Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New YouGov leader ratings finds both TMay and Corbyn strugglin

245

Comments

  • RobD said:


    Yes it is. You said yourself that it has been rejected. The EU has made it clear that there is no further negotiation. This deal is either dead or parliament must accept it.

    Your last sentence sums it up quite nicely, and demonstrates that it isn’t dead yet.
    And you said Parliament rejected it.

    Look, in baby talk, here are the options

    No Deal
    Maybot's Deal (Rejected by massive margin)
    Remain.



    Also: EU do some fast negotiating and come up with an acceptable amendment to the WA negotiated by Mrs May (and staff) and approved by Parliament.

    Remain is not an option: The Government will not cancel A50 nor even postpone it - that much was proven in the voting.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 5,978
    Amazing this from GMB.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,555
    >
    dr_spyn said:

    Sounds as if Root had a very difficult delivery to deal with

    That was back in 2017, and I think his partner did most of the work, anyway...
  • Cookie Monster must be melting inside that suit at the cricket.....
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,770
    Fenman said:

    Barnesian said:

    For what it's worth - the EMA after the latest Survation poll shows:

    Con 38.5% Lab 38.1%

    Con 297
    Lab 274
    LD 17
    UKIP 0
    PC 3
    Green 1
    SNP 40

    Toris 29 short of an overall majority. Lab minority government possible with SNP and LD support.

    I feel sure I speak for my fellow Lib Dems when I say - fat chance.
    If the LD's won't support either party (directly or indirectly) in a hung parliament, what's the point of them?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 8,590
    edited January 2019

    No.

    Didn't think you would :-)

    And I do not think you are wrong.

    FPT re JC and anti-semitism:

    My take on him is that he is all politics, to the extent that he is wont to feel personal antipathy to people who are on the other side of any cause that he is passionate about. One of the reasons for his divorce was an ideological disagreement with his spouse as to how his kids should be schooled. That, if true, is unusual and surely telling.

    One of these causes of his is pro Palestine, which for him equates to anti Israel - or anti zionist as he would express it. He will therefore be ill disposed (yes, personally) towards people who are passionately pro Israel, which for him equates to anti Palestine. In the parlance he will be ill disposed towards zionists. Whether those 'zionists' are jewish or not is not relevant. The prejudice (if we term it that) is against an idea not a racial or religious or cultural grouping. It so happens, however, that Israel is strongly associated with jewishness - most of the world's jews outside of America live there - and therefore the distinction can easily be lost, both by participants and observers.

    So to conclude, and on balance, if we define anti semitism as prejudice against jews, JC is not IMO anti semitic.

    That said, his remark about 'no sense of british irony' gave me pause for thought. It rang a little warning bell. Not of itself enough to make me change my mind, but if there were lots more where that came from, I well might.
  • Its a good job England bat deep.........
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Yup. The only chance we now have of getting concessions from the EU is to show them that it’s full steam ahead with the no-deal preparations, and that we’re using the £39bn to do it.
    You are truly an idiot. And an idiot who is thousands of miles away and safely insulated from the disaster we are about to inflict upon ourselves at that.
    Rather than again play the man, what would be your suggestion as to how to get the EU around the table and talking?
    Well, we could start by ratifying the deal that we agreed with them and which, by their own admission, we shaped it into what we wanted according to Maybot's red lines.
    Except it wasn't agreed, unless you missed that vote a few weeks ago? And who's big idea was it to insist Parliament had to vote on it?
    It was agreed by our negotiators acting under instructions from our Executive.
    Who had no authority to agree anything until it had been agreed by parliament.
    A more nuanced perspective is that it was unwise of the Negotiators to agree something that was unlikely to be confirmed by Parliament. The size of the majority against the deal will have suggested to the EU that the Executive and their Negotiators were not acting in good faith, but merely using the negotiating process as a political ploy.

    You can understand why they might be peed off with us.

    Anyway, on the bright side, England are approaching 50 with only 3 wickets down. Tally-ho!
    I was surprised by the degree of Parliamentary hostility towards the WA.
  • kinabalu said:

    No.

    Didn't think you would :-)

    And I do not think you are wrong.

    FPT re JC and anti-semitism:

    My take on him is that he is all politics, to the extent that he is wont to feel personal antipathy to people who are on the other side of any cause that he is passionate about. One of the reasons for his divorce was an ideological disagreement with his spouse as to how his kids should be schooled. That, if true, is unusual and surely telling.

    One of these causes of his is pro Palestine, which for him equates to anti Israel - or anti zionist as he would express it. He will therefore be ill disposed (yes, personally) towards people who are passionately pro Israel, which for him equates to anti Palestine. In the parlance he will be ill disposed towards zionists. Whether those 'zionists' are jewish or not is not relevant. The prejudice (if we term it that) is against an idea not a racial or religious or cultural grouping. It so happens, however, that Israel is strongly associated with jewishness - most of the world's jews outside of America live there - and therefore the distinction can easily be lost, both by participants and observers.

    So to conclude, and on balance, if we define anti semitism as prejudice against jews, JC is not IMO anti semitic.

    That said, his remark about 'no sense of british irony' gave me pause for thought. It rang a little warning bell. Not of itself enough to make me change my mind, but if there were lots more where that came from, I well might.
    I think that's a very fair assessment.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,770
    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Yup. The only chance we now have of getting concessions from the EU is to show them that it’s full steam ahead with the no-deal preparations, and that we’re using the £39bn to do it.
    You are truly an idiot. And an idiot who is thousands of miles away and safely insulated from the disaster we are about to inflict upon ourselves at that.
    Rather than again play the man, what would be your suggestion as to how to get the EU around the table and talking?
    Well, we could start by ratifying the deal that we agreed with them and which, by their own admission, we shaped it into what we wanted according to Maybot's red lines.
    Except it wasn't agreed, unless you missed that vote a few weeks ago? And who's big idea was it to insist Parliament had to vote on it?
    It was agreed by our negotiators acting under instructions from our Executive.
    Who had no authority to agree anything until it had been agreed by parliament.
    A more nuanced perspective is that it was unwise of the Negotiators to agree something that was unlikely to be confirmed by Parliament. The size of the majority against the deal will have suggested to the EU that the Executive and their Negotiators were not acting in good faith, but merely using the negotiating process as a political ploy.

    You can understand why they might be peed off with us.

    Anyway, on the bright side, England are approaching 50 with only 3 wickets down. Tally-ho!
    I was surprised by the degree of Parliamentary hostility towards the WA.
    One wonders how great the hostility would have been if it had been read before a forthright opinion was blasted over the media.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,993

    Its a good job England bat deep.........

    If it's going to be a low scoring test, you still want at least 200 first dibs.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 14,198



    The continent has been laughing at the english for years, this is hardly new. But if you want to see an agreement passed ( like myself ) then we start from where we are and the chances of getting this past Parliament are uncertain so we will be going with this to the wire irrespective. And since the other side habitually wont shift until the last minute we might as well bring a deck of cards to pass the time,

    There was a story like that which I believe was eventually confirmed, Swedish employers used to negotiate national wage agreements every 3 years with the equivalent of the TUC. Normally these would go to the wire in all-night talks. In one year, however, they reached agreement quite easily the previous evening. They agreed it would look bad to announce that and give the impression that one side had caved too easily, so they spent the night drinking, socialising and playing cards before stumbling out at 7am to announce that they'd hammered out a deal.
  • RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Yup. The only chance we now have of getting concessions from the EU is to show them that it’s full steam ahead with the no-deal preparations, and that we’re using the £39bn to do it.
    You are truly an idiot. And an idiot who is thousands of miles away and safely insulated from the disaster we are about to inflict upon ourselves at that.
    Rather than again play the man, what would be your suggestion as to how to get the EU around the table and talking?
    Well, we could start by ratifying the deal that we agreed with them and which, by their own admission, we shaped it into what we wanted according to Maybot's red lines.
    Except it wasn't agreed, unless you missed that vote a few weeks ago? And who's big idea was it to insist Parliament had to vote on it?
    It was agreed by our negotiators acting under instructions from our Executive.
    Who had no authority to agree anything until it had been agreed by parliament.
    Everything has been done in accordance with UK procedure and law.
    No. Everything that was done was in accordance with UK procedure and law, but not everything that had to be done in accordance with UK procedure and law has yet been done. No treaty or agreement comes into force or has any legal binding until it has been ratified and deposited with the agreed authority. Hence all the argument over the Czech President not ratifying the Lisbon Treaty even though it had been agreed by his negotiators.
  • Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Yup. The only chance we now have of getting concessions from the EU is to show them that it’s full steam ahead with the no-deal preparations, and that we’re using the £39bn to do it.
    You are truly an idiot. And an idiot who is thousands of miles away and safely insulated from the disaster we are about to inflict upon ourselves at that.
    Rather than again play the man, what would be your suggestion as to how to get the EU around the table and talking?
    Well, we could start by ratifying the deal that we agreed with them and which, by their own admission, we shaped it into what we wanted according to Maybot's red lines.
    Except it wasn't agreed, unless you missed that vote a few weeks ago? And who's big idea was it to insist Parliament had to vote on it?
    It was agreed by our negotiators acting under instructions from our Executive.
    Who had no authority to agree anything until it had been agreed by parliament.
    A more nuanced perspective is that it was unwise of the Negotiators to agree something that was unlikely to be confirmed by Parliament. The size of the majority against the deal will have suggested to the EU that the Executive and their Negotiators were not acting in good faith, but merely using the negotiating process as a political ploy.

    You can understand why they might be peed off with us.

    Anyway, on the bright side, England are approaching 50 with only 3 wickets down. Tally-ho!
    I was surprised by the degree of Parliamentary hostility towards the WA.
    Yeah, but you don't work there, Sean. You're not a whip. The Executive must have had some idea.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 25,247
    dr_spyn said:

    dr_spyn said:

    I see England's openers doing the business as usual....

    and a brief innings from The Captain.
    Oh I don't know, they're well on their way to beating their previous first innings total.
    Sounds as if Root had a very difficult delivery to deal with, comments on inconsistent bounce on BBC.
    An inconsistent pitch, in the West Indies? ;)
  • blueblue said:

    Barnesian said:

    For what it's worth - the EMA after the latest Survation poll shows:

    Con 38.5% Lab 38.1%

    Con 297
    Lab 274
    LD 17
    UKIP 0
    PC 3
    Green 1
    SNP 40

    Toris 29 short of an overall majority. Lab minority government possible with SNP and LD support.

    Not a terrible outcome for the next election by any means. Corbyn in a very weak position to push through his insanity, with the Tories needing only a small boost to return to power next time.
    What surprises me is the substantial "strongly support" Labour result - that suggests to me that the population sample is not the same as the UK as a whole, and You-gov have to review their corrections. (Look at the 'All not Labour' results as well - only 1% regard them as very favourable.) Also look at Mr Corbyn's approval - massive increase in popularity since 2017 in his own party.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 25,369
    edited January 2019

    Yeah, but you don't work there, Sean. You're not a whip. The Executive must have had some idea.

    They were outflanked by the ERG's very well-organised pre-trashing operation. Admittedly, they should have seen that coming, because it was a straight repeat of the pre-trashing of Cameron's renegotiation, but Theresa May in particular is awful at anticipating her opponents' moves.

    Edit: And of course the government's handling of the DUP was disastrously ham-fisted.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507

    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Yup. The only chance we now have of getting concessions from the EU is to show them that it’s full steam ahead with the no-deal preparations, and that we’re using the £39bn to do it.
    You are truly an idiot. And an idiot who is thousands of miles away and safely insulated from the disaster we are about to inflict upon ourselves at that.
    Rather than again play the man, what would be your suggestion as to how to get the EU around the table and talking?
    Well, we could start by ratifying the deal that we agreed with them and which, by their own admission, we shaped it into what we wanted according to Maybot's red lines.
    Except it wasn't agreed, unless you missed that vote a few weeks ago? And who's big idea was it to insist Parliament had to vote on it?
    It was agreed by our negotiators acting under instructions from our Executive.
    Who had no authority to agree anything until it had been agreed by parliament.
    A more nuanced perspective is that it was unwise of the Negotiators to agree something that was unlikely to be confirmed by Parliament. The size of the majority against the deal will have suggested to the EU that the Executive and their Negotiators were not acting in good faith, but merely using the negotiating process as a political ploy.

    You can understand why they might be peed off with us.

    Anyway, on the bright side, England are approaching 50 with only 3 wickets down. Tally-ho!
    I was surprised by the degree of Parliamentary hostility towards the WA.
    Yeah, but you don't work there, Sean. You're not a whip. The Executive must have had some idea.
    TBH, we don't know what was said between the negotiators. Our negotiators might very well have warned the EU's negotiators that there would be difficulties.

    I thought there would be problems with the awkward squad, but not that so many middle of the road Conservatives would reject it.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 1,821

    Pulpstar said:

    Does anyone not see that the EU doesn't budge, and the 'will' of Parliment is broken, then it prove that Parliment is indeed no longer the soveriegn power of the country?

    How do you think thats going to look going forward, and the fallout from that?

    "Going forward", it looks less and less important. I get that this nebulous concept of sovereignty means a lot to 70-year olds and their dwindling band of spiritual successors in the Young Conservatives, but your average millennial doesn't give a flying one when they can't get on the housing ladder or have any job security.
    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at Leavers, isn't it? Rather than actually espousing any particular belief in sovereignty per se.

    Generally the malaise is a lack of "agency" (horrible sociological word, but there we go). People of all ages believe they don't have control over their own lives. The difference is that older people are more likely to blame this on the EU, and younger people on capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 10,349

    Amazing this from GMB.

    Ross Greer shows why party list systems stink to high heaven.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 1,850

    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Yup. The only chance we now have of getting concessions from the EU is to show them that it’s full steam ahead with the no-deal preparations, and that we’re using the £39bn to do it.
    You are truly an idiot. And an idiot who is thousands of miles away and safely insulated from the disaster we are about to inflict upon ourselves at that.
    Rather than again play the man, what would be your suggestion as to how to get the EU around the table and talking?
    Well, we could start by ratifying the deal that we agreed with them and which, by their own admission, we shaped it into what we wanted according to Maybot's red lines.
    Except it wasn't agreed, unless you missed that vote a few weeks ago? And who's big idea was it to insist Parliament had to vote on it?
    It was agreed by our negotiators acting under instructions from our Executive.
    Who had no authority to agree anything until it had been agreed by parliament.
    A more nuanced perspective is that it was unwise of the Negotiators to agree something that was unlikely to be confirmed by Parliament. The size of the majority against the deal will have suggested to the EU that the Executive and their Negotiators were not acting in good faith, but merely using the negotiating process as a political ploy.

    You can understand why they might be peed off with us.

    Anyway, on the bright side, England are approaching 50 with only 3 wickets down. Tally-ho!
    I was surprised by the degree of Parliamentary hostility towards the WA.
    Yeah, but you don't work there, Sean. You're not a whip. The Executive must have had some idea.
    The whole fiasco seems to have been on misunderstanding the idea that if all sides are unhappy it must be a fair deal. That arguably makes sense in a zero-sum bilateral negotiation. It doesn’t make any sense if the ‘sides’ are a disparate group and you need a majority to support you against their favourite unicorn. It just means that you have a lot of unhappy people, and they won’t vote for you. And they didn’t.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507

    Yeah, but you don't work there, Sean. You're not a whip. The Executive must have had some idea.

    They were outflanked by the ERG's very well-organised pre-trashing operation. Admittedly, they should have seen that coming, because it was a straight repeat of the pre-trashing of Cameron's renegotiation, but Theresa May in particular is awful at anticipating her opponents' moves.

    Edit: And of course the government's handling of the DUP was disastrously ham-fisted.
    Certainly, the latter. They should have been in on the negotiations from the start.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 2,316
    matt said:

    Fenman said:

    Barnesian said:

    For what it's worth - the EMA after the latest Survation poll shows:

    Con 38.5% Lab 38.1%

    Con 297
    Lab 274
    LD 17
    UKIP 0
    PC 3
    Green 1
    SNP 40

    Toris 29 short of an overall majority. Lab minority government possible with SNP and LD support.

    I feel sure I speak for my fellow Lib Dems when I say - fat chance.
    If the LD's won't support either party (directly or indirectly) in a hung parliament, what's the point of them?
    Minority Government is possible. Support on a case-by-case basis is possible. Faced with the state of the two major parties, you could even argue it's the only responsible thing to do.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,454
    edited January 2019
    matt said:

    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Yup. The only chance we now have of getting concessions from the EU is to show them that it’s full steam ahead with the no-deal preparations, and that we’re using the £39bn to do it.
    You are truly an idiot. And an idiot who is thousands of miles away and safely insulated from the disaster we are about to inflict upon ourselves at that.
    Rather than again play the man, what would be your suggestion as to how to get the EU around the table and talking?
    Well, we could start by ratifying the deal that we agreed with them and which, by their own admission, we shaped it into what we wanted according to Maybot's red lines.
    Except it wasn't agreed, unless you missed that vote a few weeks ago? And who's big idea was it to insist Parliament had to vote on it?
    It was agreed by our negotiators acting under instructions from our Executive.
    Who had no authority to agree anything until it had been agreed by parliament.
    A more nuanced perspective is that it was unwise of the Negotiators to agree something that was unlikely to be confirmed by Parliament. The size of the majority against the deal will have suggested to the EU that the Executive and their Negotiators were not acting in good faith, but merely using the negotiating process as a political ploy.

    You can understand why they might be peed off with us.

    Anyway, on the bright side, England are approaching 50 with only 3 wickets down. Tally-ho!
    I was surprised by the degree of Parliamentary hostility towards the WA.
    One wonders how great the hostility would have been if it had been read before a forthright opinion was blasted over the media.
    The trouble with these anti-EU politicians is that they all hanker to be the most extreme and are perpetually paranoid that someone even more nutty will come along and show them up as being unreasonably sensible.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    They were outflanked by the ERG's very well-organised pre-trashing operation.

    The tragedy there is not that they didn't see it coming (although that is true), the tragedy is that the ERG trashing campaign was at all effective.

    It was led by the same fuqwits who said "easiest deal in history". Every time they appear on television to trash the deal the subtitle should read "Remember, this person is a blithering idiot"
  • IanB2 said:

    matt said:

    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Yup. The only chance we now have of getting concessions from the EU is to show them that it’s full steam ahead with the no-deal preparations, and that we’re using the £39bn to do it.
    You are truly an idiot. And an idiot who is thousands of miles away and safely insulated from the disaster we are about to inflict upon ourselves at that.
    Rather than again play the man, what would be your suggestion as to how to get the EU around the table and talking?
    Well, we could start by ratifying the deal that we agreed with them and which, by their own admission, we shaped it into what we wanted according to Maybot's red lines.
    Except it wasn't agreed, unless you missed that vote a few weeks ago? And who's big idea was it to insist Parliament had to vote on it?
    It was agreed by our negotiators acting under instructions from our Executive.
    Who had no authority to agree anything until it had been agreed by parliament.
    A more nuanced perspective is that it was unwise of the Negotiators to agree something that was unlikely to be confirmed by Parliament. The size of the majority against the deal will have suggested to the EU that the Executive and their Negotiators were not acting in good faith, but merely using the negotiating process as a political ploy.

    You can understand why they might be peed off with us.

    Anyway, on the bright side, England are approaching 50 with only 3 wickets down. Tally-ho!
    I was surprised by the degree of Parliamentary hostility towards the WA.
    One wonders how great the hostility would have been if it had been read before a forthright opinion was blasted over the media.
    The trouble with these anti-EU politicians is that they all hanker to be the most extreme and are perpetually paranoid that someone even more nutty will come along and show them up.
    Brings you back to the failure of the voting system though. They are rewarded for appealing to the lowest common denominator.
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 777

    matt said:

    Fenman said:

    Barnesian said:

    For what it's worth - the EMA after the latest Survation poll shows:

    Con 38.5% Lab 38.1%

    Con 297
    Lab 274
    LD 17
    UKIP 0
    PC 3
    Green 1
    SNP 40

    Toris 29 short of an overall majority. Lab minority government possible with SNP and LD support.

    I feel sure I speak for my fellow Lib Dems when I say - fat chance.
    If the LD's won't support either party (directly or indirectly) in a hung parliament, what's the point of them?
    Minority Government is possible. Support on a case-by-case basis is possible. Faced with the state of the two major parties, you could even argue it's the only responsible thing to do.
    The role of the Lib Dems is to seek to have their policies enacted. That doesn't require a coalition
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 777

    IanB2 said:

    matt said:

    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Yup. The only chance we now have of getting concessions from the EU is to show them that it’s full steam ahead with the no-deal preparations, and that we’re using the £39bn to do it.
    You are truly an idiot. And an idiot who is thousands of miles away and safely insulated from the disaster we are about to inflict upon ourselves at that.
    Rather than again play the man, what would be your suggestion as to how to get the EU around the table and talking?
    Well, we could start by ratifying the deal that we agreed with them and which, by their own admission, we shaped it into what we wanted according to Maybot's red lines.
    Except it wasn't agreed, unless you missed that vote a few weeks ago? And who's big idea was it to insist Parliament had to vote on it?
    It was agreed by our negotiators acting under instructions from our Executive.
    Who had no authority to agree anything until it had been agreed by parliament.
    A more nuanced perspective is that it was unwise of the Negotiators to agree something that was unlikely to be confirmed by Parliament. The size of the majority against the deal will have suggested to the EU that the Executive and their Negotiators were not acting in good faith, but merely using the negotiating process as a political ploy.

    You can understand why they might be peed off with us.

    Anyway, on the bright side, England are approaching 50 with only 3 wickets down. Tally-ho!
    I was surprised by the degree of Parliamentary hostility towards the WA.
    One wonders how great the hostility would have been if it had been read before a forthright opinion was blasted over the media.
    The trouble with these anti-EU politicians is that they all hanker to be the most extreme and are perpetually paranoid that someone even more nutty will come along and show them up.
    Brings you back to the failure of the voting system though. They are rewarded for appealing to the lowest common denominator.
    The British people
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 29,155
    Neither of them is exactly setting the Thames on fire. The public may have been infected by a mass psychosis but they haven't completely lost their minds.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507
    IanB2 said:

    matt said:

    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Yup. The only chance we now have of getting concessions from the EU is to show them that it’s full steam ahead with the no-deal preparations, and that we’re using the £39bn to do it.
    You are truly an idiot. And an idiot who is thousands of miles away and safely insulated from the disaster we are about to inflict upon ourselves at that.
    Rather than again play the man, what would be your suggestion as to how to get the EU around the table and talking?
    Well, we could start by ratifying the deal that we agreed with them and which, by their own admission, we shaped it into what we wanted according to Maybot's red lines.
    Except it wasn't agreed, unless you missed that vote a few weeks ago? And who's big idea was it to insist Parliament had to vote on it?
    It was agreed by our negotiators acting under instructions from our Executive.
    Who had no authority to agree anything until it had been agreed by parliament.
    A more nuanced perspective is that it was unwise of the Negotiators to agree something that was unlikely to be confirmed by Parliament. The size of the majority against the deal will have suggested to the EU that the Executive and their Negotiators were not acting in good faith, but merely using the negotiating process as a political ploy.

    You can understand why they might be peed off with us.

    Anyway, on the bright side, England are approaching 50 with only 3 wickets down. Tally-ho!
    I was surprised by the degree of Parliamentary hostility towards the WA.
    One wonders how great the hostility would have been if it had been read before a forthright opinion was blasted over the media.
    The trouble with these anti-EU politicians is that they all hanker to be the most extreme and are perpetually paranoid that someone even more nutty will come along and show them up as being unreasonably sensible.
    A lot of them treat it as a pissing contest.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,993

    matt said:

    Fenman said:

    Barnesian said:

    For what it's worth - the EMA after the latest Survation poll shows:

    Con 38.5% Lab 38.1%

    Con 297
    Lab 274
    LD 17
    UKIP 0
    PC 3
    Green 1
    SNP 40

    Toris 29 short of an overall majority. Lab minority government possible with SNP and LD support.

    I feel sure I speak for my fellow Lib Dems when I say - fat chance.
    If the LD's won't support either party (directly or indirectly) in a hung parliament, what's the point of them?
    Minority Government is possible. Support on a case-by-case basis is possible. Faced with the state of the two major parties, you could even argue it's the only responsible thing to do.
    You need to give support to either May or Corbyn to command the confidence of the house though.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,993
    Yes I can see even if the WA is passed that the Lords will chuck back enough to time us out with inadequate legislation.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 6,307
    Pulpstar said:

    matt said:

    Fenman said:

    Barnesian said:

    For what it's worth - the EMA after the latest Survation poll shows:

    Con 38.5% Lab 38.1%

    Con 297
    Lab 274
    LD 17
    UKIP 0
    PC 3
    Green 1
    SNP 40

    Toris 29 short of an overall majority. Lab minority government possible with SNP and LD support.

    I feel sure I speak for my fellow Lib Dems when I say - fat chance.
    If the LD's won't support either party (directly or indirectly) in a hung parliament, what's the point of them?
    Minority Government is possible. Support on a case-by-case basis is possible. Faced with the state of the two major parties, you could even argue it's the only responsible thing to do.
    You need to give support to either May or Corbyn to command the confidence of the house though.
    Not if you choose to abstain you don't.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,555
    Pulpstar said:

    Its a good job England bat deep.........

    If it's going to be a low scoring test, you still want at least 200 first dibs.
    At this rate, we'll have them by teatime.

    Gabriel has some serious pace. Bit of a handful on this pitch.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 42,504
    edited January 2019
    I do worry about the quality of some academic research...

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/31/police-stop-and-search-riots-2011-london

    There might be a simpler explanation...if police use more stop in search in areas where there are more issues with crime (especially violent crime)*, then surprise surprise when law and order breaks down, areas with more issues with violent crime suffer more violent crime.

    * which one would hope would be the case.

    And "we note that last year’s rise in the number of stop and searches was accompanied by a slight fall in the number of arrests" ....is perhaps that people think shit I am might get stop and searched, I need to be more careful about what I carry on the street.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,037
    If nothing else, Brexit has inspired a KAL cartoon that is actually amusing.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 25,247
    78/4 at lunch. The only positive thing for England is that this time last week they were all out for fewer runs.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,993
    dixiedean said:

    Pulpstar said:

    matt said:

    Fenman said:

    Barnesian said:

    For what it's worth - the EMA after the latest Survation poll shows:

    Con 38.5% Lab 38.1%

    Con 297
    Lab 274
    LD 17
    UKIP 0
    PC 3
    Green 1
    SNP 40

    Toris 29 short of an overall majority. Lab minority government possible with SNP and LD support.

    I feel sure I speak for my fellow Lib Dems when I say - fat chance.
    If the LD's won't support either party (directly or indirectly) in a hung parliament, what's the point of them?
    Minority Government is possible. Support on a case-by-case basis is possible. Faced with the state of the two major parties, you could even argue it's the only responsible thing to do.
    You need to give support to either May or Corbyn to command the confidence of the house though.
    Not if you choose to abstain you don't.
    How many parties other than Sinn Fein have abstained as a matter of policy on Queens Speech/budgets in the history of our parliament ?!
  • If nothing else, Brexit has inspired a KAL cartoon that is actually amusing.

    EU plugs are inferior and yet they still rigidly stick with them regardless...is that the message?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,555

    If nothing else, Brexit has inspired a KAL cartoon that is actually amusing.

    EU plugs are inferior and yet they still rigidly stick with them regardless...is that the message?
    You're asking for a complete rewiring of Europe before the end of March.... is that the message ?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,311

    If nothing else, Brexit has inspired a KAL cartoon that is actually amusing.

    The moral of this story: they won't be selling us any electricity then.....
  • Pulpstar said:

    How many parties other than Sinn Fein have abstained as a matter of policy on Queens Speech/budgets in the history of our parliament ?!

    I think it does happen occasionally - the Conservatives largely abstained on the main Queen's Speech motion in October 1974, for example.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 6,307
    Pulpstar said:

    dixiedean said:

    Pulpstar said:

    matt said:

    Fenman said:

    Barnesian said:

    For what it's worth - the EMA after the latest Survation poll shows:

    Con 38.5% Lab 38.1%

    Con 297
    Lab 274
    LD 17
    UKIP 0
    PC 3
    Green 1
    SNP 40

    Toris 29 short of an overall majority. Lab minority government possible with SNP and LD support.

    I feel sure I speak for my fellow Lib Dems when I say - fat chance.
    If the LD's won't support either party (directly or indirectly) in a hung parliament, what's the point of them?
    Minority Government is possible. Support on a case-by-case basis is possible. Faced with the state of the two major parties, you could even argue it's the only responsible thing to do.
    You need to give support to either May or Corbyn to command the confidence of the house though.
    Not if you choose to abstain you don't.
    How many parties other than Sinn Fein have abstained as a matter of policy on Queens Speech/budgets in the history of our parliament ?!
    I have no idea. However, if you wish to support certain government legislation, but not the Government in total, then abstaining on a QS or VONC makes perfect sense.
    On the figures quoted, the Lib Dems would have the arithmetic to do exactly that. They could keep the government in place whilst picking and choosing which Bills to vote down.
    Our system is not designed for informal agreements in extremely hung Parliaments. It is one of its weaknesses. But till the SNP go away, it is most likely going to have to evolve.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507

    I do worry about the quality of some academic research...

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/31/police-stop-and-search-riots-2011-london

    There might be a simpler explanation...if police use more stop in search in areas where there are more issues with crime (especially violent crime)*, then surprise surprise when law and order breaks down, areas with more issues with violent crime suffer more violent crime.

    * which one would hope would be the case.

    And "we note that last year’s rise in the number of stop and searches was accompanied by a slight fall in the number of arrests" ....is perhaps that people think shit I am might get stop and searched, I need to be more careful about what I carry on the street.

    The poor rioters. Driven to rob and kill because the police showed them insufficient respect.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Does anyone not see that the EU doesn't budge, and the 'will' of Parliment is broken, then it prove that Parliment is indeed no longer the soveriegn power of the country?

    How do you think thats going to look going forward, and the fallout from that?

    "Going forward", it looks less and less important. I get that this nebulous concept of sovereignty means a lot to 70-year olds and their dwindling band of spiritual successors in the Young Conservatives, but your average millennial doesn't give a flying one when they can't get on the housing ladder or have any job security.
    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at Leavers, isn't it? Rather than actually espousing any particular belief in sovereignty per se.

    Generally the malaise is a lack of "agency" (horrible sociological word, but there we go). People of all ages believe they don't have control over their own lives. The difference is that older people are more likely to blame this on the EU, and younger people on capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 42,504
    edited January 2019
    Sean_F said:

    I do worry about the quality of some academic research...

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/31/police-stop-and-search-riots-2011-london

    There might be a simpler explanation...if police use more stop in search in areas where there are more issues with crime (especially violent crime)*, then surprise surprise when law and order breaks down, areas with more issues with violent crime suffer more violent crime.

    * which one would hope would be the case.

    And "we note that last year’s rise in the number of stop and searches was accompanied by a slight fall in the number of arrests" ....is perhaps that people think shit I am might get stop and searched, I need to be more careful about what I carry on the street.

    The poor rioters. Driven to rob and kill because the police showed them insufficient respect.
    You iz racist blood.
  • If nothing else, Brexit has inspired a KAL cartoon that is actually amusing.

    EU plugs are inferior and yet they still rigidly stick with them regardless...is that the message?
    I think it is that TMay and the Brexiteers are somewhat Con-fused.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 32,036

    If nothing else, Brexit has inspired a KAL cartoon that is actually amusing.

    EU plugs are inferior and yet they still rigidly stick with them regardless...is that the message?
    UK plugs cause more foot injuries.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507

    Sean_F said:

    I do worry about the quality of some academic research...

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/31/police-stop-and-search-riots-2011-london

    There might be a simpler explanation...if police use more stop in search in areas where there are more issues with crime (especially violent crime)*, then surprise surprise when law and order breaks down, areas with more issues with violent crime suffer more violent crime.

    * which one would hope would be the case.

    And "we note that last year’s rise in the number of stop and searches was accompanied by a slight fall in the number of arrests" ....is perhaps that people think shit I am might get stop and searched, I need to be more careful about what I carry on the street.

    The poor rioters. Driven to rob and kill because the police showed them insufficient respect.
    You iz racist blood.
    People who riot are exactly the kind of people who need to be stopped and searched.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    Pulpstar said:

    Does anyone not see that the EU doesn't budge, and the 'will' of Parliment is broken, then it prove that Parliment is indeed no longer the soveriegn power of the country?

    How do you think thats going to look going forward, and the fallout from that?

    "Going forward", it looks less and less important. I get that this nebulous concept of sovereignty means a lot to 70-year olds and their dwindling band of spiritual successors in the Young Conservatives, but your average millennial doesn't give a flying one when they can't get on the housing ladder or have any job security.
    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at Leavers, isn't it? Rather than actually espousing any particular belief in sovereignty per se.

    Generally the malaise is a lack of "agency" (horrible sociological word, but there we go). People of all ages believe they don't have control over their own lives. The difference is that older people are more likely to blame this on the EU, and younger people on capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,555
    Interesting article on Bloomberg's presidential intentions, and his efforts to defeat Trump in 2020 (the two are not necessarily the same thing):
    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/bloomberg-building-data-organization-crush-trump/581710/
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,993

    Pulpstar said:

    How many parties other than Sinn Fein have abstained as a matter of policy on Queens Speech/budgets in the history of our parliament ?!

    I think it does happen occasionally - the Conservatives largely abstained on the main Queen's Speech motion in October 1974, for example.
    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Does anyone not see that the EU doesn't budge, and the 'will' of Parliment is broken, then it prove that Parliment is indeed no longer the soveriegn power of the country?

    How do you think thats going to look going forward, and the fallout from that?

    "Going forward", it looks less and less important. I get that this nebulous concept of sovereignty means a lot to 70-year olds and their dwindling band of spiritual successors in the Young Conservatives, but your average millennial doesn't give a flying one when they can't get on the housing ladder or have any job security.
    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at Leavers, isn't it? Rather than actually espousing any particular belief in sovereignty per se.

    Generally the malaise is a lack of "agency" (horrible sociological word, but there we go). People of all ages believe they don't have control over their own lives. The difference is that older people are more likely to blame this on the EU, and younger people on capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    This is what makes me angry about Corbyn's diffidence. There is no doubt in my mind Brexit will hurt most the people he should be protecting most. He should be four-square against it but at best he is equivocal. It invites the suggestion that he's one of those socialists who want conditions for poor people to worsen in order to strengthen their revolutionary resolve.

    It is complete bollox, always was and always will be.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 30,971

    Pulpstar said:

    Does anyone not see that the EU doesn't budge, and the 'will' of Parliment is broken, then it prove that Parliment is indeed no longer the soveriegn power of the country?

    How do you think thats going to look going forward, and the fallout from that?

    "Going forward", it looks less and less important. I get that this nebulous concept of sovereignty means a lot to 70-year olds and their dwindling band of spiritual successors in the Young Conservatives, but your average millennial doesn't give a flying one when they can't get on the housing ladder or have any job security.
    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at Leavers, isn't it? Rather than actually espousing any particular belief in sovereignty per se.

    Generally the malaise is a lack of "agency" (horrible sociological word, but there we go). People of all ages believe they don't have control over their own lives. The difference is that older people are more likely to blame this on the EU, and younger people on capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256


    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?

    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    Buy more and eat the ones you have ;)

    That is what I am doing :D
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 6,307
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    I do worry about the quality of some academic research...

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/31/police-stop-and-search-riots-2011-london

    There might be a simpler explanation...if police use more stop in search in areas where there are more issues with crime (especially violent crime)*, then surprise surprise when law and order breaks down, areas with more issues with violent crime suffer more violent crime.

    * which one would hope would be the case.

    And "we note that last year’s rise in the number of stop and searches was accompanied by a slight fall in the number of arrests" ....is perhaps that people think shit I am might get stop and searched, I need to be more careful about what I carry on the street.

    The poor rioters. Driven to rob and kill because the police showed them insufficient respect.
    You iz racist blood.
    People who riot are exactly the kind of people who need to be stopped and searched.
    There have been enough threats and hints of riots and disorder on social media recently. However, the stop and search profile would have to be radically re-modelled to cover these people.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,311



    The continent has been laughing at the english for years, this is hardly new. But if you want to see an agreement passed ( like myself ) then we start from where we are and the chances of getting this past Parliament are uncertain so we will be going with this to the wire irrespective. And since the other side habitually wont shift until the last minute we might as well bring a deck of cards to pass the time,

    There was a story like that which I believe was eventually confirmed, Swedish employers used to negotiate national wage agreements every 3 years with the equivalent of the TUC. Normally these would go to the wire in all-night talks. In one year, however, they reached agreement quite easily the previous evening. They agreed it would look bad to announce that and give the impression that one side had caved too easily, so they spent the night drinking, socialising and playing cards before stumbling out at 7am to announce that they'd hammered out a deal.
    British Gas used to negotiate the price for acquiring production from UK offshore gasfields. These negotiations were expected to go on for months, with teams on either side drawing out concessions of a tiny fraction of a penny per unit each time they met. On one occasion, at the first such meeting, the BG negotiator heard their opening proposal, sat back in his chair looking at his notes - and said "Yep, we can accept that."

    He knew that rather than rejoicing that they had got the top price they never expected to achieve, the guys on the other side would instead forever be wondering how they had screwed up. "How did we offer so cheap a price that they jumped on it?"

    They hadn't. What they didn't know was that he was retiring. And their proposal was within a range of acceptable outcomes. So he took it. And the thought of their continuing discomfort amused him.

  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 1,696

    RobD said:


    Yes it is. You said yourself that it has been rejected. The EU has made it clear that there is no further negotiation. This deal is either dead or parliament must accept it.

    Your last sentence sums it up quite nicely, and demonstrates that it isn’t dead yet.
    And you said Parliament rejected it.

    Look, in baby talk, here are the options

    No Deal
    Maybot's Deal (Rejected by massive margin)
    Remain.



    The big trouble is that all 3 of these options are equally damaged. Attempting a fair weighing:

    No Deal
    + Technically delivers the referendum, is the default, some mentions in the campaign that 'we'd 'be OK'
    - If you could fairly assess the Leave campaign in the round this was an option they clearly rejected and so any attempt to implement represents 'false manifesto' (note: in a proper weighing Remainer warnings are much less relevant than what the Leave campaign themselves said), most extreme version of Brexit not justified by narrow victory margin, (lastly) the risks themselves

    May Deal
    + Represents the first phase of a true and fair delivery of the promises of the Leave campaign as a whole (even if not Richard Tyndall's version of it)
    - awkward conditionality included to deliver the above, overwhelming rejection by leave campaign leaders

    Remain:
    - Lost the referendum and I accept a reasonable expectation in normal circumstances that the referendum should be implemented
    + Brought back into play by Leavers trashing all available leave options, retains some credibility given narrowness of margin and enough reasonable doubt over foreign interference (for the record, I think the victory was genuine but carries some doubt)

    On any dispassionate assessment, all 3 have the right to be at the table. I hate that I come to that view on No Deal, which I oppose vehemently, but there you go
  • Pulpstar said:

    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.

    They (we, for the moment!) are in desperate strategic trouble whatever happens. Obviously the worst for the country and therefore the party would be crashing out with no deal. A long delay or second referendum would be the second worst. The least bad for the country, and therefore for the party, would be to leave with the deal.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 12,600

    Pulpstar said:

    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at Leavers, isn't it? Rather than actually espousing any particular belief in sovereignty per se.

    Generally the malaise is a lack of "agency" (horrible sociological word, but there we go). People of all ages believe they don't have control over their own lives. The difference is that older people are more likely to blame this on the EU, and younger people on capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    Surely everything you have already bought with a sell-by date after March will in reality be fine this time next year?

    It's not as if it's going to be strawberries is it?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,993

    Pulpstar said:

    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at Leavers, isn't it? Rather than actually espousing any particular belief in sovereignty per se.

    Generally the malaise is a lack of "agency" (horrible sociological word, but there we go). People of all ages believe they don't have control over their own lives. The difference is that older people are more likely to blame this on the EU, and younger people on capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    Surely everything you have already bought with a sell-by date after March will in reality be fine this time next year?

    It's not as if it's going to be strawberries is it?
    It'll be bread, it's always bloody bread that gets cleared off the shelves whenever there is a panic buy due to snow, brexit or whatever in this country !
  • Pulpstar said:

    Does anyone not see that the EU doesn't budge, and the 'will' of Parliment is broken, then it prove that Parliment is indeed no longer the soveriegn power of the country?

    How do you think thats going to look going forward, and the fallout from that?

    "Going forward", it looks less and less important.
    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    If so, the UK government will be looking at a completely different commission and MEP make up. Anything could happen

    When the country reflects on this disaster, it will no doubt come to the conclusion that TM deal was the best deal, backed by business and most of Northern Ireland, and the ERG purists and remainers who want to stop brexit deepened a crisis far more than ever should have happened
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,206
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at Leavers, isn't it? Rather than actually espousing any particular belief in sovereignty per se.

    Generally the malaise is a lack of "agency" (horrible sociological word, but there we go). People of all ages believe they don't have control over their own lives. The difference is that older people are more likely to blame this on the EU, and younger people on capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    Surely everything you have already bought with a sell-by date after March will in reality be fine this time next year?

    It's not as if it's going to be strawberries is it?
    It'll be bread, it's always bloody bread that gets cleared off the shelves whenever there is a panic buy due to snow, brexit or whatever in this country !
    Modern bread is vile, closely related poison, so the less you eat the better.
  • Pulpstar said:

    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.

    They (we, for the moment!) are in desperate strategic trouble whatever happens. Obviously the worst for the country and therefore the party would be crashing out with no deal. A long delay or second referendum would be the second worst. The least bad for the country, and therefore for the party, would be to leave with the deal.
    Richard, is May's Deal really best for the Party?

    I assume it would carry with the backstop, so the DUP would jump ship. That probably leads to a VONC and a GE.

    Sure the Party would be ok with that? Sure we don't wind up with Venezuela as well as Brexit?
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Pro_Rata said:

    The big trouble is that all 3 of these options are equally damaged. Attempting a fair weighing:

    No Deal
    + Technically delivers the referendum, is the default, some mentions in the campaign that 'we'd 'be OK'
    - If you could fairly assess the Leave campaign in the round this was an option they clearly rejected and so any attempt to implement represents 'false manifesto' (note: in a proper weighing Remainer warnings are much less relevant than what the Leave campaign themselves said), most extreme version of Brexit not justified by narrow victory margin, (lastly) the risks themselves

    May Deal
    + Represents the first phase of a true and fair delivery of the promises of the Leave campaign as a whole (even if not Richard Tyndall's version of it)
    - awkward conditionality included to deliver the above, overwhelming rejection by leave campaign leaders

    Remain:
    - Lost the referendum and I accept a reasonable expectation in normal circumstances that the referendum should be implemented
    + Brought back into play by Leavers trashing all available leave options, retains some credibility given narrowness of margin and enough reasonable doubt over foreign interference (for the record, I think the victory was genuine but carries some doubt)

    On any dispassionate assessment, all 3 have the right to be at the table. I hate that I come to that view on No Deal, which I oppose vehemently, but there you go

    A fair enough assessment. We have been at this point since December - it was apparent back than that these where the only options available, but we must always remember that "No Deal" is already in place. We can argue about the others, but MPs have already voted us out like lemmings going over the cliff
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,311

    Pulpstar said:

    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at Leavers, isn't it? Rather than actually espousing any particular belief in sovereignty per se.

    Generally the malaise is a lack of "agency" (horrible sociological word, but there we go). People of all ages believe they don't have control over their own lives. The difference is that older people are more likely to blame this on the EU, and younger people on capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    Surely everything you have already bought with a sell-by date after March will in reality be fine this time next year?

    It's not as if it's going to be strawberries is it?
    Picked up some pasta today. "Best before" was mid-2021.

    Just sayin'....
  • Its a good job England bat deep.....
  • Bairstow Out - Sell England at 100 (DYOR)
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,206

    Its a good job England bat deep.....

    I have a question about the use of the word 'bat' in your post.
    Sure, they attend the crease, but bat???
  • Pulpstar said:

    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.

    They (we, for the moment!) are in desperate strategic trouble whatever happens. Obviously the worst for the country and therefore the party would be crashing out with no deal. A long delay or second referendum would be the second worst. The least bad for the country, and therefore for the party, would be to leave with the deal.
    Richard, is May's Deal really best for the Party?

    I assume it would carry with the backstop, so the DUP would jump ship. That probably leads to a VONC and a GE.

    Sure the Party would be ok with that? Sure we don't wind up with Venezuela as well as Brexit?
    It is the best way forward for the country at present no matter what the political risks are
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,037
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How many parties other than Sinn Fein have abstained as a matter of policy on Queens Speech/budgets in the history of our parliament ?!

    I think it does happen occasionally - the Conservatives largely abstained on the main Queen's Speech motion in October 1974, for example.
    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.
    That would be desperate tactical trouble. Strategically, the Conservatives have always benefited from being the clear party of the right [tactical voting being a method to circumvent that benefit]. The strategic calamity would be if the party split.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 1,696

    Pulpstar said:

    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.

    They (we, for the moment!) are in desperate strategic trouble whatever happens. Obviously the worst for the country and therefore the party would be crashing out with no deal. A long delay or second referendum would be the second worst. The least bad for the country, and therefore for the party, would be to leave with the deal.
    Little mention of New Centre for months now, which is odd. Truth is, the Centre is as desperately split as anyone else between Remain true believers (LD, Umunna et al) and varying degrees of delivery pragmatism (Benn, Cooper, shades of Tory Remainers, most on PB, Flint et al). Hell, some centrists are split with themselves.

    A real shame Tory anti No Deal support for the Cooper-Boles amendment was so weak. 17 was pretty shoddy even allowing that payroll sympathisers couldn't.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,037

    Bairstow Out - Sell England at 100 (DYOR)

    You can sell for as much as you like with me at 150 :)
  • philiph said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I thon capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sue up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    Surely everything you have already bought with a sell-by date after March will in reality be fine this time next year?

    It's not as if it's going to be strawberries is it?
    It'll be bread, it's always bloody bread that gets cleared off the shelves whenever there is a panic buy due to snow, brexit or whatever in this country !
    Modern bread is vile, closely related poison, so the less you eat the better.
    It surprises me Leavers haven't made more of the anti-obesity argument.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 30,971

    Pulpstar said:

    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.

    They (we, for the moment!) are in desperate strategic trouble whatever happens. Obviously the worst for the country and therefore the party would be crashing out with no deal. A long delay or second referendum would be the second worst. The least bad for the country, and therefore for the party, would be to leave with the deal.
    Richard, is May's Deal really best for the Party?

    I assume it would carry with the backstop, so the DUP would jump ship. That probably leads to a VONC and a GE.

    Sure the Party would be ok with that? Sure we don't wind up with Venezuela as well as Brexit?
    It is the best way forward for the country at present no matter what the political risks are
    If the Tories No Deal, then they will be deservedly slaughtered, as Letwin has effectively said.

    It will be a long long period in opposition.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 42,504
    edited January 2019
    philiph said:

    Its a good job England bat deep.....

    I have a question about the use of the word 'bat' in your post.
    Sure, they attend the crease, but bat???
    It is used in the same way as attend is used in the context of Jezza trips to terrorist memorials....he is there, but doesn't take part.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    edited January 2019

    When the country reflects on this disaster, it will no doubt come to the conclusion that TM deal was the best deal, backed by business and most of Northern Ireland, and the ERG purists and remainers who want to stop brexit deepened a crisis far more than ever should have happened Cameron should never have held the referendum

    Fixed it for you ;)

    :D:D:D
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 27,071
    Not quite

    The WA is the only deal on the table

    The U.K. needs to propose something acceptable (which would put something else on the table)
  • Pro_Rata said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.

    They (we, for the moment!) are in desperate strategic trouble whatever happens. Obviously the worst for the country and therefore the party would be crashing out with no deal. A long delay or second referendum would be the second worst. The least bad for the country, and therefore for the party, would be to leave with the deal.
    Little mention of New Centre for months now, which is odd. Truth is, the Centre is as desperately split as anyone else between Remain true believers (LD, Umunna et al) and varying degrees of delivery pragmatism (Benn, Cooper, shades of Tory Remainers, most on PB, Flint et al). Hell, some centrists are split with themselves.

    A real shame Tory anti No Deal support for the Cooper-Boles amendment was so weak. 17 was pretty shoddy even allowing that payroll sympathisers couldn't.
    I think and hope a no deal amendment on the 14th Feb will sail past, this time, putting an end to ERG nonsense
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 25,247
    edited January 2019
    philiph said:

    Its a good job England bat deep.....

    I have a question about the use of the word 'bat' in your post.
    Sure, they attend the crease, but bat???
    Bat should be a noun rather than a verb. It’s what the men carry when they walk from the pavilion to the middle, and back again a few minutes later.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,037
    Sandpit said:

    philiph said:

    Its a good job England bat deep.....

    I have a question about the use of the word 'bat' in your post.
    Sure, they attend the crease, but bat???
    Bat should be a noun. It’s what the men carry when they walk from the pavilion to the middle, and back again a few minutes later.
    That ball to Stokes was seriously unpleasant. If the pitch gets worse there could yet be an abandonment here.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 30,971

    Pulpstar said:

    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at Leavers, isn't it? Rather than actually espousing any particular belief in sovereignty per se.

    Generally the malaise is a lack of "agency" (horrible sociological word, but there we go). People of all ages believe they don't have control over their own lives. The difference is that older people are more likely to blame this on the EU, and younger people on capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    snip
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    Surely everything you have already bought with a sell-by date after March will in reality be fine this time next year?

    It's not as if it's going to be strawberries is it?
    Picked up some pasta today. "Best before" was mid-2021.

    Just sayin'....
    Yes, I was semi joking. We drink a lot of soya milk in this house. Some of that has use by dates that aren't too far ahead (I started buying back in the early autumn), but no real problems otherwise (tins, pasta, rice, coffee, tea, flour etc etc).

    Unless we get rats who break in and eat the whole lot.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 31,556
    edited January 2019

    When the country reflects on this disaster, it will no doubt come to the conclusion that TM deal was the best deal, backed by business and most of Northern Ireland, and the ERG purists and remainers who want to stop brexit deepened a crisis far more than ever should have happened Cameron should never have held the referendum

    Fixed it for you ;)

    :D:D:D
    Hi Beverley.

    You may not agree with my observations but maybe add your own comments rather than striking out mine.

    I am entitled to my view
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201

    Pulpstar said:

    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.

    They (we, for the moment!) are in desperate strategic trouble whatever happens. Obviously the worst for the country and therefore the party would be crashing out with no deal. A long delay or second referendum would be the second worst. The least bad for the country, and therefore for the party, would be to leave with the deal.
    Richard, is May's Deal really best for the Party?

    I assume it would carry with the backstop, so the DUP would jump ship. That probably leads to a VONC and a GE.

    Sure the Party would be ok with that? Sure we don't wind up with Venezuela as well as Brexit?
    It is the best way forward for the country at present no matter what the political risks are
    If the Tories No Deal, then they will be deservedly slaughtered, as Letwin has effectively said.

    It will be a long long period in opposition.
    I do not agree with this theory. Look at the support for no deal in the polls. If the Tories go for another referendum or revoke they are in big trouble, both with their voters and with party issues.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 2,316

    Pulpstar said:

    Does anyone not see that the EU doesn't budge, and the 'will' of Parliment is broken, then it prove that Parliment is indeed no longer the soveriegn power of the country?

    How do you think thats going to look going forward, and the fallout from that?

    "Going forward", it looks less and less important.
    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    If so, the UK government will be looking at a completely different commission and MEP make up. Anything could happen

    When the country reflects on this disaster, it will no doubt come to the conclusion that TM deal was the best deal, backed by business and most of Northern Ireland, and the ERG purists and remainers who want to stop brexit deepened a crisis far more than ever should have happened
    If you can confidently call "no doubt" on a political outcome in this of all times, Big G, you stand to clean up on the betting markets.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 1,850

    Pulpstar said:

    Does anyone not see that the EU doesn't budge, and the 'will' of Parliment is broken, then it prove that Parliment is indeed no longer the soveriegn power of the country?

    How do you think thats going to look going forward, and the fallout from that?

    "Going forward", it looks less and less important.
    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    If so, the UK government will be looking at a completely different commission and MEP make up. Anything could happen

    When the country reflects on this disaster, it will no doubt come to the conclusion that TM deal was the best deal, backed by business and most of Northern Ireland, and the ERG purists and remainers who want to stop brexit deepened a crisis far more than ever should have happened
    I think it’s more likely to come to the conclusion that TM red lines caused the disaster by necessitating an unpalatable deal. It’s only the best deal if you treat them as a given.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 25,369
    edited January 2019

    Pulpstar said:

    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.

    They (we, for the moment!) are in desperate strategic trouble whatever happens. Obviously the worst for the country and therefore the party would be crashing out with no deal. A long delay or second referendum would be the second worst. The least bad for the country, and therefore for the party, would be to leave with the deal.
    Richard, is May's Deal really best for the Party?

    I assume it would carry with the backstop, so the DUP would jump ship. That probably leads to a VONC and a GE.

    Sure the Party would be ok with that? Sure we don't wind up with Venezuela as well as Brexit?
    I think we are likely to end up with Corbyn in all scenarios.

    Under a no-deal crash out, we first have a period of utter chaos for which the Tories will be blamed for a generation (and justifiably so even though others like Corbyn and the Labour centrists should by rights also share the blame). The party itself might well split in that scenario - there is no way that sensible MPs like Phil Hammond, Amber Rudd, Richard Harrington etc are going to want to associate themselves with the disaster.

    Cancelling Brexit or holding a referendum is also extremely problematic. In party terms it is hard to see how any leader proposing it could survive, but even if that weren't an issue it would represent the complete rejection of a policy around which the whole party united in 2016. 'Trust us, we brought you a clusterf*k which the country only narrowly escaped, and even then at the cost of irreversible damage', is not an election-winning message for a party which, when I joined it, prided itself on pragmatism, economic competence, and avoidance of ideological extremism.

    If the deal can be agreed, then at least we'll have delivered a workable form of Brexit which doesn't trash the economy too badly, and which could eventually be the basis for a reasonable settlement. Given the current bad place the country and the party are in, that's as good as we're going to get. We might even avoid the second disaster of Corbyn, if the Conservatives can remember they need to be united, although at the moment that's looking somewhat implausible.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 25,247

    Sandpit said:

    philiph said:

    Its a good job England bat deep.....

    I have a question about the use of the word 'bat' in your post.
    Sure, they attend the crease, but bat???
    Bat should be a noun. It’s what the men carry when they walk from the pavilion to the middle, and back again a few minutes later.
    That ball to Stokes was seriously unpleasant. If the pitch gets worse there could yet be an abandonment here.
    It’s that bad, as opposed to the usual WIndian uneven pitch?

    An abandonment would save England’s blushes again, but annoy the hell out of Betfair.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201

    Pulpstar said:

    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at Leavers, isn't it? Rather than actually espousing any particular belief in sovereignty per se.

    Generally the malaise is a lack of "agency" (horrible sociological word, but there we go). People of all ages believe they don't have control over their own lives. The difference is that older people are more likely to blame this on the EU, and younger people on capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    n't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    snip
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    Surely everything you have already bought with a sell-by date after March will in reality be fine this time next year?

    It's not as if it's going to be strawberries is it?
    Picked up some pasta today. "Best before" was mid-2021.

    Just sayin'....
    Yes, I was semi joking. We drink a lot of soya milk in this house. Some of that has use by dates that aren't too far ahead (I started buying back in the early autumn), but no real problems otherwise (tins, pasta, rice, coffee, tea, flour etc etc).

    Unless we get rats who break in and eat the whole lot.
    So you have been stockpiling coffee from Africa, Tea from China, Rice from India and Flour from Canadian wheat?
  • Pulpstar said:

    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.

    They (we, for the moment!) are in desperate strategic trouble whatever happens. Obviously the worst for the country and therefore the party would be crashing out with no deal. A long delay or second referendum would be the second worst. The least bad for the country, and therefore for the party, would be to leave with the deal.
    Richard, is May's Deal really best for the Party?

    I assume it would carry with the backstop, so the DUP would jump ship. That probably leads to a VONC and a GE.

    Sure the Party would be ok with that? Sure we don't wind up with Venezuela as well as Brexit?
    It is the best way forward for the country at present no matter what the political risks are
    If the Tories No Deal, then they will be deservedly slaughtered, as Letwin has effectively said.

    It will be a long long period in opposition.
    This conservative rejects no deal with a passion and will not be a member if we leave in those circumstances
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,454

    Pulpstar said:

    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.

    They (we, for the moment!) are in desperate strategic trouble whatever happens. Obviously the worst for the country and therefore the party would be crashing out with no deal. A long delay or second referendum would be the second worst. The least bad for the country, and therefore for the party, would be to leave with the deal.
    Richard, is May's Deal really best for the Party?

    I assume it would carry with the backstop, so the DUP would jump ship. That probably leads to a VONC and a GE.

    Sure the Party would be ok with that? Sure we don't wind up with Venezuela as well as Brexit?
    I think we are likely to end up with Corbyn in all scenarios.

    Under a no-deal crash out, we first have a period of utter chaos for which the Tories will be blamed for a generation (and justifiably so even though others like Corbyn and the Labour centrists should by rights also share the blame). The party itself might well split in that scenario - there is no way that sensible MPs like Phil Hammond, Amber Rudd, Richard Harrington etc are going to want to associate themselves with the disaster.

    Cancelling Brexit or holding a referendum is also extremely problematic. In party terms it is hard to see how any leader proposing it could survive, but even if that weren't an issue it would represent the complete rejection of a policy around which the whole party united in 2016. 'Trust us, we brought you a clusterf*k which the country only narrowly escaped, and at the cost of irreversible damage', is not an election-winning message for a party which when I joined it prided itself on pragmatism, economic competence, and avoidance of ideological extremism.

    If the deal can be agreed, then at least we'll have delivered a workable form of Brexit which doesn't trash the economy too badly, and which could eventually be the basis for a reasonable settlement. Given the current bad place the country and the party are in, that's as good as we're going to get. We might even avoid the second disaster of Corbyn, if the Conservatives can remember they need to be united, although at the moment that's looking somewhat implausible.
    If only most Tory MPs were as clear sighted
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 29,155

    philiph said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I thon capitalism or some ill-formed concept of it.
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sue up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    Surely everything you have already bought with a sell-by date after March will in reality be fine this time next year?

    It's not as if it's going to be strawberries is it?
    It'll be bread, it's always bloody bread that gets cleared off the shelves whenever there is a panic buy due to snow, brexit or whatever in this country !
    Modern bread is vile, closely related poison, so the less you eat the better.
    It surprises me Leavers haven't made more of the anti-obesity argument.
    The obese were disproportionately likely to vote Leave. No one attacks their voter base.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 1,696
    edited January 2019
    Charles said:

    Not quite

    The WA is the only deal on the table

    The U.K. needs to propose something acceptable (which would put something else on the table)
    Don't worry about no food on the tables. Come March 29th our tables will be heaving and we will be able to feast for months on the carcasses of rejected and impossible Brexit deals.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Does anyone not see that the EU doesn't budge, and the 'will' of Parliment is broken, then it prove that Parliment is indeed no longer the soveriegn power of the country?

    How do you think thats going to look going forward, and the fallout from that?

    "Going forward", it looks less and less important.
    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    If so, the UK government will be looking at a completely different commission and MEP make up. Anything could happen

    When the country reflects on this disaster, it will no doubt come to the conclusion that TM deal was the best deal, backed by business and most of Northern Ireland, and the ERG purists and remainers who want to stop brexit deepened a crisis far more than ever should have happened
    If you can confidently call "no doubt" on a political outcome in this of all times, Big G, you stand to clean up on the betting markets.
    Yes you are right - but I do not bet
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507

    Pulpstar said:

    The Tories could be in desperate strategic trouble if Labour backbench (Stringer, Flint, Mann etc) votes are used eventually to get the WA through and the backstop is not to the DUP's liking - could be absolubtely friendless in parliament at a subsequent GE.

    They (we, for the moment!) are in desperate strategic trouble whatever happens. Obviously the worst for the country and therefore the party would be crashing out with no deal. A long delay or second referendum would be the second worst. The least bad for the country, and therefore for the party, would be to leave with the deal.
    Richard, is May's Deal really best for the Party?

    I assume it would carry with the backstop, so the DUP would jump ship. That probably leads to a VONC and a GE.

    Sure the Party would be ok with that? Sure we don't wind up with Venezuela as well as Brexit?
    It is the best way forward for the country at present no matter what the political risks are
    If the Tories No Deal, then they will be deservedly slaughtered, as Letwin has effectively said.

    It will be a long long period in opposition.
    Not necessarily. People might just allocate blame along partisan lines.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,037
    edited January 2019
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    philiph said:

    Its a good job England bat deep.....

    I have a question about the use of the word 'bat' in your post.
    Sure, they attend the crease, but bat???
    Bat should be a noun. It’s what the men carry when they walk from the pavilion to the middle, and back again a few minutes later.
    That ball to Stokes was seriously unpleasant. If the pitch gets worse there could yet be an abandonment here.
    It’s that bad, as opposed to the usual WIndian uneven pitch?

    An abandonment would save England’s blushes again, but annoy the hell out of Betfair.
    Not that bad, but individual balls have bounced dangerously off a length, which is the usual test - the question being what frequency is acceptable. Today is fine, though not much fun when you get hit, I'm sure.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256


    Hi Beverley.

    You may not agree with my observations but maybe add your own comments rather than striking out mine.

    I am entitled to my view

    Indeed, but "When the country reflects on this disaster, it will no doubt come to the conclusion that Cameron should never have held the referendum" loses a bit of the fun element.

    It is demob-happy time now. Responsibility is a thing of the past and conventions are being abandoned as we charge towards an irresponsibly managed future.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507
    Polruan said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Does anyone not see that the EU doesn't budge, and the 'will' of Parliment is broken, then it prove that Parliment is indeed no longer the soveriegn power of the country?

    How do you think thats going to look going forward, and the fallout from that?

    "Going forward", it looks less and less important.
    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at
    My car maintenance man for the last 27 years and his entire family voted to leave because

    'whoever we vote for, nothing changes; all that happens is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer'.

    Not a lot in there about sovereignty, immigration or even the EU. More about the after-effects of Thatcher and the lack of fair voting aka PR in Westminster elections.

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    I think it’s more likely to come to the conclusion that TM red lines caused the disaster by necessitating an unpalatable deal. It’s only the best deal if you treat them as a given.
    The red lines were not plucked out of thin air. They were consistent with the result.
  • Polruan said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Does anyone not see that the EU doesn't budge, and the 'will' of Parliment is broken, then it prove that Parliment is indeed no longer the soveriegn power of the country?

    How do you think thats going to look going forward, and the fallout from that?

    "Going forward", it looks less and less important.
    Hmm, plenty on social media whenever the Gov't is defeated about "parliamentary sovereignty" re Brexit; less so when the Gov't is winning. Any ideas on that ?
    I think it's usually in the context of throwing a common Leave argument back at
    My car maintenance man for the last 27

    Meanwhile a neighbour of a friend voted that way to, ahem, 'send the darkies home'. But there aren't many of them on the English-Welsh border and cutting down EU immigration might increase the numbers.
    Interesting anecdote. As a result of Brexit some of "the rich" will get poorer, but we can be sure that the poor will definitely get poorer. They will be the ones that suffer. Immigration will probably not come down, though as you say, it will be non-Europeans who will make up the numbers.
    Yes. I am expecting No Deal. I have never lived in a failing State before so should it should be interesting. Our very own Venezuela and without Corbyn being elected.

    Who could ever have imagined that?
    Latest seems to be that No Deal will switch to June, rather than end of March, as May fiddles around with some kind of nonsense extension.

    I now need to check the sell-by dates on a whole load of stockpiled food that was ready for March.
    If so, the UK government will be looking at a completely different commission and MEP make up. Anything could happen

    When the country reflects on this disaster, it will no doubt come to the conclusion that TM deal was the best deal, backed by business and most of Northern Ireland, and the ERG purists and remainers who want to stop brexit deepened a crisis far more than ever should have happened
    I think it’s more likely to come to the conclusion that TM red lines caused the disaster by necessitating an unpalatable deal. It’s only the best deal if you treat them as a given.
    The so called red lines reflected the referendum. A Norway style deal does not and we would be better to remain
This discussion has been closed.