Should the UK remain a member of the EU

[A Red]

1 minute ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Show me a more credible alternative to the Leader of HM Opposition and I'll go with it. 

 

Show me Swinson and Umunna talking about Clarke and Harman and I'll refer you to my request for a more credible alternative. 

Doesnt matter what or who you want, its what the majority of mp's will go for. 

[Mudface]

6 minutes ago, A Red said:

Doesnt matter what or who you want, its what the majority of mp's will go for. 

So Corbyn then, seeing as he's the overwhelmingly democratically elected leader of by far the largest opposition party.

[A Red]

3 minutes ago, Mudface said:

So Corbyn then, seeing as he's the overwhelmingly democratically elected leader of by far the largest opposition party.

But it seems there isnt a majority of mp's that want him. If thats the case they have to see if there is someone else the majority will support. If there isnt then its dead in the water.

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, Jose Jones said:

You’re right on the politics of it a bit there Barry, but you also need to look at it the other way too.

 

The Tory remainers don’t want to legitimise  Corbyn by giving him the hint of a chance of being seen to be reasonably capable. They’ve been successfully painting him as unpalatable for years and then giving him some legitimacy would undo all that work.

 

The Lib Dems are again misreading their own voters by acting as if Labour are there main rivals instead of the Tories. So also don’t want gift Labour the opportunity to lead.

 

On the other side, it will absolutely legitimise the Labour strategy, show they’re setting the agenda and enable them to demonstrate the ability to offer something to both Leavers and Remainers. It’s a massive opportunity.

 

All of them are thinking about 

 

Labour are bringing 250 MPs, the Lib Dems and the Tory rebels are bringing 25 between them. Why the hell should Labour be the ones to make all the compromises?

 

It’s pretty fucking ironic that the remainers in the Tories and Lib Dems have been very vocal about understanding the balance of power when it comes to the UK versus 27 EU countries, but they seem to have forgotten that when it comes to similar numbers in parliament.

I don't disagree with your point of view. However, I think we have to live in the real world. It doesn't matter what is fair to Corbyn, there is no rule that if he wins a no confidence vote, everybody has to start backing him. It doesn't matter if the lib Dems, Tory rebels and independents are being two faced. His job in my opinion, is to find a way through the current brexit deadline without us no-dealing and as all leaders of the opposition should want, a chance to fight a general election. He can come out of this smelling of roses in my opinion. He makes the sacrifice for the greater good of the country and doubles that with a blow that will rip the Tories apart. 

24 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Right now, what is supposedly palatable to large parts of the country is irrelevant.   They don't get to choose the interim Prime Minister, just like they never got to choose Johnson. (Actually, they don't get to choose any Prime Minister; that's how our "democracy" works.)

 

(It's always worth bearing in mind that these judgements of how popular Corbyn is come from parts of the media who spend all their time pushing a false version of Corbyn, specifically designed to diminish his standing with the electorate. )

 

Do you think Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman or anybody else has more credibility than the democratically elected Leader of the Opposition? 

 

As for Clarke, his favoured position now is to stop No Deal and negotiate a softer Brexit. (Swinson would presumably know this if she'd spoken to Clarke, as she claimed she did, but he says she didn't. ) 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-49372525

 

Clarke is also opposed to a second referendum. 

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/eddie-mair/ken-clarke-second-brexit-referendum-silly-first/

 

So, Swinson and the Tinge group are busy blocking Corbyn when he represents the only credible chance of them achieving the very thing that they claim they've been fighting for all this time.

 

Again, Parliamentary convention and precedent dictates that in the event of a No Confidence vote going against the Government, the Opposition get a go at trying to form a Government.  Why not direct your logic towards Swinson and Umunna: "It doesn't matter what Corbyn wants. The idea is to have a Government which does no more or less than extend Article 50 then go to the nation with a GE."

For me this is all about how do we get a situation to extend article 50 and get a GE. As I said in this post above , it doesn't matter if the others are being two faced. It's about achieving the best outcome. It seems to me you would prefer a Johnson government and a no deal brexit over the chance of forming a unity government to delay leaving the EU and getting a GE. For me all that matters is the result. I don't care who it is out of Corbyn, Harman or Clarke. It is completely irrelevant. Do you want to win a cup final on a jammy own goal playing badly or being fucking brilliant a losing? For me there's times where the only thing that matters is the result. I don't want to crash out of the EU and I want a Johnson government for as short a period as possible. I'd embrace a path forward that can achieve those goals. 

[aRdja]

16 minutes ago, Mudface said:

So Corbyn then, seeing as he's the overwhelmingly democratically elected leader of by far the largest opposition party.

Even the centrist plebs want Corbyn.

 

 

[skend04]

29 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

If you've got access to that, could you copy and paste it, please. 

 

(I don't want to give Murdoch anything to get past his paywall. )

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/18/brexit-leaked-papers-predict-food-shortages-and-port-delays-operation-yellowhammer

 

It's behind a paywall on The Times but Guardian are running the story now too.

[Rico1304]

33 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

If you've got access to that, could you copy and paste it, please. 

 

(I don't want to give Murdoch anything to get past his paywall. )

Typical. Want something for nothing. 

[Scooby Dudek]

17 minutes ago, skend04 said:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/18/brexit-leaked-papers-predict-food-shortages-and-port-delays-operation-yellowhammer

 

It's behind a paywall on The Times but Guardian are running the story now too.

Don't worry already been dismissed as project fear.

[Moo]

1 hour ago, viRdjil said:

Why?

Because he could split the Tories and he could undermine Johnson's credibility as potential PM going into a general election.  I think Johnson would reman their leader even after a VONC, or at the very least if he did step down they wouldn't have a clue which way to go and Clarke's presence would muddy the waters. 

[aRdja]

6 minutes ago, Moo said:

Because he could split the Tories and he could undermine Johnson's credibility as potential PM going into a general election.  I think Johnson would reman their leader even after a VONC, or at the very least if he did step down they wouldn't have a clue which way to go and Clarke's presence would muddy the waters. 

The tory remainers and lib dems should really learn to compromise to avoid the disaster that is no-deal.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, A Red said:

Doesnt matter what or who you want, its what the majority of mp's will go for. 

So... not Clarke or Harman, or anyone dictated by Swinson or Umunna. 

 

Right now, Corbyn can count on Labour, Plaid, SNP and Green. Lib Dems and Tinge can count on Lib Dems and Tinge. If you want to build a temporary Government, it helps to have something to build on.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

37 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Typical. Want something for nothing. 

That's the trouble with Socialism...

[A Red]

1 minute ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

So... not Clarke or Harman, or anyone dictated by Swinson or Umunna. 

 

Right now, Corbyn can count on Labour, Plaid, SNP and Green. Lib Dems and Tinge can count on Lib Dems and Tinge. If you want to build a temporary Government, it helps to have something to build on.

Would you support it whichever MP was interim leader?

[Moo]

25 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

The tory remainers and lib dems should really learn to compromise to avoid the disaster that is no-deal.

I agree, but the problem is the Lib Dems may not be as bothered about no deal as they claim.  I think some, including Swinson, are more bothered about positioning themselves post Brexit and want to take advantage of the chaos, this is demonstrated by her being more interested in Corbyn being the enemy rather than the Tories who have actually got us in this position. 

So the question becomes is Corbyn willing to compromise in order to avoid no deal AND get a general election?  I think he'd be daft not to if it is the only option. 

[aRdja]

8 minutes ago, Moo said:

I agree, but the problem is the Lib Dems may not be as bothered about no deal as they claim.  I think some, including Swinson, are more bothered about positioning themselves post Brexit and want to take advantage of the chaos, this is demonstrated by her being more interested in Corbyn being the "enemy" rather than the Tories who have actually got us in this position. 

So the question becomes is Corbyn willing to compromise in order to avoid no deal AND get a general election?  I think he'd be daft not to if it is the only option. 

Would’ve thought remaining in the EU is Lib-dems raison d’etre... Whatever happened to “Bollocks to Brexit”?

[Moo]

4 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

Would’ve though remaining in EU is Lib-dems raison d’etre... Whatever happened to “Bollocks to Brexit”?

I think it probably was pre Swinson. 

Chaos is a ladder (but that's one for another thread!) 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

50 minutes ago, Barry Wom said:

 It seems to me you would prefer a Johnson government and a no deal brexit over the chance of forming a unity government to delay leaving the EU and getting a GE. 

That's the opposite of the truth and nothing I have said could lead to that conclusion.

 

We need an interim Government to stop No Deal, extend Article 50 and call a General Election.  Only one party leader has offered unconditionally to work with other parties to achieve that. As it happens, that is also the party leader with the biggest democratic mandate, the greatest number of seats on the opposition benches, the support of some other parties and the credibility of holding the office of Leader of HM Opposition. 

 

Only the cult of "Anyone But Corbyn" stand in the way of this chance to stop No Deal. The onus is now on their constituents and party members to tell them to pull their heads out of their arses and do something useful in the national interest. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

29 minutes ago, A Red said:

Would you support it whichever MP was interim leader?

Yes.

 

Right now Corbyn has more than 200 seats advantage over any of the other names mentioned.  If anyone else had those sort of numbers, I'd support them.

[Mudface]

29 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

Would’ve thought remaining in the EU is Lib-dems raison d’etre... Whatever happened to “Bollocks to Brexit”?

It was a meaningless, facile slogan?

[aRdja]

8 minutes ago, Mudface said:

It was a meaningless, facile slogan?

Probably... I genuinely don’t understand what it is they find so repulsive about Corbynism that they’d rather the country head into No Deal Brexit.. Higher tax?

[cloggypop]

Commie bikes

[Duff Man]

2 hours ago, viRdjil said:

Probably... I genuinely don’t understand what it is they find so repulsive about Corbynism that they’d rather the country head into No Deal Brexit.. Higher tax?

Everyone, except possibly Mike Gapes, understands no-deal is worse than a time limited Corbyn government. The current calculation, however, is that it's more expedient to pretend otherwise.

[Barrington Womble]

2 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

That's the opposite of the truth and nothing I have said could lead to that conclusion.

 

We need an interim Government to stop No Deal, extend Article 50 and call a General Election.  Only one party leader has offered unconditionally to work with other parties to achieve that. As it happens, that is also the party leader with the biggest democratic mandate, the greatest number of seats on the opposition benches, the support of some other parties and the credibility of holding the office of Leader of HM Opposition. 

 

Only the cult of "Anyone But Corbyn" stand in the way of this chance to stop No Deal. The onus is now on their constituents and party members to tell them to pull their heads out of their arses and do something useful in the national interest. 

I'm not sure it's a cult, but the anyone but Corbyn position is one that exists and is real and not just MPs, the electorate too. It feels to me Corbyn's position is "me or nobody" which is just as ridiculous. If Corbyn won a general election he may have a mandate to not care these people exist. However, the reality is he doesn't have enough support to carry anything without cross party support, certainly including the liberals and maybe including some Tories too. So it seems to me there's a straight forward choice. Carry on as we are and just see what happens, which it feels Corbyn is doing, because his appeal currently falls on too many deaf ears and that will likely not change. Or make a pragmatic decision that a compromise needs to be made to ensure we prevent no deal and get a GE. Why would it be an issue to you if that was led by Harmon or Clarke as long as it happened? Surely the result is the main goal here?

 

And as far as I'm concerned, if that charge is led by a Tory, all the better, because it will damage their party. Ken Clarke will bring a decent number of Tories with him, it could take them a generation to recover, in fact maybe even cause them to split. This is our best ticket to a labour government imo. If we're not careful, Johnson will just go for the election and be seen as the strong leader and hold them together. I personally want this to damage the Tory party as much as possible. Either bring the government down through a no confidence/ unity government path or at least form a partnership that if Johnson is to call an election he looks weak and on the run. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

2 hours ago, viRdjil said:

Probably... I genuinely don’t understand what it is they find so repulsive about Corbynism that they’d rather the country head into No Deal Brexit.. Higher tax?

We're not even talking about Corbynism: the interim Government wouldn't be able to implement any of Labour’s manifesto; they'd just stick around long enough to do everything that the "Bollocks to Brexit" crowd say they want. Somehow, that's not acceptable to those twats.

[Duff Man]

I mean, everyone gets that they don't really believe that shit, right?