EU-BREXIT - Page 200 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15013178
snapdragon wrote:Blimey- I didn't know that. Thanks.

I agree about McDonnell.

He may be just a running with the foxes and hunting with the hounds type, until he tears off his beard and whiskers when he's finally in a place of real power. A few mixed metaphors there, but you get my drift.

I also agree Milne needs to go - and so does the arsehole Drummond-Murray and his entire family.

They're a menace and have too much influence.



If you mean that once the Labour Party gains power, the leaders, like to change their spots, then yes,I would agree with you, power will corrupt them & they will have effectively 'pulled-the-wool-over-the-people's-eyes'- again by not delivering the goods.

That is & always will be Labour.

BLAIR'S government adhered to Tory budgets on two occasions for the first two years of office, in other words, they are\were 'Tories' carrying out Tory policies under the guise of, the 'Third Way'.
Why otherwise would you even want to implement the policies of the party that you have just defeated, it's madness, just like Gordon BROWN's pro-business speeches, the effect is that under a four year period of office, the opportunity to influence & implement your own policies are lost by self-constraint.


That 'Third Way' is double-speak for occupying the 'middle ground' of politics,it's sterile ground for people & country as it leads nowhere.
By contrast, the Tories always deliver, for their own kind.
By skinster
#15013181
JohnRawls wrote:Well, it is his job as a politician to convince. If he is not capable of that then this just means he is bad at what is required of him. That is why he is a political looser as i stated before.


Convince what? That the party membership can vote on something they're in debate over if Labour win an election? Is there anything fairer than that? Please share if so.
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15013188
skinster wrote:Convince what? That the party membership can vote on something they're in debate over if Labour win an election? Is there anything fairer than that? Please share if so.


Leaders position strictly speaking about any kind of ruler is:

1) To follow the will of the people.
2) To inspire the people to do something.

Those are perhaps the 2 most "Core" things that a "Benevolent" leader needs to do in the modern sense of politics.(There is obviously more but for simplicity sake you can summarise it with those two) Now, having said that somebody might say that they only need to do point 1. I heavily disagree with that because people do not often either know what they actually want or what they actually want is bad so hence the point 2 exists.

Corbyn might be okay for some in point 1 because of his semi-socialist policies but he doesn't inspire anything beyond the point 1. He doesn't lead, he doesn't try to lead, he tries to execute the plan that he has in his head and that is it. If you compare this to Trump, Macron, Merkel or even Johnson then you clearly see that Corbyn is a looser in this regard. And not being able to fulfil 50% of his job makes him a looser overall in my book.

So you crying about remainers not understanding Corbyn is laughable to me. Voters/electorate doesn't need to bend over to understand Corbyns reasoning or inspiration for what he wants or does. It is his job to convince the people or inspire the people to understand him. Of course for you, who supports almost all of Corbyn policies, it is okay and understandable and acceptable. Yet, majority of the electorate is not interested in politics to the same extent as you, they do not get in to the neaty gritty details, they do not even care as much as you or do not support majority of Corbyn policies. All that does not mean that they can't vote for Corbyn, it simply means Corbyn is doing a bad job/is a looser.

On the other hand, you have Johnson. Yes, his policy is a fucking mess. I would argue that he has no policy at this point whatsoever, reasoning of which he can't clearly explain anymore. Yet, somehow he manages to convince a lot of people from different walks of life to vote for him without having a heavy pre-established camp.(Compared to Corbyn) He is just one of the many Tories and a one that is polarising and disliked. Yet he is winning and Corbyn is loosing.
By snapdragon
#15013191
Nonsense wrote:If you mean that once the Labour Party gains power, the leaders, like to change their spots, then yes,I would agree with you, power will corrupt them & they will have effectively 'pulled-the-wool-over-the-people's-eyes'- again by not delivering the goods.



What? The problem with Corbyn is he won't come right out and say, yes, the decision needs to go back to the people. He's sodding about because he doesn't want to do that. He wants to leave.

That is & always will be Labour.


It's every political party, though the Tories are worst.

BLAIR'S government adhered to Tory budgets on two occasions for the first two years of office, in other words, they are\were 'Tories' carrying out Tory policies under the guise of, the 'Third Way'.
Why otherwise would you even want to implement the policies of the party that you have just defeated, it's madness, just like Gordon BROWN's pro-business speeches, the effect is that under a four year period of office, the opportunity to influence & implement your own policies are lost by self-constraint.


You're talking crap. The shoe was on the other foot.

[qute]That 'Third Way' is double-speak for occupying the 'middle ground' of politics,it's sterile ground for people & country as it leads nowhere.
By contrast, the Tories always deliver, for their own kind.[/quote]

The third way was supposed to do what it said on the tin.
I actually think Blair was a good PM until the fiasco of the WOT.

The first way was Thatcherism and absolutely horrible.
The Tories just deliver for the very rich.
By skinster
#15013201
snapdragon wrote:What? The problem with Corbyn is he won't come right out and say, yes, the decision needs to go back to the people. He's sodding about because he doesn't want to do that.


:lol:
User avatar
By Beren
#15013206
snapdragon wrote:His heart isn't in remaining and never has been. He wants Britain to become a socialist country and he can't do that while we're in the EU.

He can't do that anyway and he knows it. He could make Britain something like Sweden in the EU or something like Norway outside of it, but he definitely can't do anything if he's not prime minister. However, he just can't ignore the referendum results if he wants to be prime minister, so he has to have a Brexit plan, as well as he has to promise a public vote on any deal he makes with the EU, which I wouldn't believe to be against his will so much. In my opinion he's gone through the same transformation process as Eastern European leftists had, who started as Communists, then became Reform Communists, and turned into Social Democrats finally. It's amazing though how a Social Democrat/Democratic Socialist like Corbyn or Sanders can scare the shit out of Anglophones. :lol:
User avatar
By Seeker8
#15013211
Reuters wrote:The Chancellor Phillip Hammond warns leader candidates that Scotland leaving the union "would deprive Britain's next leader of the money needed to end austerity".




How can this be? I thought Scotland was too poor to be independent. :lol:

U.K media aren't reporting it, of course.
User avatar
By Beren
#15013216
In my opinion Scotland leaves if BoJo will be elected PM in a general election.



And NI will be partitioned too perhaps, which I don't think will be a completely peaceful process. :hmm:

Image
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15013251
Beren wrote:In my opinion Scotland leaves if BoJo will be elected PM in a general election.



And NI will be partitioned too perhaps, which I don't think will be a completely peaceful process. :hmm:

Image


It is a bit more severe then that because i think UK will probably get kicked out eventually if they don't decide anything. (Time is ticking)

The reason is simple, we have elections also and some leaders need to compete against alt-rightesque forces around the Europe. Most notable places are Germany and France. France will be in 2022 and Macron has stated that he doesn't want to extend forever. He will be okay to extend in October 2019 but he can't realistically go beyond mid-late 2020 because the election in 2022 is in April i think. So he kinda has an inherent interest for UK to suffer for a year to undermine his competition. To a great degree the same thing is in Germany but i think Germany is later on with its dates. Do others also want to do this? Absolutely! I just think France is the most biggest danger to UK in that regard right now.

So from 1 side, we have forever extensionists but then it won't last forever. Something is going to snap. We will probably extend the 2019 and the next date if needed. But beyond that it is danger zone code red SOS.
By layman
#15013384
I doubt anyone would veto an extension. Too divisive. There is a perhaps a time limit but it is very long. Any alt right elements lose from brexit mess. There is diplomatic time overhead but it’s fairly minor.

Bojo would perhaps manage to sell the withdraw agreement with better spin. He can put emphasis on the fact the backstop is actually a backstop and suggest the unicorn technology will mean it will never be needed.

He is a good liar after all.
By Atlantis
#15013413
Bojo is so polarizing that he is bound to split the Tories for good. And I can't see how a Tory government that polled at 9% during the last EP elections can have a mandate for a radical Brexit determining the country's future for decades to come. Even Bojo can't be that reckless. There are only two solutions: either there is a 2nd referendum or a GE. Either way, the Tories are bound to lose.
By B0ycey
#15013440
layman wrote:I doubt anyone would veto an extension. Too divisive. There is a perhaps a time limit but it is very long. Any alt right elements lose from brexit mess. There is diplomatic time overhead but it’s fairly minor.


Another extention will depend on who wins the leadership battle. I suspect Hunt would ask and receive as he seems more cooperative and he may well get a long extention to give him time to discuss what changes can be applied if any to this deal. Although BoJo has declared himself a "No Deal" PM by saying we are leaving in October if nothing changes in talks. The backstop is the sticking point and neither side are moving. So what does he expect to change if he wins the leadership battle and the UK have him in charge instead of May?

So the question is does BoJo have the balls to call an early GE to give him a better hand or does it require a leadership confidence motion by Tory remainers when they are faced with No Deal on the table and a kamikaze clown PM that needs the axe.

Bojo would perhaps manage to sell the withdraw agreement with better spin. He can put emphasis on the fact the backstop is actually a backstop and suggest the unicorn technology will mean it will never be needed.

He is a good liar after all.


Do you think BoJo can sell the backstop to the DUP? I doubt it. I'm sure May would have got her deal through parliament if it wasn't in coalition so I see nothing new here. Convincing Tories was never the issue.
User avatar
By Beren
#15013443
Atlantis wrote:Bojo is so polarizing that he is bound to split the Tories for good. And I can't see how a Tory government that polled at 9% during the last EP elections can have a mandate for a radical Brexit determining the country's future for decades to come. Even Bojo can't be that reckless. There are only two solutions: either there is a 2nd referendum or a GE. Either way, the Tories are bound to lose.

They're rather poised to win with BoJo actually, that's why he's winning their leadership contest. I'd be worried about the UK rather than the Tories under him, although the Tories have been worrying about themselves only all along the shit show. Earlier the issue was whether how the UK economy would be after Brexit, now the appropriate question rather is whether how the UK itself will be after Brexit.
User avatar
By Beren
#15014018
Although Boris steals all the spotlight as usual, immovable object Jeremy Corbyn made a move towards a second referendum in Westminster two hours ago.

The Guardian wrote:Corbyn restates call for any Brexit deal to be put to public in second referendum

Corbyn asks May if she agrees with Boris Johnson that it would be possible to negotiate a solution to the backstop during the transition.

He says Labour will work with other MPs to block no deal.

And he ends by saying the government should let the public decide on Brexit.

    "Whatever Brexit plan the new Tory leader comes up with, after three long years of failure they should have the confidence to go back to the people on a deal agreed by parliament."
By layman
#15014220
I read the Unite union blocked any full on support for new referendum.

More confusion it seems. Trade union movement is generally very pro eu but len mclusky and unite are labours biggest donars and one of his main allies. :roll:
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15014297
Beren wrote:They'd rather prefer PM Farage to PM Corbyn perhaps. :lol:


Does it matter though? If the Parliament doesn't support leaving with No Deal then there is not going to be a No Deal it seems.

Is there a situation where the PM wants to exit on the 31st but the Parliament doesn't? If the Parliament asks for an extension again while Bojo says no. I mean the only choice is to suspend parliament and push through No Deal with no parliament.(As i understand, the queen needs to sign up for this which she probably won't) You don't need to be a genius to understand that it might literally start a civil war within the UK.
By B0ycey
#15014301
JohnRawls wrote:...You don't need to be a genius to understand that it might literally start a civil war within the UK.


There will be no civil war in the UK. Although trying to push through "No Deal" in a remain parliament means that BoJos premiership won't last long. Does he have the courage to call an early election to give himself the opportunity to have a working majority or do the rebels have to do his work for him I wonder?
User avatar
By Kaiserschmarrn
#15014392
What UK Thinks wrote:
Three Years On: Still Divided

Today marks the third anniversary of the EU referendum in which the country voted narrowly (by 52% to 48%) in favour of leaving the EU. Since then, the country has spent much of the last three years debating how the process of leaving has and should be handled, the terms on which we should aim to leave, and even the merits of the original decision itself. The debate has precipitated a general election and resulted in the downfall of a Prime Minister. The one thing that has not happened is Britain making its exit from the EU – thanks to the repeated refusal of the House of Commons to accept the terms of the withdrawal treaty that was negotiated with the EU by the UK government. Instead the country is awaiting the arrival of a new Prime Minister who will be charged with the task of solving in three months a Brexit riddle that Theresa May was unable to solve in three years.

One might imagine that the difficulties that have beset the withdrawal process would have had an impact on support for the principle of remaining or leaving the EU in the first place. But of that there is remarkably little evidence. Our poll of polls of how people would vote in another referendum continues to report that the country is more or less evenly divided between Remain and Leave, much as it was three years ago.

True, as has been the position ever since our poll of polls series began at the beginning of 2018, the balance of support is now tilted in favour of Remain rather than, as in the referendum, in favour of Leave. Indeed, the current average of Remain 52%, Leave 48% is the exact mirror image of what emerged from the ballot boxes in June 2016.

However, this does not mean that there is a discernible, key group of Leave voters who have changed their minds about Brexit. That much becomes clear if, as in the table below, we examine separately the current vote intentions of those who voted Remain in 2016 and those who backed Leave. In both cases over 85% say they would vote exactly the same way as they did in 2016. The sound and fury of the last three years has left the vast majority of voters unmoved. And although 8% of those who backed Leave say that they would now vote Remain, they are counterbalanced by 8% of Remain supporters who indicate that they would now support Leave.

Image

The principal reason why public opinion is now tilted towards Remain is because, as we have noted before, those who did not vote three years ago prefer Remain to Leave by around two to one (if they express a view at all). In part, at least, this reflects the fact that this group of abstainers consists disproportionately of younger voters who in general are more likely to back Remain. However, it also suggests that, far from being certain to produce a majority for Remain, the outcome of a second referendum could turn on the ability or otherwise of the Remain side to mobilise the support of a group of voters who cannot necessarily be relied upon to vote at all.

Meanwhile, we should note that, in so far as there has been any change in recent weeks, it consists of a slight narrowing of the lead for Remain. The latest figures of Remain 52%, Leave 48%, contrast with ones of Remain 54%, Leave 46%, that had hitherto pertained for most of the time since the beginning of this year. Still, this movement could be the product of chance variation or the possibility that more recent polls have been undertaken disproportionately by companies that tend to produce relatively narrow leads for Remain anyway.

However, this seems to be an inadequate explanation. Of the four companies that have polled vote intentions in a second referendum since the beginning of May and who also did so in January this year, three (BMG, Survation and YouGov) have registered clear drops in support for Remain, on average by three points, while only one (Kantar) has not.

The principal explanation for this change appears to be that there has been some ‘hardening’ of the Leave vote in recent weeks. At the beginning of the year we reported that while 89% of those who voted Remain said that they would vote the same way again, the equivalent figure among Leave supporters, 83%, had become somewhat lower. Now the two figures are almost identical. Recent events have, it seems, simply reinforced Leave voters in their original views rather than encouraged them to think again.


So much for the tide is turning. Any day now though ...
  • 1
  • 198
  • 199
  • 200
  • 201
  • 202
  • 305

The Roger Stone trial was a result of the Mueller[…]

Actually, it does not contain the judge’s actual w[…]

You should stick with what you know as an engin[…]

“Iceworm”

If I'm a troll, at least I'm a troll who knows […]