BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
And you think that is the issue resolved? Hmmmm.morstar said:
There is a sea border in the new WA. Given that NI politics may take a more progressive turn based on events of last 48hrs, this development might be very slightly less toxic that it has been.pblakeney said:
The border problem has been solved?TheBlueBean said:
Not according to the EU. The previous WA contained level playing field provisions and didn't solve the border problem.rick_chasey said:Re Brexit, the whole NI / GB border becomes a lot easier if there’s some locked in regulatory “level playing field” with the EU.
Anyone sensible would.....never mind.
You think that because BJ says so? 🤣🤣🤣The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
In your humble opinion.webboo said:
Ah I didn’t realise that getting a competitive advantage meant having no moral scruples.Stevo_666 said:
Wrong. Just getting a competitive advantage as I said above.webboo said:
An example might be joining a political party you detest, so you can vote for leader who will be unelectable.Stevo_666 said:
OK - so when challenged to produce examples, you have no reply.rick_chasey said:Ok mate keep telling yourself that. I’ve mentioned it *so many times* so if you didn’t listen then you won’t now.
This would indicate you were scared of the competition.
Because they might elect a leader who might win.
You sound more like a morally superior Southerner than a Yorkshire bloke. Or just another bad loser venting about the GE result?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
No I just recognise sociopathic excuses for immoral behaviour when I see it.0
-
Wrong again. You've just backed up my take on you above quite nicely.webboo said:No I just recognise sociopathic excuses for immoral behaviour when I see it.
Now try playing the ball not the man."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Clearly you believe the outcome justifies the means.
A bit like Adolf.0 -
I predict Labour will pick another unelectable leader next time with or without Stevo's help. The main priority of the Momentum/Corbynite crowd is keeping control of the party. Election results are secondary.0
-
Depends how granular you want to be. In principle yes, it is the mechanism by which the Irish border solution is resolved and has been written into the WA which will get waved through very shortly.pblakeney said:
And you think that is the issue resolved? Hmmmm.morstar said:
There is a sea border in the new WA. Given that NI politics may take a more progressive turn based on events of last 48hrs, this development might be very slightly less toxic that it has been.pblakeney said:
The border problem has been solved?TheBlueBean said:
Not according to the EU. The previous WA contained level playing field provisions and didn't solve the border problem.rick_chasey said:Re Brexit, the whole NI / GB border becomes a lot easier if there’s some locked in regulatory “level playing field” with the EU.
Anyone sensible would.....never mind.
You think that because BJ says so? 🤣🤣🤣
Not saying it won't be contentious but logically it works. Unlike the utopian (nonsense) scenario where NI was to have seamless trade simultaneously between both Mainland GB and mainland Ireland whilst GB diverged from Ireland.
3 years were wasted pretending there would be no border when there was always going to be one either in the sea or on land.0 -
There's plenty of true believers unfortunately. I don't honestly think that those few having jolly japes had much impact except for helping make politics feel a bit more rotten.Stevo_666 said:
In your humble opinion.webboo said:
Ah I didn’t realise that getting a competitive advantage meant having no moral scruples.Stevo_666 said:
Wrong. Just getting a competitive advantage as I said above.webboo said:
An example might be joining a political party you detest, so you can vote for leader who will be unelectable.Stevo_666 said:
OK - so when challenged to produce examples, you have no reply.rick_chasey said:Ok mate keep telling yourself that. I’ve mentioned it *so many times* so if you didn’t listen then you won’t now.
This would indicate you were scared of the competition.
Because they might elect a leader who might win.
You sound more like a morally superior Southerner than a Yorkshire bloke. Or just another bad loser venting about the GE result?0 -
There are 2 problems with it.morstar said:
Depends how granular you want to be. In principle yes, it is the mechanism by which the Irish border solution is resolved and has been written into the WA which will get waved through very shortly.pblakeney said:
And you think that is the issue resolved? Hmmmm.morstar said:
There is a sea border in the new WA. Given that NI politics may take a more progressive turn based on events of last 48hrs, this development might be very slightly less toxic that it has been.pblakeney said:
The border problem has been solved?TheBlueBean said:
Not according to the EU. The previous WA contained level playing field provisions and didn't solve the border problem.rick_chasey said:Re Brexit, the whole NI / GB border becomes a lot easier if there’s some locked in regulatory “level playing field” with the EU.
Anyone sensible would.....never mind.
You think that because BJ says so? 🤣🤣🤣
Not saying it won't be contentious but logically it works. Unlike the utopian (nonsense) scenario where NI was to have seamless trade simultaneously between both Mainland GB and mainland Ireland whilst GB diverged from Ireland.
3 years were wasted pretending there would be no border when there was always going to be one either in the sea or on land.
1. N.I.
2. Boris believes in the utopian scenario, or is at least attempting to sell it.
I totally concur with the last sentence.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I think the Vince Cable thing highlights the difference between leaders and operators. VC was quite widely regarded as very effective in the coalition. Being good at your job doesn't necessarily make you a good leader though.briantrumpet said:
And, if Private Eye is to be believed, Vince Cable wasn't exactly dynamic in the role of leading it while he was there, at one of the most pivotal points in British politics in a long while... and, I guess, without a party machine to provide direction.rick_chasey said:It’s really really hard when the electorate removes all the experience and talent.
Wouldn’t underestimate that.
You could argue this is the opposite with BJ. Lots of evidence to suggest he is ineffective at day to day operational stuff but has clearly galvanised support for his vision and driven a clear agenda quite effectively in his short time in office.
Only time will tell if he proves to be an effective long term leader a la Alex Ferguson or a short term relegation avoidance specialist.0 -
Quite. With half a million members, the idea that it was a handful of Tory infiltrators, that made the difference, is just a little delusional.kingstongraham said:
There's plenty of true believers unfortunately. I don't honestly think that those few having jolly japes had much impact except for helping make politics feel a bit more rotten.Stevo_666 said:
In your humble opinion.webboo said:
Ah I didn’t realise that getting a competitive advantage meant having no moral scruples.Stevo_666 said:
Wrong. Just getting a competitive advantage as I said above.webboo said:
An example might be joining a political party you detest, so you can vote for leader who will be unelectable.Stevo_666 said:
OK - so when challenged to produce examples, you have no reply.rick_chasey said:Ok mate keep telling yourself that. I’ve mentioned it *so many times* so if you didn’t listen then you won’t now.
This would indicate you were scared of the competition.
Because they might elect a leader who might win.
You sound more like a morally superior Southerner than a Yorkshire bloke. Or just another bad loser venting about the GE result?
Labour did this to themselves just as the Tories have let themselves be taken over by Vote Leave.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Well London is very definitely a Labour city now if that gives any indication.morstar said:
I think the Vince Cable thing highlights the difference between leaders and operators. VC was quite widely regarded as very effective in the coalition. Being good at your job doesn't necessarily make you a good leader though.briantrumpet said:
And, if Private Eye is to be believed, Vince Cable wasn't exactly dynamic in the role of leading it while he was there, at one of the most pivotal points in British politics in a long while... and, I guess, without a party machine to provide direction.rick_chasey said:It’s really really hard when the electorate removes all the experience and talent.
Wouldn’t underestimate that.
You could argue this is the opposite with BJ. Lots of evidence to suggest he is ineffective at day to day operational stuff but has clearly galvanised support for his vision and driven a clear agenda quite effectively in his short time in office.
Only time will tell if he proves to be an effective long term leader a la Alex Ferguson or a short term relegation avoidance specialist.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
0
-
Yeah, but she wasn't a real Tory, obvs. Because the only real Tories are the ones who sign up to their present agenda.kingstongraham said:Single market: https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107219
0 -
I think Boris is trying to sell it. He knows exactly what the shortfalls are but is trying gloss over them.pblakeney said:
There are 2 problems with it.morstar said:
Depends how granular you want to be. In principle yes, it is the mechanism by which the Irish border solution is resolved and has been written into the WA which will get waved through very shortly.pblakeney said:
And you think that is the issue resolved? Hmmmm.morstar said:
There is a sea border in the new WA. Given that NI politics may take a more progressive turn based on events of last 48hrs, this development might be very slightly less toxic that it has been.pblakeney said:
The border problem has been solved?TheBlueBean said:
Not according to the EU. The previous WA contained level playing field provisions and didn't solve the border problem.rick_chasey said:Re Brexit, the whole NI / GB border becomes a lot easier if there’s some locked in regulatory “level playing field” with the EU.
Anyone sensible would.....never mind.
You think that because BJ says so? 🤣🤣🤣
Not saying it won't be contentious but logically it works. Unlike the utopian (nonsense) scenario where NI was to have seamless trade simultaneously between both Mainland GB and mainland Ireland whilst GB diverged from Ireland.
3 years were wasted pretending there would be no border when there was always going to be one either in the sea or on land.
1. N.I.
2. Boris believes in the utopian scenario, or is at least attempting to sell it.
I totally concur with the last sentence.
Interesting that both TM and BJ arrived at the sea border solution. Only difference being that TM backed away whilst BJ drove on.
It was always the logical solution but conversely, from a union perspective, the more emotive.0 -
Can't disagree with any of that.mrb123 said:I predict Labour will pick another unelectable leader next time with or without Stevo's help. The main priority of the Momentum/Corbynite crowd is keeping control of the party. Election results are secondary.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Who knows how many Conservatives joined up back in 2015? Looking at my first post on the Labour party thread, it got a fair bit of visibility judging by the variety of people who got wind of it. Although admitedly there would have been a lot of far left and hardcore union types piling in when they spotted their chance.rjsterry said:
Quite. With half a million members, the idea that it was a handful of Tory infiltrators, that made the difference, is just a little delusional.kingstongraham said:
There's plenty of true believers unfortunately. I don't honestly think that those few having jolly japes had much impact except for helping make politics feel a bit more rotten.Stevo_666 said:
In your humble opinion.webboo said:
Ah I didn’t realise that getting a competitive advantage meant having no moral scruples.Stevo_666 said:
Wrong. Just getting a competitive advantage as I said above.webboo said:
An example might be joining a political party you detest, so you can vote for leader who will be unelectable.Stevo_666 said:
OK - so when challenged to produce examples, you have no reply.rick_chasey said:Ok mate keep telling yourself that. I’ve mentioned it *so many times* so if you didn’t listen then you won’t now.
This would indicate you were scared of the competition.
Because they might elect a leader who might win.
You sound more like a morally superior Southerner than a Yorkshire bloke. Or just another bad loser venting about the GE result?
Labour did this to themselves just as the Tories have let themselves be taken over by Vote Leave.
But whether or not it tipped the balance, it was cracking fun trying and created a few interesting 'debates' on here
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
It categorically didn't tip the balance. He secured 59% and 61% of the vote in both leadership elections. It was the least close-run leadership contest ever seen. It has been calculated that Corbyn would have won in the first round with 51% of votes, even without "£3 registered supporters", having gained the support of 49.6% of full members and 57.6% of affiliated supporters.
Left-wingers alone did this to Labour.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
rjsterry said:
It categorically didn't tip the balance. He secured 59% and 61% of the vote in both leadership elections. It was the least close-run leadership contest ever seen. It has been calculated that Corbyn would have won in the first round with 51% of votes, even without "£3 registered supporters", having gained the support of 49.6% of full members and 57.6% of affiliated supporters.
Left-wingers alone did this to Labour.
Well yes, regardless of the fact it didn't tip the balance, it's a shitty thing to have done. And I'm no Labour supporter.Stevo_666 said:
Who knows how many Conservatives joined up back in 2015? Looking at my first post on the Labour party thread, it got a fair bit of visibility judging by the variety of people who got wind of it. Although admitedly there would have been a lot of far left and hardcore union types piling in when they spotted their chance.rjsterry said:
Quite. With half a million members, the idea that it was a handful of Tory infiltrators, that made the difference, is just a little delusional.kingstongraham said:
There's plenty of true believers unfortunately. I don't honestly think that those few having jolly japes had much impact except for helping make politics feel a bit more rotten.Stevo_666 said:
In your humble opinion.webboo said:
Ah I didn’t realise that getting a competitive advantage meant having no moral scruples.Stevo_666 said:
Wrong. Just getting a competitive advantage as I said above.webboo said:
An example might be joining a political party you detest, so you can vote for leader who will be unelectable.Stevo_666 said:
OK - so when challenged to produce examples, you have no reply.rick_chasey said:Ok mate keep telling yourself that. I’ve mentioned it *so many times* so if you didn’t listen then you won’t now.
This would indicate you were scared of the competition.
Because they might elect a leader who might win.
You sound more like a morally superior Southerner than a Yorkshire bloke. Or just another bad loser venting about the GE result?
Labour did this to themselves just as the Tories have let themselves be taken over by Vote Leave.
But whether or not it tipped the balance, it was cracking fun trying and created a few interesting 'debates' on here0 -
Who calculated that? Got a link?rjsterry said:It categorically didn't tip the balance. He secured 59% and 61% of the vote in both leadership elections. It was the least close-run leadership contest ever seen. It has been calculated that Corbyn would have won in the first round with 51% of votes, even without "£3 registered supporters", having gained the support of 49.6% of full members and 57.6% of affiliated supporters.
Left-wingers alone did this to Labour.
Regardless, it was fun trying."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Interesting.rjsterry said:
Although no need for me to rejoin as the hard left is is control and the lefties really haven't learned from their drubbing at the polls. They're still convinced that it was anything other than crap policies and a crap leadership.
I can still amuse myself reading their bile filled emails droning on about the evil rich/ capitalist conspiracies/ nasty bosses/ etc etc. Plus a bit of reality denial now."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
So my question is just why is new labour such a toxic legacy?
Iraq war is Blair’s personal legacy as a leader rather than a party issue.
And I’m not interested in the ‘Global’ financial crisis. I mean why does old labour want to distance itself from a government that got itself re-elected twice?0 -
Because winning is intrinsically impure. If you win, that must mean that at least some of the enemy voted for you, so you are a traitor.morstar said:why does old labour want to distance itself from a government that got itself re-elected twice?
0 -
Fair enough. In which case, they are consigned to history.bompington said:
Because winning is intrinsically impure. If you win, that must mean that at least some of the enemy voted for you, so you are a traitor.morstar said:why does old labour want to distance itself from a government that got itself re-elected twice?
Who fills the void and how?0 -
What void? They are stil, Her Majestys opposition. Just not a very good one.morstar said:
Fair enough. In which case, they are consigned to history.bompington said:
Because winning is intrinsically impure. If you win, that must mean that at least some of the enemy voted for you, so you are a traitor.morstar said:why does old labour want to distance itself from a government that got itself re-elected twice?
Who fills the void and how?
If you mean a new centre left party, that will take time. Labour either need to become more moderate (difficult as noted above) or there needs to be a sizeable breakaway of moderates."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Id say that ultimately sums up my point though, people choose who to vote for a variety of reasons but there is no moral superior choice, someone who votes "not Labour" shall we say rather than just Tory, doesnt care any less about those things than someone who votes for Labour, of course they care, unless you're a sociopath, you care that people are in poverty,the homeless,the NHS and want to see things done to fix them, but they simply believe theres a different way to tackle it.rick_chasey said:awavey said:I couldnt believe it at work all I said was the well the stockmarket have reacted positively to the result,33bn apparently added to it by the end of the day the pound increasing in value, and I suddenly got jumped on by a colleague for not understanding well there are increasing foodbanks and clearly I hated poor people for being so shallow that I was only interested in capitalism outcomes...yeah who I voted for is between me and my maker, but when the left get off their high horse blaming everyone else for this kind of stuff,maybe theyll command a majority view in this country.
Wouldn’t you agree each party tends to look after certain socio economic strata and the Tories really don’t look after those at the bottom?
I mean, the increase in homelessness, for example, is really easily attributed to austerity. There’s a direct causal correlation there.
You may think it’s not really a concern of yours, and that’s entirely fair - as you say, you are absolutely entitled to vote however you want for whatever reason you want - but, and I mean this as an honest question - does the whole worse off doing worse not bother you?
and its that aspect where you have left leaning supporters,note I dont say Labour,who believe they are morally superior because of who they vote for, and yet whilst claiming they have total empathy with everyone will then describe anyone who votes differently as being this selfish uncaring group and sneer at them for it for "not getting it"
I genuinely heard this conversation in the pub yesterday said without any hint of irony, or self reflection either describing how people voted Tory in traditional Labour heartlands "well THOSE people dont even read the Guardian..." and I havent added the emphasis, thats how it was said, as if the type of newspaper you read makes you a better person.0
