Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW PB / Polling Matters podcast. Where do we go from here and

12346

Comments

  • Options
    kle4 said:

    nico67 said:

    kle4 said:

    If the extension request bill is not watertight then the oh so smug planners of the move will have some explaining to do. They will have banked everything on this, rather than take far simpler means of stopping no deal like approving a deal, so if no deal happens regardless what a bloody waste of space they would have been.

    The SC can’t quash the Bill . They won’t overturn Primary Legislation but just deal with interpretation .

    Yes, but that's the point - if the bill does not actually legally enforce what the authors thought it did, then they have royally cocked up. Governments have certainly found out in the past they have not given legal authority for something they thought they had in such a manner.
    Governments have also found out before there are loopholes they didn't foresee.

    Presumably as well the rebels have enacted their law without the civil service while Boris presumably has the civil service at his disposal. So hypothetically if the civil service may have spotted a mistake in the law in the drafting stage they may not have been able to spot it now - whereas someone may have spotted it and passed it to the government now.

    Not that I can imagine what a loophole is here, it seems masterly drafted.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,625
    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    The gossip about a Norn Ireland only solution is intriguing. It solves lots of problems for everyone, and the DUP will moan but quietly delight in it, as it guarantees a pretty prosperous future for the province - in the UK Single Market but ALSO in the EU zone.

    In fact they'd be mad not to take it, and they should stop worrying about a Border Poll because this solution means Ulster would be so well favoured it would never seek to change its arrangements.

    I can't see JRM voting for it. Isn't this going to be seen as the evil EU trying to grab a bit of the UK?
    One of the advantages of Boris and Dom being so BDSMy to the Rebel Alliance, and kicking them out of the Tories, is that he now has the moral authority to say and do the same to the ERG. Indeed I am sure this is part of The Cunning Plan. Seriously.
    Indeed, Cummings does not take dissent well and will be ruthless to those who defy the whip, unlike May.

    There was a reason Steve Baker and Mark Francois and John Redwood were not included in the Boris Cabinet
    The reason is that they are a complete bunch of arseholes....even bigger than Mogg, Boris, Gove, Patel and Raab- and that is saying a lot.

    Even Cummings knows these extreme Tories are fucking useless....
    Yes, they even voted against the Withdrawal Agreement at MV3 unlike Boris, Raab, Mogg etc despite knowing that likely meant we would not leave the EU on 31st March.

    Cummings was the mastermind who got Leave to 52% remember, had Farage been in charge of the official Leave campaign I doubt Leave would have got much more than 45%
    To be honest....if the Tories came up with a deal that pissed off the ERG and the DUP...I could live with that...
    They did, it was called the WA, and unfortunately no one else was willing to pass it because...because it was a Tory Brexit.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    edited September 2019
    kle4 said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    The gossip about a Norn Ireland only solution is intriguing. It solves lots of problems for everyone, and the DUP will moan but quietly delight in it, as it guarantees a pretty prosperous future for the province - in the UK Single Market but ALSO in the EU zone.

    In fact they'd be mad not to take it, and they should stop worrying about a Border Poll because this solution means Ulster would be so well favoured it would never seek to change its arrangements.

    I can't see JRM voting for it. Isn't this going to be seen as the evil EU trying to grab a bit of the UK?
    One of the advantages of Boris and Dom being so BDSMy to the Rebel Alliance, and kicking them out of the Tories, is that he now has the moral authority to say and do the same to the ERG. Indeed I am sure this is part of The Cunning Plan. Seriously.
    Indeed, Cummings does not take dissent well and will be ruthless to those who defy the whip, unlike May.

    There was a reason Steve Baker and Mark Francois and John Redwood were not included in the Boris Cabinet
    The reason is that they are a complete bunch of arseholes....even bigger than Mogg, Boris, Gove, Patel and Raab- and that is saying a lot.

    Even Cummings knows these extreme Tories are fucking useless....
    Yes, they even voted against the Withdrawal Agreement at MV3 unlike Boris, Raab, Mogg etc despite knowing that likely meant we would not leave the EU on 31st March.

    Cummings was the mastermind who got Leave to 52% remember, had Farage been in charge of the official Leave campaign I doubt Leave would have got much more than 45%
    To be honest....if the Tories came up with a deal that pissed off the ERG and the DUP...I could live with that...
    They did, it was called the WA, and unfortunately no one else was willing to pass it because...because it was a Tory Brexit.
    It requires a Tory majority at the next GE of course but if Boris and Cummings get that I think a WA that pisses off the hardest diehards within the ERG and the DUP is likely
  • Options
    tysontyson Posts: 6,049
    kle4 said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    The gossip about a Norn Ireland only solution is intriguing. It solves lots of problems for everyone, and the DUP will moan but quietly delight in it, as it guarantees a pretty prosperous future for the province - in the UK Single Market but ALSO in the EU zone.

    In fact they'd be mad not to take it, and they should stop worrying about a Border Poll because this solution means Ulster would be so well favoured it would never seek to change its arrangements.

    I can't see JRM voting for it. Isn't this going to be seen as the evil EU trying to grab a bit of the UK?
    One of the advantages of Boris and Dom being so BDSMy to the Rebel Alliance, and kicking them out of the Tories, is that he now has the moral authority to say and do the same to the ERG. Indeed I am sure this is part of The Cunning Plan. Seriously.
    Indeed, Cummings does not take dissent well and will be ruthless to those who defy the whip, unlike May.

    There was a reason Steve Baker and Mark Francois and John Redwood were not included in the Boris Cabinet
    The reason is that they are a complete bunch of arseholes....even bigger than Mogg, Boris, Gove, Patel and Raab- and that is saying a lot.

    Even Cummings knows these extreme Tories are fucking useless....
    Yes, they even voted against the Withdrawal Agreement at MV3 unlike Boris, Raab, Mogg etc despite knowing that likely meant we would not leave the EU on 31st March.

    Cummings was the mastermind who got Leave to 52% remember, had Farage been in charge of the official Leave campaign I doubt Leave would have got much more than 45%
    To be honest....if the Tories came up with a deal that pissed off the ERG and the DUP...I could live with that...
    They did, it was called the WA, and unfortunately no one else was willing to pass it because...because it was a Tory Brexit.

    Fair point
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,560

    kle4 said:

    nico67 said:

    kle4 said:

    If the extension request bill is not watertight then the oh so smug planners of the move will have some explaining to do. They will have banked everything on this, rather than take far simpler means of stopping no deal like approving a deal, so if no deal happens regardless what a bloody waste of space they would have been.

    The SC can’t quash the Bill . They won’t overturn Primary Legislation but just deal with interpretation .

    Yes, but that's the point - if the bill does not actually legally enforce what the authors thought it did, then they have royally cocked up. Governments have certainly found out in the past they have not given legal authority for something they thought they had in such a manner.
    Governments have also found out before there are loopholes they didn't foresee.

    Presumably as well the rebels have enacted their law without the civil service while Boris presumably has the civil service at his disposal. So hypothetically if the civil service may have spotted a mistake in the law in the drafting stage they may not have been able to spot it now - whereas someone may have spotted it and passed it to the government now.

    Not that I can imagine what a loophole is here, it seems masterly drafted.
    BoJo could always revoke A50 at the last moment - that would scupper the Rebel Alliance and their pesky extension!

    :smile:
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Scott_P said:
    Very interesting. The shift is from No Deal to Delay and Don't Know rather than Remain but it backs up all the other pollsters which show as it approaches No Deal support is dropping. Unfortunately the have the Internet in the EU as well as some interns who speak English.
    Sssshhh! Don't tell those pesky Europeans. If we tip our hand, the 4D chess game that should lead to a slam dunk will be a busted flush. Then we'll all be snookered.
  • Options
    nichomar said:

    French official on the UK's anti-no-deal politicians:

    https://twitter.com/Mij_Europe/status/1170675098967322624

    I am absolutely certain I have seen that quote from either one of the MEPs or a Vice President of commission.


    Actually a former conservative mp who still sits in the house I believe

    Aaaaah! Thank you. One of those things that bloody annoys when you can’t quite place it.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,560
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    The gossip about a Norn Ireland only solution is intriguing. It solves lots of problems for everyone, and the DUP will moan but quietly delight in it, as it guarantees a pretty prosperous future for the province - in the UK Single Market but ALSO in the EU zone.

    In fact they'd be mad not to take it, and they should stop worrying about a Border Poll because this solution means Ulster would be so well favoured it would never seek to change its arrangements.

    I can't see JRM voting for it. Isn't this going to be seen as the evil EU trying to grab a bit of the UK?
    One of the advantages of Boris and Dom being so BDSMy to the Rebel Alliance, and kicking them out of the Tories, is that he now has the moral authority to say and do the same to the ERG. Indeed I am sure this is part of The Cunning Plan. Seriously.
    Indeed, Cummings does not take dissent well and will be ruthless to those who defy the whip, unlike May.

    There was a reason Steve Baker and Mark Francois and John Redwood were not included in the Boris Cabinet
    The reason is that they are a complete bunch of arseholes....even bigger than Mogg, Boris, Gove, Patel and Raab- and that is saying a lot.

    Even Cummings knows these extreme Tories are fucking useless....
    Yes, they even voted against the Withdrawal Agreement at MV3 unlike Boris, Raab, Mogg etc despite knowing that likely meant we would not leave the EU on 31st March.

    Cummings was the mastermind who got Leave to 52% remember, had Farage been in charge of the official Leave campaign I doubt Leave would have got much more than 45%
    To be honest....if the Tories came up with a deal that pissed off the ERG and the DUP...I could live with that...
    They did, it was called the WA, and unfortunately no one else was willing to pass it because...because it was a Tory Brexit.
    It requires a Tory majority at the next GE of course but if Boris and Cummings get that I think a WA that pisses of the ERG and DUP is likely
    This is a Tory majority at an election after Boris has had to extend?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,625
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    The gossip about a Norn Ireland only solution is intriguing. It solves lots of problems for everyone, and the DUP will moan but quietly delight in it, as it guarantees a pretty prosperous future for the province - in the UK Single Market but ALSO in the EU zone.

    In fact they'd be mad not to take it, and they should stop worrying about a Border Poll because this solution means Ulster would be so well favoured it would never seek to change its arrangements.

    I can't see JRM voting for it. Isn't this going to be seen as the evil EU trying to grab a bit of the UK?
    One of the advantages of Boris and Dom being so BDSMy to the Rebel Alliance, and kicking them out of the Tories, is that he now has the moral authority to say and do the same to the ERG. Indeed I am sure this is part of The Cunning Plan. Seriously.
    Indeed, Cummings does not take dissent well and will be ruthless to those who defy the whip, unlike May.

    There was a reason Steve Baker and Mark Francois and John Redwood were not included in the Boris Cabinet
    The reason is that they are a complete bunch of arseholes....even bigger than Mogg, Boris, Gove, Patel and Raab- and that is saying a lot.

    Even Cummings knows these extreme Tories are fucking useless....
    Yes, they even voted against the Withdrawal Agreement at MV3 unlike Boris, Raab, Mogg etc despite knowing that likely meant we would not leave the EU on 31st March.

    Cummings was the mastermind who got Leave to 52% remember, had Farage been in charge of the official Leave campaign I doubt Leave would have got much more than 45%
    To be honest....if the Tories came up with a deal that pissed off the ERG and the DUP...I could live with that...
    They did, it was called the WA, and unfortunately no one else was willing to pass it because...because it was a Tory Brexit.
    It requires a Tory majority at the next GE of course but if Boris and Cummings get that I think a WA that pisses of the hardest diehards within the ERG and the DUP is likely
    Best keep that under your hat or you won't get that majority! He'll be asked over and over if he would bring that back and he'll have to say something.
  • Options

    kle4 said:

    Operation 'screw the DUP' actually viable? We can only hope.

    In fairness the DUP have been uncharacteristically keeping their heads down for quite some time.
    Well Bozo doesn't rely on the DUP for his majority any more. He is now free to throw them overboard.

    Edit: Beaten to it by Surby!
    The flaw in your scheme is that Johnson may well rely on the DUP for his majority in two or three months time,
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    The gossip about a Norn Ireland only solution is intriguing. It solves lots of problems for everyone, and the DUP will moan but quietly delight in it, as it guarantees a pretty prosperous future for the province - in the UK Single Market but ALSO in the EU zone.

    In fact they'd be mad not to take it, and they should stop worrying about a Border Poll because this solution means Ulster would be so well favoured it would never seek to change its arrangements.

    I can't see JRM voting for it. Isn't this going to be seen as the evil EU trying to grab a bit of the UK?
    One of the advantages of Boris and Dom being so BDSMy to the Rebel Alliance, and kicking them out of the Tories, is that he now has the moral authority to say and do the same to the ERG. Indeed I am sure this is part of The Cunning Plan. Seriously.
    Indeed, Cummings does not take dissent well and will be ruthless to those who defy the whip, unlike May.

    There was a reason Steve Baker and Mark Francois and John Redwood were not included in the Boris Cabinet
    The reason is that they are a complete bunch of arseholes....even bigger than Mogg, Boris, Gove, Patel and Raab- and that is saying a lot.

    Even Cummings knows these extreme Tories are fucking useless....
    Yes, they even voted against the Withdrawal Agreement at MV3 unlike Boris, Raab, Mogg etc despite knowing that likely meant we would not leave the EU on 31st March.

    Cummings was the mastermind who got Leave to 52% remember, had Farage been in charge of the official Leave campaign I doubt Leave would have got much more than 45%
    To be honest....if the Tories came up with a deal that pissed off the ERG and the DUP...I could live with that...

    But sadly,. that isn't going to happen, because Boris is reliant on those two blocks to stay as PM...and for Boris being PM is much more important than anything else....
    Only so long as he lacks a majority, if he gets a majority Boris can throw them overboard and knowing Boris he almost certainly will
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    edited September 2019
    nichomar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    The gossip about a Norn Ireland only solution is intriguing. It solves lots of problems for everyone, and the DUP will moan but quietly delight in it, as it guarantees a pretty prosperous future for the province - in the UK Single Market but ALSO in the EU zone.

    In fact they'd be mad not to take it, and they should stop worrying about a Border Poll because this solution means Ulster would be so well favoured it would never seek to change its arrangements.

    I can't see JRM voting for it. Isn't this going to be seen as the evil EU trying to grab a bit of the UK?
    One of the advantages of Boris and Dom being so BDSMy to the Rebel Alliance, and kicking them out of the Tories, is that he now has the moral authority to say and do the same to the ERG. Indeed I am sure this is part of The Cunning Plan. Seriously.
    Indeed, Cummings does not take dissent well and will be ruthless to those who defy the whip, unlike May.

    There was a reason Steve Baker and Mark Francois and John Redwood were not included in the Boris Cabinet
    Who is this Cummings you talk about with such absolute power? I have no recollection of such a person ever elected into a position that could wield such power.
    Alistair Campbell was the closest equivalent to Cummings we have had, with a shade of Peter Mandelson and Seamus Milne and Nick Timothy
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,518

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    The gossip about a Norn Ireland only solution is intriguing. It solves lots of problems for everyone, and the DUP will moan but quietly delight in it, as it guarantees a pretty prosperous future for the province - in the UK Single Market but ALSO in the EU zone.

    In fact they'd be mad not to take it, and they should stop worrying about a Border Poll because this solution means Ulster would be so well favoured it would never seek to change its arrangements.

    I can't see JRM voting for it. Isn't this going to be seen as the evil EU trying to grab a bit of the UK?
    One of the advantages of Boris and Dom being so BDSMy to the Rebel Alliance, and kicking them out of the Tories, is that he now has the moral authority to say and do the same to the ERG. Indeed I am sure this is part of The Cunning Plan. Seriously.
    Indeed, Cummings does not take dissent well and will be ruthless to those who defy the whip, unlike May.

    There was a reason Steve Baker and Mark Francois and John Redwood were not included in the Boris Cabinet
    The reason is that they are a complete bunch of arseholes....even bigger than Mogg, Boris, Gove, Patel and Raab- and that is saying a lot.

    Even Cummings knows these extreme Tories are fucking useless....
    Yes, they even voted against the Withdrawal Agreement at MV3 unlike Boris, Raab, Mogg etc despite knowing that likely meant we would not leave the EU on 31st March.

    Cummings was the mastermind who got Leave to 52% remember, had Farage been in charge of the official Leave campaign I doubt Leave would have got much more than 45%
    To be honest....if the Tories came up with a deal that pissed off the ERG and the DUP...I could live with that...
    They did, it was called the WA, and unfortunately no one else was willing to pass it because...because it was a Tory Brexit.
    It requires a Tory majority at the next GE of course but if Boris and Cummings get that I think a WA that pisses of the ERG and DUP is likely
    This is a Tory majority at an election after Boris has had to extend?
    Yes, the one that the BXP will fight on a No Deal, no vassal state manifesto.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    The gossip about a Norn Ireland only solution is intriguing. It solves lots of problems for everyone, and the DUP will moan but quietly delight in it, as it guarantees a pretty prosperous future for the province - in the UK Single Market but ALSO in the EU zone.

    In fact they'd be mad not to take it, and they should stop worrying about a Border Poll because this solution means Ulster would be so well favoured it would never seek to change its arrangements.

    I can't see JRM voting for it. Isn't this going to be seen as the evil EU trying to grab a bit of the UK?
    One of the advantages of Boris and Dom being so BDSMy to the Rebel Alliance, and kicking them out of the Tories, is that he now has the moral authority to say and do the same to the ERG. Indeed I am sure this is part of The Cunning Plan. Seriously.
    Indeed, Cummings does not take dissent well and will be ruthless to those who defy the whip, unlike May.

    There was a reason Steve Baker and Mark Francois and John Redwood were not included in the Boris Cabinet
    The reason is that they are a complete bunch of arseholes....even bigger than Mogg, Boris, Gove, Patel and Raab- and that is saying a lot.

    Even Cummings knows these extreme Tories are fucking useless....
    Yes, they even voted against the Withdrawal Agreement at MV3 unlike Boris, Raab, Mogg etc despite knowing that likely meant we would not leave the EU on 31st March.

    Cummings was the mastermind who got Leave to 52% remember, had Farage been in charge of the official Leave campaign I doubt Leave would have got much more than 45%
    To be honest....if the Tories came up with a deal that pissed off the ERG and the DUP...I could live with that...
    They did, it was called the WA, and unfortunately no one else was willing to pass it because...because it was a Tory Brexit.
    It requires a Tory majority at the next GE of course but if Boris and Cummings get that I think a WA that pisses of the ERG and DUP is likely
    This is a Tory majority at an election after Boris has had to extend?
    Macron will reportedly veto further extension past a November general election, so Boris will fight the election on a Brexit Deal or No Deal if he wins a majority ticket
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940

    kle4 said:

    Operation 'screw the DUP' actually viable? We can only hope.

    In fairness the DUP have been uncharacteristically keeping their heads down for quite some time.
    Well Bozo doesn't rely on the DUP for his majority any more. He is now free to throw them overboard.

    Edit: Beaten to it by Surby!
    The flaw in your scheme is that Johnson may well rely on the DUP for his majority in two or three months time,
    Well yes it relies on Boris winning a majority not ending up with May 2
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    The gossip about a Norn Ireland only solution is intriguing. It solves lots of problems for everyone, and the DUP will moan but quietly delight in it, as it guarantees a pretty prosperous future for the province - in the UK Single Market but ALSO in the EU zone.

    In fact they'd be mad not to take it, and they should stop worrying about a Border Poll because this solution means Ulster would be so well favoured it would never seek to change its arrangements.

    I can't see JRM voting for it. Isn't this going to be seen as the evil EU trying to grab a bit of the UK?
    One of the advantages of Boris and Dom being so BDSMy to the Rebel Alliance, and kicking them out of the Tories, is that he now has the moral authority to say and do the same to the ERG. Indeed I am sure this is part of The Cunning Plan. Seriously.
    Indeed, Cummings does not take dissent well and will be ruthless to those who defy the whip, unlike May.

    There was a reason Steve Baker and Mark Francois and John Redwood were not included in the Boris Cabinet
    The reason is that they are a complete bunch of arseholes....even bigger than Mogg, Boris, Gove, Patel and Raab- and that is saying a lot.

    Even Cummings knows these extreme Tories are fucking useless....
    Yes, they even voted against the Withdrawal Agreement at MV3 unlike Boris, Raab, Mogg etc despite knowing that likely meant we would not leave the EU on 31st March.

    Cummings was the mastermind who got Leave to 52% remember, had Farage been in charge of the official Leave campaign I doubt Leave would have got much more than 45%
    To be honest....if the Tories came up with a deal that pissed off the ERG and the DUP...I could live with that...
    They did, it was called the WA, and unfortunately no one else was willing to pass it because...because it was a Tory Brexit.
    It requires a Tory majority at the next GE of course but if Boris and Cummings get that I think a WA that pisses of the hardest diehards within the ERG and the DUP is likely
    Best keep that under your hat or you won't get that majority! He'll be asked over and over if he would bring that back and he'll have to say something.
    He will say he will deliver Brexit Deal or No Deal and 'aim' for a Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop if he wins (he will still remove it for GB anyway even if he leaves it to a large extent in place for NI until a technical solution)
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    kle4 said:

    Operation 'screw the DUP' actually viable? We can only hope.

    In fairness the DUP have been uncharacteristically keeping their heads down for quite some time.
    Well Bozo doesn't rely on the DUP for his majority any more. He is now free to throw them overboard.

    Edit: Beaten to it by Surby!
    The flaw in your scheme is that Johnson may well rely on the DUP for his majority in two or three months time,
    That's why we ALL have to vote for Boris. I'm serious. Hold your nose and give the philandering Etonian shit your vote. Anything is better than Corbyn or No Deal.
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Byronic said:

    kle4 said:

    Operation 'screw the DUP' actually viable? We can only hope.

    In fairness the DUP have been uncharacteristically keeping their heads down for quite some time.
    Well Bozo doesn't rely on the DUP for his majority any more. He is now free to throw them overboard.

    Edit: Beaten to it by Surby!
    The flaw in your scheme is that Johnson may well rely on the DUP for his majority in two or three months time,
    That's why we ALL have to vote for Boris. I'm serious. Hold your nose and give the philandering Etonian shit your vote. Anything is better than Corbyn or No Deal.
    Hahahahahahahahahahahaha no
  • Options
    Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    edited September 2019
    It's not just the DUP who'll hate a NI only backstop. It will increase opposition amongst Labour MPs and unions as GB would fall out of the CU automatically at the end of the now truncated transition period. It makes the cliff edge for GB at the end of the transition much higher. So who who voted x 3 against May's Withdrawal Agreement would support MV4 based on a NI rather than UK backstop ?

    There may be a handful of ERGers who are prepared to throw NI under the bus to get GB out of the customs union. But in the other direction you kill off any hope of Labour MP buy in. Plus Boris has ended the careers of 21 + Tory MPs who voted for the previous WA. How many out of spite and genuine concern re GB leaving the CU will now vote the other way.

    I'm interested to hear why anyone thinks the WA with a NI only backstop will pass this Commons in a way MV 1 to 3 didn't.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    so banjaxed on coke

    I can't believe that about you. People on coke are usually obnoxious and with an overinflated sense of their own abilities.
    I know. I am the rare, witty, self-aware, self-deprecating, if not borderline-saintly exception that proves the rule.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    kle4 said:

    Operation 'screw the DUP' actually viable? We can only hope.

    In fairness the DUP have been uncharacteristically keeping their heads down for quite some time.
    Well Bozo doesn't rely on the DUP for his majority any more. He is now free to throw them overboard.

    Edit: Beaten to it by Surby!
    The flaw in your scheme is that Johnson may well rely on the DUP for his majority in two or three months time,
    Plus no election until 2022 as Corbyn is chicken.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    It's not just the DUP who'll hate a NI only backstop. It will increase opposition amongst Labour MPs and unions as GB would fall out of the CU automatically at the end of the now truncated transition period. It makes the cliff edge for GB at the end of the transition much higher. So who who voted x 3 against May's Withdrawal Agreement would support MV4 based on a NI rather than UK backstop ?

    There may be a handful of ERGers who are prepared to throw NI under the bus to get GB out of the customs union. But in the other direction you kill off any hope of Labour MP buy in. Plus Boris has ended the careers of 21 + Tory MPs who voted for the previous WA. How many out of spite and genuine concern re GB leaving the CU will now vite the other way.

    I'm interested to hear why anyone thinks the WA with a NI only backstop will pass this Commons in a way MV 1 to 3 didn't.

    These people will vote down a Brexit solution.... "out of spite"?!?!

    Well fuck them. The future of the nation is at stake. The electorate will take wild revenge.
  • Options
    nichomar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    The gossip about a Norn Ireland only solution is intriguing. It solves lots of problems for everyone, and the DUP will moan but quietly delight in it, as it guarantees a pretty prosperous future for the province - in the UK Single Market but ALSO in the EU zone.

    In fact they'd be mad not to take it, and they should stop worrying about a Border Poll because this solution means Ulster would be so well favoured it would never seek to change its arrangements.

    I can't see JRM voting for it. Isn't this going to be seen as the evil EU trying to grab a bit of the UK?
    One of the advantages of Boris and Dom being so BDSMy to the Rebel Alliance, and kicking them out of the Tories, is that he now has the moral authority to say and do the same to the ERG. Indeed I am sure this is part of The Cunning Plan. Seriously.
    Indeed, Cummings does not take dissent well and will be ruthless to those who defy the whip, unlike May.

    There was a reason Steve Baker and Mark Francois and John Redwood were not included in the Boris Cabinet
    Who is this Cummings you talk about with such absolute power? I have no recollection of such a person ever elected into a position that could wield such power.
    Well he is ranked number one in the world, he must be pretty good:
    https://www.icc-cricket.com/rankings/mens/player-rankings/test/bowling
    In fact he has been pretty dominant in the last few weeks...
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Byronic said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    so banjaxed on coke

    I can't believe that about you. People on coke are usually obnoxious and with an overinflated sense of their own abilities.
    I know. I am the rare, witty, self-aware, self-deprecating, if not borderline-saintly exception that proves the rule.
    I see your version or "borderline" has some technological solution that allows checks to be made quite far from the actual border.
  • Options

    It's not just the DUP who'll hate a NI only backstop. It will increase opposition amongst Labour MPs and unions as GB would fall out of the CU automatically at the end of the now truncated transition period. It makes the cliff edge for GB at the end of the transition much higher. So who who voted x 3 against May's Withdrawal Agreement would support MV4 based on a NI rather than UK backstop ?

    There may be a handful of ERGers who are prepared to throw NI under the bus to get GB out of the customs union. But in the other direction you kill off any hope of Labour MP buy in. Plus Boris has ended the careers of 21 + Tory MPs who voted for the previous WA. How many out of spite and genuine concern re GB leaving the CU will now vite the other way.

    I'm interested to hear why anyone thinks the WA with a NI only backstop will pass this Commons in a way MV 1 to 3 didn't.

    Steve Baker and Marc Francois will still vote against it regardless.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk
  • Options
    Byronic said:

    It's not just the DUP who'll hate a NI only backstop. It will increase opposition amongst Labour MPs and unions as GB would fall out of the CU automatically at the end of the now truncated transition period. It makes the cliff edge for GB at the end of the transition much higher. So who who voted x 3 against May's Withdrawal Agreement would support MV4 based on a NI rather than UK backstop ?

    There may be a handful of ERGers who are prepared to throw NI under the bus to get GB out of the customs union. But in the other direction you kill off any hope of Labour MP buy in. Plus Boris has ended the careers of 21 + Tory MPs who voted for the previous WA. How many out of spite and genuine concern re GB leaving the CU will now vite the other way.

    I'm interested to hear why anyone thinks the WA with a NI only backstop will pass this Commons in a way MV 1 to 3 didn't.

    These people will vote down a Brexit solution.... "out of spite"?!?!

    Well fuck them. The future of the nation is at stake. The electorate will take wild revenge.
    Fuck Business Boris! :lol:
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    It's not just the DUP who'll hate a NI only backstop. It will increase opposition amongst Labour MPs and unions as GB would fall out of the CU automatically at the end of the now truncated transition period. It makes the cliff edge for GB at the end of the transition much higher. So who who voted x 3 against May's Withdrawal Agreement would support MV4 based on a NI rather than UK backstop ?

    There may be a handful of ERGers who are prepared to throw NI under the bus to get GB out of the customs union. But in the other direction you kill off any hope of Labour MP buy in. Plus Boris has ended the careers of 21 + Tory MPs who voted for the previous WA. How many out of spite and genuine concern re GB leaving the CU will now vote the other way.

    I'm interested to hear why anyone thinks the WA with a NI only backstop will pass this Commons in a way MV 1 to 3 didn't.

    Kate Hoey will be in a real dilemma. Her two loyalties -- voting with the DUP and voting against Labour -- will suddenly be in contradiction. Which way will she break?
  • Options

    It's not just the DUP who'll hate a NI only backstop. It will increase opposition amongst Labour MPs and unions as GB would fall out of the CU automatically at the end of the now truncated transition period. It makes the cliff edge for GB at the end of the transition much higher. So who who voted x 3 against May's Withdrawal Agreement would support MV4 based on a NI rather than UK backstop ?

    There may be a handful of ERGers who are prepared to throw NI under the bus to get GB out of the customs union. But in the other direction you kill off any hope of Labour MP buy in. Plus Boris has ended the careers of 21 + Tory MPs who voted for the previous WA. How many out of spite and genuine concern re GB leaving the CU will now vote the other way.

    I'm interested to hear why anyone thinks the WA with a NI only backstop will pass this Commons in a way MV 1 to 3 didn't.

    The only possible argument would be if Johnson can make it a realistic Deal v No Deal choice, as May tried to do. Perhaps Johnson's theatrics about No Deal are ultimately aimed towards this.
  • Options
    Is it fair to say Boris is a chicken in that he's scared by Farage?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    Noo said:

    It's not just the DUP who'll hate a NI only backstop. It will increase opposition amongst Labour MPs and unions as GB would fall out of the CU automatically at the end of the now truncated transition period. It makes the cliff edge for GB at the end of the transition much higher. So who who voted x 3 against May's Withdrawal Agreement would support MV4 based on a NI rather than UK backstop ?

    There may be a handful of ERGers who are prepared to throw NI under the bus to get GB out of the customs union. But in the other direction you kill off any hope of Labour MP buy in. Plus Boris has ended the careers of 21 + Tory MPs who voted for the previous WA. How many out of spite and genuine concern re GB leaving the CU will now vote the other way.

    I'm interested to hear why anyone thinks the WA with a NI only backstop will pass this Commons in a way MV 1 to 3 didn't.

    Kate Hoey will be in a real dilemma. Her two loyalties -- voting with the DUP and voting against Labour -- will suddenly be in contradiction. Which way will she break?
    Kate Hoey will no longer be an MP
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,625
    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    Well of course there's some who are like that. How large a group I am not sure, but I'd put that as the phony 'do anything to stop a no deal brexit, except vote for a deal, so no not actually will do anything' crowd. Then there's the principled 'I'll never contribute to Brexit' hold outs, the duplicitous 'I said I would, but actually I'll oppose anything', the bizarre 'this is not brexity enough and nothing ever will be' crowd, the 'not enough detail for me at this stage, even though I know the transition is the start of yet more negotiation so I am just pissing about' crowd, and so on and so forth.

    So many people combining against any deal, or specific deals. Another part of the reason I don't believe enough people on any side genuinely want a deal.
  • Options

    It's not just the DUP who'll hate a NI only backstop. It will increase opposition amongst Labour MPs and unions as GB would fall out of the CU automatically at the end of the now truncated transition period. It makes the cliff edge for GB at the end of the transition much higher. So who who voted x 3 against May's Withdrawal Agreement would support MV4 based on a NI rather than UK backstop ?

    There may be a handful of ERGers who are prepared to throw NI under the bus to get GB out of the customs union. But in the other direction you kill off any hope of Labour MP buy in. Plus Boris has ended the careers of 21 + Tory MPs who voted for the previous WA. How many out of spite and genuine concern re GB leaving the CU will now vote the other way.

    I'm interested to hear why anyone thinks the WA with a NI only backstop will pass this Commons in a way MV 1 to 3 didn't.

    The only possible argument would be if Johnson can make it a realistic Deal v No Deal choice, as May tried to do. Perhaps Johnson's theatrics about No Deal are ultimately aimed towards this.
    Makes it easier to argue an extension should be vetoed if a deal is getting rejected for the fourth time.
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    It's a fucking terrible deal. It's just all the focus has been on stopping No Deal Brexit, and apparently that's still being fought despite legislation passing both houses.
    It's the abuser's method. Threaten to kill someone then they'll be happy when you simply punch them in the face. The Brexit taliban have been playing this game for three years.

    These are the sick, gaslighting people that are now in charge.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    edited September 2019

    It's not just the DUP who'll hate a NI only backstop. It will increase opposition amongst Labour MPs and unions as GB would fall out of the CU automatically at the end of the now truncated transition period. It makes the cliff edge for GB at the end of the transition much higher. So who who voted x 3 against May's Withdrawal Agreement would support MV4 based on a NI rather than UK backstop ?

    There may be a handful of ERGers who are prepared to throw NI under the bus to get GB out of the customs union. But in the other direction you kill off any hope of Labour MP buy in. Plus Boris has ended the careers of 21 + Tory MPs who voted for the previous WA. How many out of spite and genuine concern re GB leaving the CU will now vote the other way.

    I'm interested to hear why anyone thinks the WA with a NI only backstop will pass this Commons in a way MV 1 to 3 didn't.

    As I said it would require a clear Tory majority after the next general election, obviously Boris could not pass it now.

    However if Boris does win a clear majority after the next general election he does not need to care what Labour MPs think (bar a handful of pro WA Labour MPs like Flint and Snell), nor does he need to care what the DUP think either
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    It's a fucking terrible deal. It's just all the focus has been on stopping No Deal Brexit, and apparently that's still being fought despite legislation passing both houses.
    It's the abuser's method. Threaten to kill someone then they'll be happy when you simply punch them in the face. The Brexit taliban have been playing this game for three years.

    These are the sick, gaslighting people that are now in charge.
    How is it a terrible deal? Unless you think that any deal is savagely worse than Remaining?
  • Options
    DruttDrutt Posts: 1,093

    Scott_P said:
    So the Cummings/Johnson master plan is to send a 2nd letter to the EU saying "Not really"?

    Really? Is that it?

    Have they thought of crossing their fingers behind their backs too?
    Maximum diplomatic impact is available by signing the letter, rolling it up, and delivering it to the Council on fire but sticking out of a dog turd so Tusk doesn't know whether to stamp on it or not.

    Congrats to Kieran on the newest Pedley.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    Yes, see TSE 'sustained No Deal leads to rejoin' blah, blah, blah
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    kle4 said:

    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    Well of course there's some who are like that. How large a group I am not sure, but I'd put that as the phony 'do anything to stop a no deal brexit, except vote for a deal, so no not actually will do anything' crowd. Then there's the principled 'I'll never contribute to Brexit' hold outs, the duplicitous 'I said I would, but actually I'll oppose anything', the bizarre 'this is not brexity enough and nothing ever will be' crowd, the 'not enough detail for me at this stage, even though I know the transition is the start of yet more negotiation so I am just pissing about' crowd, and so on and so forth.

    So many people combining against any deal, or specific deals. Another part of the reason I don't believe enough people on any side genuinely want a deal.
    "Some"? The evidence suggests hundreds of MPs have the mindset I outline. Maybe a majority.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    It's a fucking terrible deal. It's just all the focus has been on stopping No Deal Brexit, and apparently that's still being fought despite legislation passing both houses.
    It's the abuser's method. Threaten to kill someone then they'll be happy when you simply punch them in the face. The Brexit taliban have been playing this game for three years.

    These are the sick, gaslighting people that are now in charge.
    For diehard Remainers any Deal bar one that keeps us in the Single Market and Customs Union with Juncker on our banknotes and stamps is a bad deal, so you can be ignored
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    With this bunch of MPs you’d want a likely majority of 100 for any deal about 5 mins before the vote as a buffer against slippery duplicitous Remainer backsliders.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    How much porridge would Boris get for refusing to extend?
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Byronic said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    It's a fucking terrible deal. It's just all the focus has been on stopping No Deal Brexit, and apparently that's still being fought despite legislation passing both houses.
    It's the abuser's method. Threaten to kill someone then they'll be happy when you simply punch them in the face. The Brexit taliban have been playing this game for three years.

    These are the sick, gaslighting people that are now in charge.
    How is it a terrible deal? Unless you think that any deal is savagely worse than Remaining?
    Anything that takes us out of the SM and CU is a terrible deal. That's was the consensus position, and I was a one of those who thought we should go on and do that. That bridge was long ago torched, by Theresa May. Her red lines forced everyone in my position to choose either hard Brexit or Remain. I personally choose Remain.

    If someone can rebuild that bridge, I'm listening. Weirdly, that's what Corbyn is proposing. That's why for the first time in my life I could *just* about imagine voting Labour. Probably not, because I'm still really angry at the Tories for gaslighting everyone. It's them that need to offer the olive branch because they're the ones who burned the middle ground.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,201
    edited September 2019
    HYUFD said:

    For diehard Remainers

    "I am an EXCEPTIONAL Remainer, Mr HYUFD, and since I'm moving up to Rejoining, you should be more polite!"
  • Options
    DadgeDadge Posts: 2,038
    Sadly I think it's time for a break from PB. At most times of day it's become a Brexit bubble, a personal thread for a small band of diehards who don't seem to have an actual life.
  • Options
    Byronic said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    It's a fucking terrible deal. It's just all the focus has been on stopping No Deal Brexit, and apparently that's still being fought despite legislation passing both houses.
    It's the abuser's method. Threaten to kill someone then they'll be happy when you simply punch them in the face. The Brexit taliban have been playing this game for three years.

    These are the sick, gaslighting people that are now in charge.
    How is it a terrible deal? Unless you think that any deal is savagely worse than Remaining?
    Any deal is worse than remaining.
  • Options
    After all the attacks against May for saying no deal is better than a bad deal, it would funny to see if there is a MV4 on Boris's deal who the real Meatloaf Remainers are.

    I'll do anything to prevent no deal, but I won't do that [ratify any deal].
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    Streeter said:

    Byronic said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    It's a fucking terrible deal. It's just all the focus has been on stopping No Deal Brexit, and apparently that's still being fought despite legislation passing both houses.
    It's the abuser's method. Threaten to kill someone then they'll be happy when you simply punch them in the face. The Brexit taliban have been playing this game for three years.

    These are the sick, gaslighting people that are now in charge.
    How is it a terrible deal? Unless you think that any deal is savagely worse than Remaining?
    Any deal is worse than remaining.
    Speak for yourself.
  • Options
    Streeter said:

    Byronic said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    It's a fucking terrible deal. It's just all the focus has been on stopping No Deal Brexit, and apparently that's still being fought despite legislation passing both houses.
    It's the abuser's method. Threaten to kill someone then they'll be happy when you simply punch them in the face. The Brexit taliban have been playing this game for three years.

    These are the sick, gaslighting people that are now in charge.
    How is it a terrible deal? Unless you think that any deal is savagely worse than Remaining?
    Any deal is worse than remaining.
    So any deal is worse than no deal?
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    HYUFD said:

    Juncker on our banknotes and stamps

    I'll admit that I haven't used stamps in a while, but I still see £5, $10, £20 and even the odd £50 now and then, and I don't remember seeing that. Perhaps you are simply trying to insult our queen by making out she looks like a man?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,896
    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    Always seemed to me to be the case. That’s why I’ve said all along that MPs shouldn’t have had a casting vote on any deal.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,625
    Dadge said:

    Sadly I think it's time for a break from PB. At most times of day it's become a Brexit bubble, a personal thread for a small band of diehards who don't seem to have an actual life.

    Well thank you for that very gracious comment, I'm sure that demonstrates superior manners if nothing else.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    Has anyone mentioned Diana Johnson?

    His decision came as Diana Johnson became the first victim of Labour’s new trigger ballot process. After 14 years’ service as MP for Hull North, she will now face a battle to be reselected.

    http://hurryupharry.org/2019/09/07/labour-mp-john-mann-quits-to-become-government-anti-semitism-tsar/
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Floater said:

    Has anyone mentioned Diana Johnson?

    His decision came as Diana Johnson became the first victim of Labour’s new trigger ballot process. After 14 years’ service as MP for Hull North, she will now face a battle to be reselected.

    http://hurryupharry.org/2019/09/07/labour-mp-john-mann-quits-to-become-government-anti-semitism-tsar/

    "Victim"
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    From the Telegraph

    Corbyn is unwholesome in every way a man can be. When he’s not sucking up to exotic murderers, he’s baiting British Jews or condescending to our other ethnic minorities – remember “Only Labour can unlock the talent of BAME people held back by the Conservatives”? The “Absolute Boy” of golden Glastonbury salad days increasingly resembles Steptoe Senior.

    After three years of looking like an offshore zoo of squabbling monkeys to the rest of the planet, due to the inability of politicians to do their job properly, the indignity of having this clown representing us on the world stage would be the final straw. The idea of living in a near-future country headed by him and his anti-West friends makes me feel like burning my passport and running off to join the Foreign Legion.

    Though I’ve always found Corbyn unreservedly a Bad Thing, I could never work out whether this was because I believe him to be evil or stupid. Now, as he plods through the end-game of his last grasp at power – rheumy old eyes never losing sight of Seamus to make sure he’s saying the right thing – both these words seem too big for him.

    Christopher Hitchens once called the anti-war rent-a-mobs which Corbyn cut his teeth rallying “the silly led by the sinister” – this suits him better.

    He’s not the Messiah – or the anti-Christ – he’s just a very silly, slightly sinister old man. It is staggering that anybody – let alone Tory MPs – thinks he could be better than a no-deal Brexit.
  • Options
    alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    Presumably Theresa May would vote against a NI only backstopped WA. She did after all declare that “no U.K. PM could possibly sign up to such an arrangement”. Although maybe she could if not PM...
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Streeter said:

    Byronic said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    It's a fucking terrible deal. It's just all the focus has been on stopping No Deal Brexit, and apparently that's still being fought despite legislation passing both houses.
    It's the abuser's method. Threaten to kill someone then they'll be happy when you simply punch them in the face. The Brexit taliban have been playing this game for three years.

    These are the sick, gaslighting people that are now in charge.
    How is it a terrible deal? Unless you think that any deal is savagely worse than Remaining?
    Any deal is worse than remaining.
    A silly comment really. There must be deals that would be worse than remaining, almost by definition.
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Floater said:

    From the Telegraph

    Corbyn is unwholesome in every way a man can be. When he’s not sucking up to exotic murderers, he’s baiting British Jews or condescending to our other ethnic minorities – remember “Only Labour can unlock the talent of BAME people held back by the Conservatives”? The “Absolute Boy” of golden Glastonbury salad days increasingly resembles Steptoe Senior.

    After three years of looking like an offshore zoo of squabbling monkeys to the rest of the planet, due to the inability of politicians to do their job properly, the indignity of having this clown representing us on the world stage would be the final straw. The idea of living in a near-future country headed by him and his anti-West friends makes me feel like burning my passport and running off to join the Foreign Legion.

    Though I’ve always found Corbyn unreservedly a Bad Thing, I could never work out whether this was because I believe him to be evil or stupid. Now, as he plods through the end-game of his last grasp at power – rheumy old eyes never losing sight of Seamus to make sure he’s saying the right thing – both these words seem too big for him.

    Christopher Hitchens once called the anti-war rent-a-mobs which Corbyn cut his teeth rallying “the silly led by the sinister” – this suits him better.

    He’s not the Messiah – or the anti-Christ – he’s just a very silly, slightly sinister old man. It is staggering that anybody – let alone Tory MPs – thinks he could be better than a no-deal Brexit.

    That's the same paper that thought Ed Miliband was "totalitarian". I mean, once you've cried wolf that many times, no wonder people don't pay attention any more.
  • Options
    alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    It's a fucking terrible deal. It's just all the focus has been on stopping No Deal Brexit, and apparently that's still being fought despite legislation passing both houses.
    It's the abuser's method. Threaten to kill someone then they'll be happy when you simply punch them in the face. The Brexit taliban have been playing this game for three years.

    These are the sick, gaslighting people that are now in charge.
    How is it a terrible deal? Unless you think that any deal is savagely worse than Remaining?
    Anything that takes us out of the SM and CU is a terrible deal. That's was the consensus position, and I was a one of those who thought we should go on and do that. That bridge was long ago torched, by Theresa May. Her red lines forced everyone in my position to choose either hard Brexit or Remain. I personally choose Remain.

    If someone can rebuild that bridge, I'm listening. Weirdly, that's what Corbyn is proposing. That's why for the first time in my life I could *just* about imagine voting Labour. Probably not, because I'm still really angry at the Tories for gaslighting everyone. It's them that need to offer the olive branch because they're the ones who burned the middle ground.
    The WA doesn’t rule out Single Market/Customs Union.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    edited September 2019
    alex. said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    It's a fucking terrible deal. It's just all the focus has been on stopping No Deal Brexit, and apparently that's still being fought despite legislation passing both houses.
    It's the abuser's method. Threaten to kill someone then they'll be happy when you simply punch them in the face. The Brexit taliban have been playing this game for three years.

    These are the sick, gaslighting people that are now in charge.
    How is it a terrible deal? Unless you think that any deal is savagely worse than Remaining?
    Anything that takes us out of the SM and CU is a terrible deal. That's was the consensus position, and I was a one of those who thought we should go on and do that. That bridge was long ago torched, by Theresa May. Her red lines forced everyone in my position to choose either hard Brexit or Remain. I personally choose Remain.

    If someone can rebuild that bridge, I'm listening. Weirdly, that's what Corbyn is proposing. That's why for the first time in my life I could *just* about imagine voting Labour. Probably not, because I'm still really angry at the Tories for gaslighting everyone. It's them that need to offer the olive branch because they're the ones who burned the middle ground.
    The WA doesn’t rule out Single Market/Customs Union.

    Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but doesn't the political declaration talk about the separation of legal jurisdiction, which certainly does entail leaving SM/CU?
    (Edited to insert missing word "leaving")
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
  • Options
    Noo said:

    alex. said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    It's a fucking terrible deal. It's just all the focus has been on stopping No Deal Brexit, and apparently that's still being fought despite legislation passing both houses.
    It's the abuser's method. Threaten to kill someone then they'll be happy when you simply punch them in the face. The Brexit taliban have been playing this game for three years.

    These are the sick, gaslighting people that are now in charge.
    How is it a terrible deal? Unless you think that any deal is savagely worse than Remaining?
    Anything that takes us out of the SM and CU is a terrible deal. That's was the consensus position, and I was a one of those who thought we should go on and do that. That bridge was long ago torched, by Theresa May. Her red lines forced everyone in my position to choose either hard Brexit or Remain. I personally choose Remain.

    If someone can rebuild that bridge, I'm listening. Weirdly, that's what Corbyn is proposing. That's why for the first time in my life I could *just* about imagine voting Labour. Probably not, because I'm still really angry at the Tories for gaslighting everyone. It's them that need to offer the olive branch because they're the ones who burned the middle ground.
    The WA doesn’t rule out Single Market/Customs Union.

    Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but doesn't the political declaration talk about the separation of legal jurisdiction, which certainly does entail leaving SM/CU?
    (Edited to insert missing word "leaving")
    The PD is not legally binding.

    The WA legally means no exit of the SM/CU during transition. If there is an election post-Brexit then the winner could seek to make the transitionary continuation of the SM and CU permanent.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    The PD is not legally binding.

    The WA legally means no exit of the SM/CU during transition. If there is an election post-Brexit then the winner could seek to make the transitionary continuation of the SM and CU permanent.

    The PD is not legally binding, but could be politically binding. Certainly it is there for a purpose, and that purpose is to set a de facto momentum towards a destination that might be unstoppable.
    If it's not binding, and not important, it shouldn't be there. If it's not binding but IS important, I have every right to say that I don't want my MP to agree to its ratification.
    It was a huge mistake May made, and it's driven a number of us from acquiescence to opposition. And worse for you, refugees from Brexit now have to cross all the way over to where I am, which explains why Remain is now ahead in the polls. The Tories could have cemented the referendum result by compromising between hard Brexiters and Remainers around the offering that the vast majority of the Leave campaign was based around. Instead they scorched the middle ground and shrieked "traitor" at us for wanting a sensible compromise. And you leavers are still doing it :neutral:
  • Options
    alex.alex. Posts: 4,658

    Noo said:

    alex. said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    Noo said:

    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk



    These are the sick, gaslighting people that are now in charge.
    How is it a terrible deal? Unless you think that any deal is savagely worse than Remaining?
    Anything that takes us out of the SM and CU is a terrible deal. That's was the consensus position, and I was a one of those who thought we should go on and do that. That bridge was long ago torched, by Theresa May. Her red lines forced everyone in my position to choose either hard Brexit or Remain. I personally choose Remain.

    If someone can rebuild that bridge, I'm listening. Weirdly, that's what Corbyn is proposing. That's why for the first time in my life I could *just* about imagine voting Labour. Probably not, because I'm still really angry at the Tories for gaslighting everyone. It's them that need to offer the olive branch because they're the ones who burned the middle ground.
    The WA doesn’t rule out Single Market/Customs Union.

    Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but doesn't the political declaration talk about the separation of legal jurisdiction, which certainly does entail leaving SM/CU?
    (Edited to insert missing word "leaving")
    The PD is not legally binding.

    The WA legally means no exit of the SM/CU during transition. If there is an election post-Brexit then the winner could seek to make the transitionary continuation of the SM and CU permanent.
    Quite. Anybody who supported leaving with a close future relationship should have supported the WA. That ensures leaving but with the future relationship undetermined. But once we have left, supporters of a soft Brexit would have great influence because they could then co-opt remainers behind their preferred future relationship, prioritising EU over RoW/ending of FoM. Until we have left the latter were still holding out for referendum and vote.

    The above is probably the main reason why hard Brexiteers opposed the WA. The CU backstop was a fig leaf (since we could have walked away from that if we wished).

    Those who argue “any deal is worse than remain” are focussing only on economics, no wilfully ignoring the political reasons for wanting to leave the EU.

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,625
    HYUFD said:
    Or at least long enough to best Boris' tenure as PM?

    But wouldn't a Labour grandee make more sense? Clarke has accepted leaving the EU when the whole point of this is to facilitate remaining. It's a faint risk, but what if he tried to get a deal passed?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,625
    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    Surely you are either adherents of a faith or you are not, can you be part Muslim/Christian?
  • Options
    alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    You can’t be “part Muslim” via inheritance. Religion isn’t genetic!

  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    "part Muslim"? What, does he go to the mosque only on the first Friday of the month?

    Boris's Turkish ancestry doesn't make a bit of difference. He's an islamophobe. You shouldn't be defending him, you should condemn him exactly the same as you would if he were attacking Jews.
  • Options
    Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    Byronic said:

    I suddenly get the strange impression that a lot of the opposition to a Brexit deal, from certain quarters, is not because this or any Brexit deal is bad, but because it might not be so bad after all, and these people ultimately want Remain.

    So a tolerable Brexit deal is the worse result of all, as these people want no Brexit at all.

    Oodathunk

    This was clear from MV1 when virtually the entire Labour and Liberal Democrat parties voted against the bill without mentioning what they would vote for.
  • Options
    alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    Or at least long enough to best Boris' tenure as PM?

    But wouldn't a Labour grandee make more sense? Clarke has accepted leaving the EU when the whole point of this is to facilitate remaining. It's a faint risk, but what if he tried to get a deal passed?
    Any alternative PM from Labour would undermine Corbyn’s leadership. If they did a good job then they would represent a possible future alternative for Labour opponents.

  • Options
    Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    alex. said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    Or at least long enough to best Boris' tenure as PM?

    But wouldn't a Labour grandee make more sense? Clarke has accepted leaving the EU when the whole point of this is to facilitate remaining. It's a faint risk, but what if he tried to get a deal passed?
    Any alternative PM from Labour would undermine Corbyn’s leadership. If they did a good job then they would represent a possible future alternative for Labour opponents.

    One can only hope.
  • Options
    Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    He has criticized niqab-wearers, who are less than 5% of Muslims. Has he said something about Muslims more broadly?
  • Options
    Noo said:

    The PD is not legally binding.

    The WA legally means no exit of the SM/CU during transition. If there is an election post-Brexit then the winner could seek to make the transitionary continuation of the SM and CU permanent.

    The PD is not legally binding, but could be politically binding. Certainly it is there for a purpose, and that purpose is to set a de facto momentum towards a destination that might be unstoppable.
    If it's not binding, and not important, it shouldn't be there. If it's not binding but IS important, I have every right to say that I don't want my MP to agree to its ratification.
    It was a huge mistake May made, and it's driven a number of us from acquiescence to opposition. And worse for you, refugees from Brexit now have to cross all the way over to where I am, which explains why Remain is now ahead in the polls. The Tories could have cemented the referendum result by compromising between hard Brexiters and Remainers around the offering that the vast majority of the Leave campaign was based around. Instead they scorched the middle ground and shrieked "traitor" at us for wanting a sensible compromise. And you leavers are still doing it :neutral:
    I must have missed most of the Leave campaign being based around not leaving in reality.

    During the referendum Vote Leave explicitly and repeatedly said we would leave the SM. As for other campaigns Leave.EU campaigned on nothing but leaving the SM and being able to control migration.
  • Options
    ab195ab195 Posts: 477
    edited September 2019
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    Or at least long enough to best Boris' tenure as PM?

    But wouldn't a Labour grandee make more sense? Clarke has accepted leaving the EU when the whole point of this is to facilitate remaining. It's a faint risk, but what if he tried to get a deal passed?
    We can assume he really would be doing what he thought best, because it absolutely would be the last act of his career. Wouldn’t surprise me if he had one last crack at achieving something. However look to his ministerial career - he enjoys confrontation and has never been a unifier.

    There also has to be a Budget of some form, leading to a Finance Bill. I’m not sure Clarke’s new left wing supporters would enjoy his thinking on those things.

    Put all that together and I don’t think a Clarke ministry, underwritten by Labour and with a Tory (likely Boris) opposition is a goer.

    Edit to add - I also can’t see Corbyn ever accepting not being PM, but bound by the Government’s policies whilst also not being leader of the opposition. And he’d be right not to. It removes him from the board.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    Surely you are either adherents of a faith or you are not, can you be part Muslim/Christian?
    Yes one of my mother's friends grandchildren have a Muslim mother and Christian father and have been brought up in both faiths
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited September 2019
    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    "part Muslim"? What, does he go to the mosque only on the first Friday of the month?

    Boris's Turkish ancestry doesn't make a bit of difference. He's an islamophobe. You shouldn't be defending him, you should condemn him exactly the same as you would if he were attacking Jews.
    As far as I can see, Boris' attitude is more liberal than Macron's, who has banned the burqa and niqab in public spaces.

    Boris, in his infamous article, said these garments should not be banned.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    edited September 2019
    ab195 said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    Or at least long enough to best Boris' tenure as PM?

    But wouldn't a Labour grandee make more sense? Clarke has accepted leaving the EU when the whole point of this is to facilitate remaining. It's a faint risk, but what if he tried to get a deal passed?
    We can assume he really would be doing what he thought best, because it absolutely would be the last act of his career. Wouldn’t surprise me if he had one last crack at achieving something. However look to his ministerial career - he enjoys confrontation and has never been a unifier.

    There also has to be a Budget of some form, leading to a Finance Bill. I’m not sure Clarke’s new left wing supporters would enjoy his thinking on those things.

    Put all that together and I don’t think a Clarke ministry, underwritten by Labour and with a Tory (likely Boris) opposition is a goer.
    Clarke would be PM for 2 months to extend until a general election in November and until the result is declared.

    He would be a technocrat PM in all but name
  • Options
    Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268

    Noo said:

    The PD is not legally binding.

    The WA legally means no exit of the SM/CU during transition. If there is an election post-Brexit then the winner could seek to make the transitionary continuation of the SM and CU permanent.

    The PD is not legally binding, but could be politically binding. Certainly it is there for a purpose, and that purpose is to set a de facto momentum towards a destination that might be unstoppable.
    If it's not binding, and not important, it shouldn't be there. If it's not binding but IS important, I have every right to say that I don't want my MP to agree to its ratification.
    It was a huge mistake May made, and it's driven a number of us from acquiescence to opposition. And worse for you, refugees from Brexit now have to cross all the way over to where I am, which explains why Remain is now ahead in the polls. The Tories could have cemented the referendum result by compromising between hard Brexiters and Remainers around the offering that the vast majority of the Leave campaign was based around. Instead they scorched the middle ground and shrieked "traitor" at us for wanting a sensible compromise. And you leavers are still doing it :neutral:
    I must have missed most of the Leave campaign being based around not leaving in reality.

    During the referendum Vote Leave explicitly and repeatedly said we would leave the SM. As for other campaigns Leave.EU campaigned on nothing but leaving the SM and being able to control migration.
    VoteLeave also said we would leave with a deal. No deal and Single Market are equally legitimate.
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Gabs2 said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    He has criticized niqab-wearers, who are less than 5% of Muslims. Has he said something about Muslims more broadly?
    Alas, that is enough. Attacking a subset of a religion for the way they express their religion through dress is enough for the charge to stick.
    But he has said other things, stupid ahistorical theories about progress and Islam. He's got a problem with Islam and Muslims.
  • Options
    ab195ab195 Posts: 477
    HYUFD said:

    ab195 said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    Or at least long enough to best Boris' tenure as PM?

    But wouldn't a Labour grandee make more sense? Clarke has accepted leaving the EU when the whole point of this is to facilitate remaining. It's a faint risk, but what if he tried to get a deal passed?
    We can assume he really would be doing what he thought best, because it absolutely would be the last act of his career. Wouldn’t surprise me if he had one last crack at achieving something. However look to his ministerial career - he enjoys confrontation and has never been a unifier.

    There also has to be a Budget of some form, leading to a Finance Bill. I’m not sure Clarke’s new left wing supporters would enjoy his thinking on those things.

    Put all that together and I don’t think a Clarke ministry, underwritten by Labour and with a Tory (likely Boris) opposition is a goer.
    Clarke would be PM for 2 months to extend until a general election in November and until the result is declared.

    He would be a technocrat PM in all but name
    And therefore all of my post applies. Even if you’re a caretaker, the business of Government must go on and I think a Finance Bill is going to need to be introduced.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    edited September 2019
    ab195 said:

    HYUFD said:

    ab195 said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    Or at least long enough to best Boris' tenure as PM?

    But wouldn't a Labour grandee make more sense? Clarke has accepted leaving the EU when the whole point of this is to facilitate remaining. It's a faint risk, but what if he tried to get a deal passed?
    We can assume he really would be doing what he thought best, because it absolutely would be the last act of his career. Wouldn’t surprise me if he had one last crack at achieving something. However look to his ministerial career - he enjoys confrontation and has never been a unifier.

    There also has to be a Budget of some form, leading to a Finance Bill. I’m not sure Clarke’s new left wing supporters would enjoy his thinking on those things.

    Put all that together and I don’t think a Clarke ministry, underwritten by Labour and with a Tory (likely Boris) opposition is a goer.
    Clarke would be PM for 2 months to extend until a general election in November and until the result is declared.

    He would be a technocrat PM in all but name
    And therefore all of my post applies. Even if you’re a caretaker, the business of Government must go on and I think a Finance Bill is going to need to be introduced.
    Parliament would be suspended immediately post extension for the duration of the general election campaign so no.

    I expect Clarke would spend most of his premiership watching jazz and birdwatching
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    "part Muslim"? What, does he go to the mosque only on the first Friday of the month?

    Boris's Turkish ancestry doesn't make a bit of difference. He's an islamophobe. You shouldn't be defending him, you should condemn him exactly the same as you would if he were attacking Jews.
    As far as I can see, Boris' attitude is more liberal than Macron's, who has banned the burqa and niqab in public spaces.

    Boris, in his infamous article, said these garments should not be banned.
    Whataboutery. If you want to talk about someone else's islamophobia, you should do it in the spirit of adding to the discussion in hand, not deflecting it. It doesn't defend Boris that someone in the world is worse than he is.

    I'm aware of the content of Boris's article. It doesn't save him. Consider if someone wrote an article about Jews wearing the yarmulkah and comparing them with [something offensive, I'm not going there], but then said "oh but of course we shouldn't ban them", would you seriously be saying that this was all ok? I'm willing to bet not.
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Noo said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    He has criticized niqab-wearers, who are less than 5% of Muslims. Has he said something about Muslims more broadly?
    Alas, that is enough. Attacking a subset of a religion for the way they express their religion through dress is enough for the charge to stick.
    But he has said other things, stupid ahistorical theories about progress and Islam. He's got a problem with Islam and Muslims.
    So, are the governments of France, Denmark, Belgium, & Austria islamophobic?

    They have banned the full veil in public spaces. There are also partial bans & restrictions (I believe) in Germany, the Netherlands, parts of Italy and Catalonia.

    These are your beloved EU governments. They are much less liberal than Boris, who said that the garments should not be banned.
  • Options
    nunuonenunuone Posts: 1,138
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    Surely you are either adherents of a faith or you are not, can you be part Muslim/Christian?
    As a Muslim, no. You are either Muslim or not.
  • Options
    ab195ab195 Posts: 477
    edited September 2019
    HYUFD said:

    ab195 said:

    HYUFD said:

    ab195 said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    Or at least long enough to best Boris' tenure as PM?

    But wouldn't a Labour grandee make more sense? Clarke has accepted leaving the EU when the whole point of this is to facilitate remaining. It's a faint risk, but what if he tried to get a deal passed?
    We can assume he really would be doing what he thought best, because it absolutely would be the last act of his career. Wouldn’t surprise me if he had one last crack at achieving something. However look to his ministerial career - he enjoys confrontation and has never been a unifier.

    There also has to be a Budget of some form, leading to a Finance Bill. I’m not sure Clarke’s new left wing supporters would enjoy his thinking on those things.

    Put all that together and I don’t think a Clarke ministry, underwritten by Labour and with a Tory (likely Boris) opposition is a goer.
    Clarke would be PM for 2 months to extend until a general election in November and until the result is declared.

    He would be a technocrat PM in all but name
    And therefore all of my post applies. Even if you’re a caretaker, the business of Government must go on and I think a Finance Bill is going to need to be introduced.
    Parliament would be suspended immediately post extension for the duration of the general election campaign so no.

    I expect Clarke would spend most of his premiership watching jazz and birdwatching
    Erm, if I’m Jeremy Corbyn and I’ve just got a “caretaker” Gvt in power (I think he’d be mad to for the reasons above) I’m going to want it to do more than extend. I’m probably going to want to lay the groundwork for a referendum, essentially doing all the Brexit stuff I don’t want to own, under the cover of political consensus.
  • Options
    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    "part Muslim"? What, does he go to the mosque only on the first Friday of the month?

    Boris's Turkish ancestry doesn't make a bit of difference. He's an islamophobe. You shouldn't be defending him, you should condemn him exactly the same as you would if he were attacking Jews.
    As far as I can see, Boris' attitude is more liberal than Macron's, who has banned the burqa and niqab in public spaces.

    Boris, in his infamous article, said these garments should not be banned.
    Whataboutery. If you want to talk about someone else's islamophobia, you should do it in the spirit of adding to the discussion in hand, not deflecting it. It doesn't defend Boris that someone in the world is worse than he is.

    I'm aware of the content of Boris's article. It doesn't save him. Consider if someone wrote an article about Jews wearing the yarmulkah and comparing them with [something offensive, I'm not going there], but then said "oh but of course we shouldn't ban them", would you seriously be saying that this was all ok? I'm willing to bet not.
    The yarmulkah is not illiberal, misogynist, offensive and wrong.

    The niqab is.

    Its more like saying you don't like KKK garbs which are directly comparable to the niqab.
  • Options
    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    "part Muslim"? What, does he go to the mosque only on the first Friday of the month?

    Boris's Turkish ancestry doesn't make a bit of difference. He's an islamophobe. You shouldn't be defending him, you should condemn him exactly the same as you would if he were attacking Jews.
    As far as I can see, Boris' attitude is more liberal than Macron's, who has banned the burqa and niqab in public spaces.

    Boris, in his infamous article, said these garments should not be banned.
    Whataboutery. If you want to talk about someone else's islamophobia, you should do it in the spirit of adding to the discussion in hand, not deflecting it. It doesn't defend Boris that someone in the world is worse than he is.

    I'm aware of the content of Boris's article. It doesn't save him. Consider if someone wrote an article about Jews wearing the yarmulkah and comparing them with [something offensive, I'm not going there], but then said "oh but of course we shouldn't ban them", would you seriously be saying that this was all ok? I'm willing to bet not.
    What's your line on Salman Rushdie?
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,793
    Not sure if this poll has been reported?

    Express/OnePoll

    Con 31% Lab 25% Lib-Dem 16% BXP 14% Con Lead 6%

    Lots is interesting questions with the poll as well

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1175471/brexit-news-boris-johnson-EU-jeremy-corbyn-labour-tories
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Noo said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    He has criticized niqab-wearers, who are less than 5% of Muslims. Has he said something about Muslims more broadly?
    Alas, that is enough. Attacking a subset of a religion for the way they express their religion through dress is enough for the charge to stick.
    But he has said other things, stupid ahistorical theories about progress and Islam. He's got a problem with Islam and Muslims.
    So, are the governments of France, Denmark, Belgium, & Austria islamophobic?

    They have banned the full veil in public spaces. There are also partial bans & restrictions (I believe) in Germany, the Netherlands, parts of Italy and Catalonia.

    These are your beloved EU governments. They are much less liberal than Boris, who said that the garments should not be banned.
    Whataboutery. If you want to talk about someone else's islamophobia, you should do it in the spirit of adding to the discussion in hand, not deflecting it. It doesn't defend Boris that someone in the world is worse than he is.

    And for what it's worth, yes. You've successfully found OTHER examples of islamophobia. Islamophobia is widespread. All the more reason to join the fight and condemn it in all its manifestations. That means Boris (and any other whatabouteries you want to add to the list.)
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    "part Muslim"? What, does he go to the mosque only on the first Friday of the month?

    Boris's Turkish ancestry doesn't make a bit of difference. He's an islamophobe. You shouldn't be defending him, you should condemn him exactly the same as you would if he were attacking Jews.
    As far as I can see, Boris' attitude is more liberal than Macron's, who has banned the burqa and niqab in public spaces.

    Boris, in his infamous article, said these garments should not be banned.
    Whataboutery. If you want to talk about someone else's islamophobia, you should do it in the spirit of adding to the discussion in hand, not deflecting it. It doesn't defend Boris that someone in the world is worse than he is.

    I'm aware of the content of Boris's article. It doesn't save him. Consider if someone wrote an article about Jews wearing the yarmulkah and comparing them with [something offensive, I'm not going there], but then said "oh but of course we shouldn't ban them", would you seriously be saying that this was all ok? I'm willing to bet not.
    What's your line on Salman Rushdie?
    I've read Midnight's Children and thought it was a splendid book.
    I don't know much else about him, and don't intend to get into yet another tangent. Islamophobia is as wrong as antisemitism. Can't people see that? Can you all really not see it?
  • Options
    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    He has criticized niqab-wearers, who are less than 5% of Muslims. Has he said something about Muslims more broadly?
    Alas, that is enough. Attacking a subset of a religion for the way they express their religion through dress is enough for the charge to stick.
    But he has said other things, stupid ahistorical theories about progress and Islam. He's got a problem with Islam and Muslims.
    So, are the governments of France, Denmark, Belgium, & Austria islamophobic?

    They have banned the full veil in public spaces. There are also partial bans & restrictions (I believe) in Germany, the Netherlands, parts of Italy and Catalonia.

    These are your beloved EU governments. They are much less liberal than Boris, who said that the garments should not be banned.
    Whataboutery. If you want to talk about someone else's islamophobia, you should do it in the spirit of adding to the discussion in hand, not deflecting it. It doesn't defend Boris that someone in the world is worse than he is.

    And for what it's worth, yes. You've successfully found OTHER examples of islamophobia. Islamophobia is widespread. All the more reason to join the fight and condemn it in all its manifestations. That means Boris (and any other whatabouteries you want to add to the list.)
    Is it phobic to ban or dislike KKK regalia? Those wearing it find it important to their beliefs. I find it disgusting and I find the belief that one race is superior to be disgusting and I'm prepared to call them out on it. That doesn't make me phobic and more than I'm prepared to call out the incredibly similar dehumanising, demeaning and misogynistic niqab.

    You can have your beliefs all you want. Doesn't mean your beliefs aren't vile and shouldn't be called out, whether that be the KKK or the niqab or anything else that comparable that dehumanises people.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,619
    Floater said:

    From the Telegraph

    Corbyn is unwholesome in every way a man can be. When he’s not sucking up to exotic murderers, he’s baiting British Jews or condescending to our other ethnic minorities – remember “Only Labour can unlock the talent of BAME people held back by the Conservatives”? The “Absolute Boy” of golden Glastonbury salad days increasingly resembles Steptoe Senior.

    After three years of looking like an offshore zoo of squabbling monkeys to the rest of the planet, due to the inability of politicians to do their job properly, the indignity of having this clown representing us on the world stage would be the final straw. The idea of living in a near-future country headed by him and his anti-West friends makes me feel like burning my passport and running off to join the Foreign Legion.

    Though I’ve always found Corbyn unreservedly a Bad Thing, I could never work out whether this was because I believe him to be evil or stupid. Now, as he plods through the end-game of his last grasp at power – rheumy old eyes never losing sight of Seamus to make sure he’s saying the right thing – both these words seem too big for him.

    Christopher Hitchens once called the anti-war rent-a-mobs which Corbyn cut his teeth rallying “the silly led by the sinister” – this suits him better.

    He’s not the Messiah – or the anti-Christ – he’s just a very silly, slightly sinister old man. It is staggering that anybody – let alone Tory MPs – thinks he could be better than a no-deal Brexit.

    That's not journalism. It's trolling. Although these days, it's difficult to tell the difference, frankly... :(
  • Options
    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    "part Muslim"? What, does he go to the mosque only on the first Friday of the month?

    Boris's Turkish ancestry doesn't make a bit of difference. He's an islamophobe. You shouldn't be defending him, you should condemn him exactly the same as you would if he were attacking Jews.
    As far as I can see, Boris' attitude is more liberal than Macron's, who has banned the burqa and niqab in public spaces.

    Boris, in his infamous article, said these garments should not be banned.
    Whataboutery. If you want to talk about someone else's islamophobia, you should do it in the spirit of adding to the discussion in hand, not deflecting it. It doesn't defend Boris that someone in the world is worse than he is.

    I'm aware of the content of Boris's article. It doesn't save him. Consider if someone wrote an article about Jews wearing the yarmulkah and comparing them with [something offensive, I'm not going there], but then said "oh but of course we shouldn't ban them", would you seriously be saying that this was all ok? I'm willing to bet not.
    What's your line on Salman Rushdie?
    I've read Midnight's Children and thought it was a splendid book.
    I don't know much else about him, and don't intend to get into yet another tangent. Islamophobia is as wrong as antisemitism. Can't people see that? Can you all really not see it?
    Do you think he should die for writing The Satanic Verses?
  • Options
    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    "part Muslim"? What, does he go to the mosque only on the first Friday of the month?

    Boris's Turkish ancestry doesn't make a bit of difference. He's an islamophobe. You shouldn't be defending him, you should condemn him exactly the same as you would if he were attacking Jews.
    As far as I can see, Boris' attitude is more liberal than Macron's, who has banned the burqa and niqab in public spaces.

    Boris, in his infamous article, said these garments should not be banned.
    Whataboutery. If you want to talk about someone else's islamophobia, you should do it in the spirit of adding to the discussion in hand, not deflecting it. It doesn't defend Boris that someone in the world is worse than he is.

    I'm aware of the content of Boris's article. It doesn't save him. Consider if someone wrote an article about Jews wearing the yarmulkah and comparing them with [something offensive, I'm not going there], but then said "oh but of course we shouldn't ban them", would you seriously be saying that this was all ok? I'm willing to bet not.
    What's your line on Salman Rushdie?
    I've read Midnight's Children and thought it was a splendid book.
    I don't know much else about him, and don't intend to get into yet another tangent. Islamophobia is as wrong as antisemitism. Can't people see that? Can you all really not see it?
    Disliking people for their race is wrong.

    Disliking beliefs or actions is not.
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    Boris is himself part Muslim through his Turkish great-grandfather
    "part Muslim"? What, does he go to the mosque only on the first Friday of the month?

    Boris's Turkish ancestry doesn't make a bit of difference. He's an islamophobe. You shouldn't be defending him, you should condemn him exactly the same as you would if he were attacking Jews.
    As far as I can see, Boris' attitude is more liberal than Macron's, who has banned the burqa and niqab in public spaces.

    Boris, in his infamous article, said these garments should not be banned.
    Whataboutery. If you want to talk about someone else's islamophobia, you should do it in the spirit of adding to the discussion in hand, not deflecting it. It doesn't defend Boris that someone in the world is worse than he is.

    I'm aware of the content of Boris's article. It doesn't save him. Consider if someone wrote an article about Jews wearing the yarmulkah and comparing them with [something offensive, I'm not going there], but then said "oh but of course we shouldn't ban them", would you seriously be saying that this was all ok? I'm willing to bet not.
    The yarmulkah is not illiberal, misogynist, offensive and wrong.

    The niqab is.

    Its more like saying you don't like KKK garbs which are directly comparable to the niqab.
    I'm sorry that this will be difficult for you to hear, but some women wear the niqab out of choice. It's not for you to tell them what they should or shouldn't wear, or to insult them for it. I regret that you have chosen consciously to say something directly islamophobic, with the KKK comparison. I will not engage with /you/ further on this subject because I have nothing kind to say to you.
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited September 2019
    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Noo said:

    HYUFD said:

    TUC president, left-winger Mark Serwotka, claims Mr Johnson was "worse than Thatcher" and a "vicious, nasty, right-wing bigot".
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/worse-than-thatcher-unions-attack-boris-johnson/ar-AAGZAiN?ocid=spartanntp

    My goodness if Boris wins the wailing from the left will be a sight to behold!

    The wailing from Muslims will be more worrying, since Boris is an islamophobe, a Muslim-baiter. That's not the kind of thing that worries only the left. It goes across the spectrum.
    He has criticized niqab-wearers, who are less than 5% of Muslims. Has he said something about Muslims more broadly?
    Alas, that is enough. Attacking a subset of a religion for the way they express their religion through dress is enough for the charge to stick.
    But he has said other things, stupid ahistorical theories about progress and Islam. He's got a problem with Islam and Muslims.
    So, are the governments of France, Denmark, Belgium, & Austria islamophobic?

    They have banned the full veil in public spaces. There are also partial bans & restrictions (I believe) in Germany, the Netherlands, parts of Italy and Catalonia.

    These are your beloved EU governments. They are much less liberal than Boris, who said that the garments should not be banned.
    Whataboutery. If you want to talk about someone else's islamophobia, you should do it in the spirit of adding to the discussion in hand, not deflecting it. It doesn't defend Boris that someone in the world is worse than he is.

    And for what it's worth, yes. You've successfully found OTHER examples of islamophobia. Islamophobia is widespread. All the more reason to join the fight and condemn it in all its manifestations. That means Boris (and any other whatabouteries you want to add to the list.)
    If you believe all these governments are islamophobic, do you spend as much time attacking Merkel or Macron as you do Boris?

    I think I have successfully shown that Boris (on this matter) is much more liberal than almost all the EU.

    After all, I haven't yet got to the East where Victor Orban and Mateusz Morawiecki & Co are lurking with their emphasis on Christian Europe.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    edited September 2019
    ab195 said:

    HYUFD said:

    ab195 said:

    HYUFD said:

    ab195 said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:
    Or at least long enough to best Boris' tenure as PM?

    But wouldn't a Labour grandee make more sense? Clarke has accepted leaving the EU when the whole point of this is to facilitate remaining. It's a faint risk, but what if he tried to get a deal passed?
    We can assume he really would be doing what he thought best, because it absolutely would be the last act of his career. Wouldn’t surprise me if he had one last crack at achieving something. However look to his ministerial career - he enjoys confrontation and has never been a unifier.

    There also has to be a Budget of some form, leading to a Finance Bill. I’m not sure Clarke’s new left wing supporters would enjoy his thinking on those things.

    Put all that together and I don’t think a Clarke ministry, underwritten by Labour and with a Tory (likely Boris) opposition is a goer.
    Clarke would be PM for 2 months to extend until a general election in November and until the result is declared.

    He would be a technocrat PM in all but name
    And therefore all of my post applies. Even if you’re a caretaker, the business of Government must go on and I think a Finance Bill is going to need to be introduced.
    Parliament would be suspended immediately post extension for the duration of the general election campaign so no.

    I expect Clarke would spend most of his premiership watching jazz and birdwatching
    Erm, if I’m Jeremy Corbyn and I’ve just got a “caretaker” Gvt in power (I think he’d be mad to for the reasons above) I’m going to want it to do more than extend. I’m probably going to want to lay the groundwork for a referendum, essentially doing all the Brexit stuff I don’t want to own, under the cover of political consensus.
    There aren't the votes for another referendum, too many Tory rebels and Labour MPs from Leave seats who oppose No Deal but back Brexit with a Deal would vote against it.

This discussion has been closed.