. We can trust Labour council leaders. We don't need a purge of Labour volunteers elected to run CLPs. And yet that is all that comes out of you fucking crazy entryist loons bent on ensuring the Tory party rule for ever. Class traitors they say about Field and Berger and Streeting. Say the people working flat out to get the Tories in for ever.

    You are a disgrace sir.

    Not my experience

    Corbyn supporters working their bollox off to get Lab elected

    Progress types doing everything to ensure JCWNBPM

    Everytime Labour are ahead in Polls

    The PLP try their best to ensure Tories rule forever
  • Options

    Jeremy Corbyn is not the problem. His "supporters" are the problem

    To be fair he is the problem. He is taking no action to throw out the anti semetic members of the labour party or to take action against the vile abuse coming from those around him

    It gives me no pleasure to see labour in this mess but either Corbyn leads against all this or labour will cease to be an alternative to the conservatives
    Don’t forget also his conspiracy theory stuff over Russian poisoning despite having intelligence briefing. That just emboldens the cult. It is just like Trump.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    Mortimer said:

    But tell us how disappointed are you that there wasn't a recession after the Referendum ?

    Come on WG we wont hold it against you.

    I'm intensely relaxed about the fact that within weeks of the referendum, Theresa May set about kicking it into the long grass. Her place in history will be assured.
    Wow, the delusion really is epic.

    You think the Lancaster House speech was a ruse, then, presumably?
    It was a position... which in politics can always be superseded by another position.

    Remember when May's position was "I'm not going to be calling a snap election"?
  • Options

    But tell us how disappointed are you that there wasn't a recession after the Referendum ?

    Come on WG we wont hold it against you.

    I'm intensely relaxed about the fact that within weeks of the referendum, Theresa May set about kicking it into the long grass. Her place in history will be assured.
    Its revealing that the EU worshipers are unable to answer questions.

    You had such faith that the unbelievers would be punished and they weren't.

    It must have been so disappointing.
  • Options

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Thanks Harry!

    In other news:

    Michel Barnier is refusing to back down on erecting a border in the Irish Sea to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and has publicly asked the British government for data to prove that the checks on goods flowing within the territory of the UK would be few in number.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/31/barnier-stands-firm-erecting-post-brexit-border-irish-sea

    An Irish Sea border makes no sense. It’s not going to happen. Why does he persist?
    Brexit makes no sense - why do we persist?
    There was a vote, and we decided to.
    And the evidence is piling up that it is a very bad decision, so why do we persist?
    Mortimer said:

    Which voters is Barnier acting on the behalf of?

    Barnier was appointed by the Commission whose members are appointed by the European Council made up of politicians elected by voters in each EU country. So although indirectly elected, Barnier acts on behalf of all voters in the EU.

    But no voter in Rome or Rotterdam wants a border in the Irish Sea; it’s a stupid position for him to be taking.

    The EU’s overplaying a strong hand will backfire on them.
    If you want a Canada-style deal you must accept that this means a customs border in the English Channel. If you accept that Ireland is staying in the EU then you must accept that there has to be a customs border somewhere between Great Britain and Ireland. If you accept the fundamental basis of the Good Friday Agreement then that border cannot be within the island of Ireland.

    Therefore either you accept the necessity of an Irish sea customs border, or you stop being so silly about the feasibility of a Canada-style trade deal.
    The UK has no problem with a soft customs border. Why is the EU obsessed with a hard customs border?
    Yes it does. The UK has even written into the EU Withdrawal Act that no new customs infrastructure or controls on the Irish border are permitted as a consequence of Brexit. You may have no problem personally with border posts, but you're not the dictator of the UK.
    With respect neither are you. When was the EU Withdrawal Act made into law - as I understand it nothing is agreed until everything is agreed but if not can you provide the date that act became a statute
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Don’t forget also his conspiracy theory stuff over Russian poisoning despite having intelligence briefing. That just emboldens the cult. It is just like Trump.

    https://twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/1035623027478802432
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840

    Congratulations to TheJezziah on a fabulous piece of Whataboutery. Progress - as far as I can see - are not agitating against Labour MPs. Did not call for fealty to Tony Blair. Did not demand the removal of rebels. That's just Momentum.

    The enemy of the Labour Party are not Labour MPs. Or Labour officials. Or Labour councillors. We can trust Labour council leaders. We don't need a purge of Labour volunteers elected to run CLPs. And yet that is all that comes out of you fucking crazy entryist loons bent on ensuring the Tory party rule for ever. Class traitors they say about Field and Berger and Streeting. Say the people working flat out to get the Tories in for ever.

    You are a disgrace sir.

    I actually quoted you in a post saying tough on Corbyn tough on the causes of Corbyn. I assume you can see the contradiction in complaining about others having their cause as against Labour MPs when you yourself have a cause against Labour MPs.

    Progress have been agitating against Corbyn for a long time, the idea progress are sweetness and light and just work positively for Labour whilst Momentum are factional and completely different is rubbish. They are slightly different, Momentum more of a big membership movement, progress smaller but probably more of an elite well connected type group, but in terms of being factions and fighting their cause they are very similar.

    If you want to blame people for making a Labour government less likely then the centrists in Labour who in some cases would actually prefer a Tory government (see Woodcock as an example) and work to that end would be a much better target for your ire.

    Also I'm not sure how much of this is Field related but your people abandoned him in his CLP as much as the left. The vote against him wasn't a Corbynite thing, or at least not alone, he overwhelmingly lost because he lost all sides.
This discussion has been closed.