Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn’s the one that’s most out of line with his party on Bre

SystemSystem Posts: 3,967
edited August 7 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn’s the one that’s most out of line with his party on Brexit

YouGov Aug 1 2017 poll

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 988
    edited August 7
    First.

    Corbyn has not said 'right to leave', merely 'I accept the will of the majority;. Important difference.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 16,539
    PeterC said:

    First.

    Corbyn has not said 'right to leave', merely 'I accept the will of the majority;. Important difference.

    As have the remainers in the Tory party by and large.

    So how does this become an issue for him, exactly? I can see that disappointed remainers would like to have Labour leading the charge against Brexit but it seems to me that a significant minority of those who voted remain have also moved on. Corbyn will attack the government on the detail, not the principle and most Labour supporters will struggle to tell the difference.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 4,011
    DavidL said:

    PeterC said:

    First.

    Corbyn has not said 'right to leave', merely 'I accept the will of the majority;. Important difference.

    As have the remainers in the Tory party by and large.

    So how does this become an issue for him, exactly? I can see that disappointed remainers would like to have Labour leading the charge against Brexit but it seems to me that a significant minority of those who voted remain have also moved on. Corbyn will attack the government on the detail, not the principle and most Labour supporters will struggle to tell the difference.
    That's about right.

    He just needs to make sure the Tories continue to own Brexit, which he can do in exactly the way you describe. Win/win for him.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 24,943
    Just noticed on that YouGov OGH links to - the SNP (29) and Tories (28) almost tied for second/third place in Scotland.....
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 1,233
    PeterC said:

    Corbyn has not said 'right to leave', merely 'I accept the will of the majority;. Important difference.

    It`s very easy for him to "accept the will of the majority", if that is what he wanted all along, in order to be able to bring about his socialist revolution.

    Really, it`s just a cop out.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 8,037
    Sixth.

    Corbyn's position will be whatever is best able to achieve a government defeat at the time.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 10,668
    PClipp said:

    PeterC said:

    Corbyn has not said 'right to leave', merely 'I accept the will of the majority;. Important difference.

    It`s very easy for him to "accept the will of the majority", if that is what he wanted all along, in order to be able to bring about his socialist revolution.

    Really, it`s just a cop out.
    No I think that the dice have just landed well for him.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,252
    Morning all. 6 weeks down the line ? 6 months down the line ... difficult to assess what may happen. I am in Berlin which must be the most graffiti ridden city in the world. Nothing is sacred bar guarded buildings. 're last thread lots of SPD posters about this area(andersonplatz) but little from Merkel supporters. I guess it's a left wing city like London?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,339
    Good morning, everyone.

    If Corbyn can continue when over 85% of his MPs sign a motion of no confidence, I don't see why he can't continue now.

    Don't get me wrong, replacing Corbyn with a non-demented MP would be a fantastic result for both Labour and the country (assuming they didn't kowtow to the socialist Three Pounders), I just don't see it happening.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 407
    I switched my vote back from UKIP to Labour at GE2017 in the belief that Labour now agreed that Brexit, with withdrawal from the single market and customs union, has to be implemented. The behaviour of Umunna et al in trying to undermine this agreed Labour party position, and in doing so sabotage the Labour party, disgusts me.
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 665
    "In the election campaign Labour was never subject to proper scrutiny because the widespread assumption was that the party was irrelevant. The Tories were going to be returned with a big majority.

    I think this is the point that should inform all thinking on the possibility of a Corbyn/old Left GE win, at any point in the future. The debate about how economies and societies work had been largely silent for 25 years, Corbyn raised it but he was deemed unelectable so nobody actually bothered to make the argument for liberal economics and the restriction of state power/interference - as they once had successfully in the 80's.

    With that argument back in swing, and the thought that Corbyn could actually be elected, I don't see anywhere for Labour to improve their vote share, or any Conservatives who would sit on their hands and abstain.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,339
    Mr. Daodao, I suspect you're in a minority opinion within Labour on that (not that it diminishes your argument, of course).
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 1,233
    daodao said:

    I switched my vote back from UKIP to Labour at GE2017 in the belief that Labour now agreed that Brexit, with withdrawal from the single market and customs union, has to be implemented. The behaviour of Umunna et al in trying to undermine this agreed Labour party position, and in doing so sabotage the Labour party, disgusts me.

    "...this agreed Labour party position"?

    When was it agreed, and by whom?

    Asking for a friend, of course.....
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 24,943
    What ever would we do without the EU to protect our food standards?

    Belgium has admitted it knew in June that eggs from Dutch farms might be contaminated with an insecticide - a month before the issue became public.

    The information was not shared because of a fraud investigation, a spokeswoman for Belgium's food safety agency said.

    Tests found the chemical fipronil, which can harm people's kidneys, liver and thyroid glands, in Dutch eggs.


    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-40841411?ocid=socialflow_facebook&ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbcnews&ns_source=facebook
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,091
    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 12,009

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    "acceptable" is a rather ambiguous word.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 24,943
    Would it be fair to say that the Duke of Edinburgh's profile is a little less contemporary than her majesties?

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/new-5-coin-unveiled-to-mark-duke-of-edinburghs-retirement-from-royal-duties-a3603246.html
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 950

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    "acceptable" is a rather ambiguous word.
    Which word would you suggest?
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 1,197

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    Whatever the Labour rule book says, in reality it's the manifesto that counts. I don't recall that advocating a second referendum or general election.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 24,943

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    I'd love to see the legal advice they got on that.....'option.....should be retained'......how exactly?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 12,009

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    "acceptable" is a rather ambiguous word.
    Which word would you suggest?
    No idea, too early in the morning. I was just pointing that Corbyn could say it was "acceptable" even if a hard Brexit. I would expect the policy would spell out what acceptable might mean elsewhere in the section.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 24,943
    RoyalBlue said:

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    Whatever the Labour rule book says, in reality it's the manifesto that counts. I don't recall that advocating a second referendum or general election.
    Nope:

    A Labour approach to Brexit also means legislating to guarantee that Parliament has a truly meaningful vote on the final Brexit deal.

    http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/manifesto2017/brexit
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,339
    Miss Vance, quite.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 12,009

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    I'd love to see the legal advice they got on that.....'option.....should be retained'......how exactly?
    Wasn't there advice from the guy who drafted A50 that it could be reversed during the process?
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,417
    If so many RemainLabour voters were super-concerned about Brexit, then.....why did they vote Labour, rather than the LibDems?

    Maybe the theory that "they thought Labour were the best possible shot of preventing Brexit" would make some sense in Lab-Con marginals where people were tactically making sure the Tories didn't get in, but the theory really falls down in those Lib-Lab marginals - Sheffield Hallam, Cambridge, Hornsey, Bermondsey, Manc Withington, Cardiff Central, etc. - all seats which voted Remain by massive margins and where there was no chance of the Tories winning, and therefore where Remainers could theoretically have voted LibDem on principle to express their views on Brexit without risking the Tories getting in. But instead, there were huge swings to Labour in every one of those seats.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 1,197
    I think the most interesting thing about this latest poll is that the Remainer Tory minority is proportionately smaller than the Brexit-supporting Labour minority.

    There are more people like daodao than I would have expected!
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,417
    RoyalBlue said:

    I think the most interesting thing about this latest poll is that the Remainer Tory minority is proportionately smaller than the Brexit-supporting Labour minority.

    There are more people like daodao than I would have expected!

    Is it that surprising? We all knew at the time that loads of Labour's "heartlands" in the North and Wales had gone Leave - and, despite all the hype, they mostly stayed loyal to Labour in June, with only a few exceptions.
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 988
    edited August 7

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    Except this 'policy' collides with the brick wall of reality. Having activated A50 the UK will leave the EU regardless after March 2019. That is now a part of EU and UK law. This can only be stopped by legislation to revoke A50, subject to the unanimous agreement of the EU27. Without that the 'approval' of parliament of the 'final settlement' is neither here nor there. In any event there will be no 'final settlement', only a transitional deal, it seems. The 'final settlement' is the FTA which is to be negotiated in the years following 2019. By the time we have that we will have long left the EU anyway.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 24,943

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    I'd love to see the legal advice they got on that.....'option.....should be retained'......how exactly?
    Wasn't there advice from the guy who drafted A50 that it could be reversed during the process?
    Precis; 'yes in theory, no in practice':

    http://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-article-50-lord-kerr-john-kerr/
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 950
    Danny565 said:

    If so many RemainLabour voters were super-concerned about Brexit, then.....why did they vote Labour, rather than the LibDems?

    Maybe the theory that "they thought Labour were the best possible shot of preventing Brexit" would make some sense in Lab-Con marginals where people were tactically making sure the Tories didn't get in, but the theory really falls down in those Lib-Lab marginals - Sheffield Hallam, Cambridge, Hornsey, Bermondsey, Manc Withington, Cardiff Central, etc. - all seats which voted Remain by massive margins and where there was no chance of the Tories winning, and therefore where Remainers could theoretically have voted LibDem on principle to express their views on Brexit without risking the Tories getting in. But instead, there were huge swings to Labour in every one of those seats.

    A lot of us are on a journey. Mine was -

    Should we leave the EU? Not even thought about it. I suppose we could.

    Now I've thought about we probably shouldn't.

    Blimey - didn't think the vote would go that way.

    Hang on, things are getting serious. Better vote Lib Dem.

    Actually this is going to affect me personally. I really need to be heard on this. Voting Labour is the only thing that will scare the government.

    I haven't got to the working out the optimum vote to cast to stop Brexit/start the rejoin process yet.

  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,417



    Actually this is going to affect me personally. I really need to be heard on this. Voting Labour is the only thing that will scare the government.

    Why would voting Labour have scared the government more on Brexit specifically, than sending Lib Dem MPs to Parliament would've?
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 950
    Danny565 said:



    Actually this is going to affect me personally. I really need to be heard on this. Voting Labour is the only thing that will scare the government.

    Why would voting Labour have scared the government more on Brexit specifically, than sending Lib Dem MPs to Parliament would've?
    I was describing my thought process. I don't think it stands up to logical scrutiny. But if politics was logical we'd all know the results of elections before the votes were cast. I think most people are like me and vote emotionally.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 2,539
    Danny565 said:



    Actually this is going to affect me personally. I really need to be heard on this. Voting Labour is the only thing that will scare the government.

    Why would voting Labour have scared the government more on Brexit specifically, than sending Lib Dem MPs to Parliament would've?
    I guess that the Lib Dems might prop up the Tories, whereas Labour wouldn't?
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 950
    rkrkrk said:

    Danny565 said:



    Actually this is going to affect me personally. I really need to be heard on this. Voting Labour is the only thing that will scare the government.

    Why would voting Labour have scared the government more on Brexit specifically, than sending Lib Dem MPs to Parliament would've?
    I guess that the Lib Dems might prop up the Tories, whereas Labour wouldn't?
    Yeah something like that. But a bit more like voting Lib Dem is threatening to call the police, voting Labour is actually dialling them.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 2,539
    On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

    Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

    http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

    "I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,025
    rkrkrk said:

    Danny565 said:



    Actually this is going to affect me personally. I really need to be heard on this. Voting Labour is the only thing that will scare the government.

    Why would voting Labour have scared the government more on Brexit specifically, than sending Lib Dem MPs to Parliament would've?
    I guess that the Lib Dems might prop up the Tories, whereas Labour wouldn't?
    After the way the Tories under Cameron treated them, I suspect it’ll be a while before they do that again.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 18,336
    Danny565 said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    I think the most interesting thing about this latest poll is that the Remainer Tory minority is proportionately smaller than the Brexit-supporting Labour minority.

    There are more people like daodao than I would have expected!

    Is it that surprising? We all knew at the time that loads of Labour's "heartlands" in the North and Wales had gone Leave - and, despite all the hype, they mostly stayed loyal to Labour in June, with only a few exceptions.
    Overall, about 35% of Labour supporters voted Leave, and a slightly higher proportion of Conservatives voted Remain. Since then, there's been movement of Labour Leavers to the Conservatives and vice versa.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,006
    So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    DavidL said:

    PeterC said:

    First.

    Corbyn has not said 'right to leave', merely 'I accept the will of the majority;. Important difference.

    As have the remainers in the Tory party by and large.

    So how does this become an issue for him, exactly? I can see that disappointed remainers would like to have Labour leading the charge against Brexit but it seems to me that a significant minority of those who voted remain have also moved on. Corbyn will attack the government on the detail, not the principle and most Labour supporters will struggle to tell the difference.
    I think it's a majority of those who voted Remain who have moved on. The problem is the minority who haven't are both vocal and prominent.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,025
    rkrkrk said:

    On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

    Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

    http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

    "I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

    Hmmm; the Editors of the Mail on Sunday and the Daily Mail are rumoured to be at loggerheads, are they not?
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    Rendered irrelevant by the triggering of Article 50.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 1,197
    rkrkrk said:

    On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

    Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

    http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

    "I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

    The Norway option is not Remain. Nice try :wink:
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 31,797

    So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

    I'm very happy with it actually.

    It's only the same as a one-time bribe to the Wehrmacht guard on the prison camp gate.
    As soon as he trousers the cash we've escaped and we're off into the rolling hills of freedom.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,339
    King Cole, surely that's the case? The Daily Mail is very pro-Leave. The Mail on Sunday is very pro-Remain.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,006
    On the polling, it's notable that Brexit positions are entrenched. This polling is strikingly immobile. No one is convincing anyone either way.

    However, party positions are much less entrenched, as Leavers have moved to the Conservatives and Remainers have moved to Labour. You can see why a residue of socialist Leavers would stay with Labour. It's harder to see why a residue of Conservative Remainers would stay with the Tories while they're positioning themselves as the Brexit party except for football club loyalty reasons.

    For that, among other reasons, I'm expecting the Conservatives to drift down slowly in the polls.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 14,667
    RoyalBlue said:

    rkrkrk said:

    On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

    Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

    http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

    "I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

    The Norway option is not Remain. Nice try :wink:
    It's debatable whether it's an option. If everyone in the EU thought they could take the Norway option, you'd end up with chaos. The current EFTA/EEA arrangement only works because it's clear that its members are in the EU's sphere of influence and not vice versa.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 4,011
    PeterC said:

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    Except this 'policy' collides with the brick wall of reality. Having activated A50 the UK will leave the EU regardless after March 2019. That is now a part of EU and UK law. This can only be stopped by legislation to revoke A50, subject to the unanimous agreement of the EU27. Without that the 'approval' of parliament of the 'final settlement' is neither here nor there. In any event there will be no 'final settlement', only a transitional deal, it seems. The 'final settlement' is the FTA which is to be negotiated in the years following 2019. By the time we have that we will have long left the EU anyway.
    You interpret these matters with a certainty that suggests you have some expertise in them. Could you let me know what it is, as your interpretation runs counter to what I have heard from lawyers specialising in the subject.

    On the whole, their view has been that nobody will really know until the matter is tested, and then it will probably depend on political will as much as anything. The Articles themselves, as I understand it, were drafted in a way that encourages staying in the club rather than leaving it.

    On what basis would you contest that?
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 4,011

    So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

    £36 billion sounds a decent price to me, but what can we do anyway? If you leave a club without checking the exit conditions first, you can't be too surprised to find yourself stuck with a bill.
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    On the polling, it's notable that Brexit positions are entrenched. This polling is strikingly immobile.

    That's because, in reality, the quesion people are answering is "how did you vote in the referendum".
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 2,539
    RoyalBlue said:

    rkrkrk said:

    On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

    Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

    http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

    "I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

    The Norway option is not Remain. Nice try :wink:
    Yes you're right - but my reading of what he is saying is... if the Norway option does not allow immigration control, then Mr Hitchens would prioritise remaining in the single market over leaving the EU.

    That's a dramatic shift in position.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,006

    On the polling, it's notable that Brexit positions are entrenched. This polling is strikingly immobile.

    That's because, in reality, the quesion people are answering is "how did you vote in the referendum".
    There is absolutely no reason to believe that assertion has the slightest basis in reality, any more than a voting intention question is really a survey of how people voted at the last election.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 3
    I think people take Brexit as policy position too literally; you can't do that. There is no single idea of Brexit, coherent or otherwise. Before the Ref many Brexiteers said we'd never leave the single market, now they want to leave everything in ways they don't even understand (Euratom, for example). Brexit is not policy, it is a totem.

    Those who are more modern, cosmopolitan, internet savvy, pro feminist and LGBT etc. are Remainers. Those who are more traditional, culturally conservative, more concerned about sovereignty, more prone to isolationism and economic protectionism are Leavers. (there was a really good survey on this post-Ref but I can't find the link atm.) This explains why it wasn't simply a party vote during the Ref. But it also explains why Remainers can still vote with Corbyn's Labour: he is, for all the negatives thrown at him, the epitome of cosmopolitan life. Whereas the LDs (with Farron at the last election) were viewed with increased scepticism on those issues.

    Corbyn is threading the needle between a not-too-hard-stance on Brexit (which is actually a good place to start negotiating from) to keep some Leavers happy (and because of his own economic plans, which are more in line with economic protectionism / populism) whilst being a social cosmopolitan that appeals to those who can't vote for "The Nasty Party" (Fox Hunting, Dementia Tax, Austerity, Oh My).

    David Cameron did the same for the right; kept the base happy with right wing red meat, shrinking the government and (eventually) presenting the referendum, but passing things like equal marriage and not bringing up fox hunting to seem more cosmopolitan.

    I don't think Remainers will leave Labour until / unless: a) LDs come across as more cosmopolitan post Farron b) Tories come across more cosmopolitan post May or c) Corbyn loses cosmopolitan credibility.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    PeterC said:

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    Except this 'policy' collides with the brick wall of reality. Having activated A50 the UK will leave the EU regardless after March 2019. That is now a part of EU and UK law. This can only be stopped by legislation to revoke A50, subject to the unanimous agreement of the EU27. Without that the 'approval' of parliament of the 'final settlement' is neither here nor there. In any event there will be no 'final settlement', only a transitional deal, it seems. The 'final settlement' is the FTA which is to be negotiated in the years following 2019. By the time we have that we will have long left the EU anyway.
    You interpret these matters with a certainty that suggests you have some expertise in them. Could you let me know what it is, as your interpretation runs counter to what I have heard from lawyers specialising in the subject.

    On the whole, their view has been that nobody will really know until the matter is tested, and then it will probably depend on political will as much as anything. The Articles themselves, as I understand it, were drafted in a way that encourages staying in the club rather than leaving it.

    On what basis would you contest that?
    You know lawyers who specialise in Article 50? Really?

    My Careers Master at 6th form would have tried to talk me out of that as being just a little too narrow for a career option.

    Mr Quirch would have been right as well. Thirty years hanging around doing nothing and then 100% of my life's work crammed into two short years.

    ...and only 599 days 2 hours 50 minutes of it left before I get early retirement. Cool!
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 15,752

    On the polling, it's notable that Brexit positions are entrenched. This polling is strikingly immobile. No one is convincing anyone either way.

    However, party positions are much less entrenched, as Leavers have moved to the Conservatives and Remainers have moved to Labour. You can see why a residue of socialist Leavers would stay with Labour. It's harder to see why a residue of Conservative Remainers would stay with the Tories while they're positioning themselves as the Brexit party except for football club loyalty reasons.

    For that, among other reasons, I'm expecting the Conservatives to drift down slowly in the polls.

    No one is convincing anyone either way.

    Nor will they

    so maybe we should all drop the Brexit crap for a month and enjoy whats left of the summer
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 665

    RoyalBlue said:

    rkrkrk said:

    On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

    Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

    http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

    "I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

    The Norway option is not Remain. Nice try :wink:
    It's debatable whether it's an option. If everyone in the EU thought they could take the Norway option, you'd end up with chaos. The current EFTA/EEA arrangement only works because it's clear that its members are in the EU's sphere of influence and not vice versa.
    More likely now a short term extension of EEA agreement by a 'shadowing' via art 50, while the details of any future trade agreement are thrashed out. EFTA/EEA long term is not now politically likely I think.
    We do have a ten year window for interim agreement - this is allowed under the WTO while negotiations are continuing. So you could see a very short EEA shadow, or maybe nearly a decade. But it would take the pressure off, and as the EU further integrates it would take the political sting out from the other side.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 14,667
    rkrkrk said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    rkrkrk said:

    On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

    Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

    http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

    "I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

    The Norway option is not Remain. Nice try :wink:
    Yes you're right - but my reading of what he is saying is... if the Norway option does not allow immigration control, then Mr Hitchens would prioritise remaining in the single market over leaving the EU.

    That's a dramatic shift in position.
    The co-auther of the book Hitchens cites as underpinning his support for leaving the EU has just written this:

    http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86563

    Having not had a plan from the very start, the government is now faced with a task way beyond its capability. Had the people currently involved known what they were doing, and immediately set about executing the only effective plan available, we might have stood a chance. But they left it too late.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,011
    Mr Punter,

    "If you leave a club without checking the exit conditions first, you can't be too surprised to find yourself stuck with a bill."

    A good simile. However, what are the written rules about the cost of leaving? if you leave a club with no written exit conditions, I suspect you can just go. There may be a moral issue here, but who's got the clout then?

    Anyway, it's all to be argued about. We're leaving and that's the important thing.
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 988

    PeterC said:

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    Except this 'policy' collides with the brick wall of reality. Having activated A50 the UK will leave the EU regardless after March 2019. That is now a part of EU and UK law. This can only be stopped by legislation to revoke A50, subject to the unanimous agreement of the EU27. Without that the 'approval' of parliament of the 'final settlement' is neither here nor there. In any event there will be no 'final settlement', only a transitional deal, it seems. The 'final settlement' is the FTA which is to be negotiated in the years following 2019. By the time we have that we will have long left the EU anyway.
    You interpret these matters with a certainty that suggests you have some expertise in them. Could you let me know what it is, as your interpretation runs counter to what I have heard from lawyers specialising in the subject.

    On the whole, their view has been that nobody will really know until the matter is tested, and then it will probably depend on political will as much as anything. The Articles themselves, as I understand it, were drafted in a way that encourages staying in the club rather than leaving it.

    On what basis would you contest that?
    This gives the picture from the EU side

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/eu-brexit-resolution-article-50-can-be-revoked-2017-3

    But the ECJ is supreme in this matter and so it would have the right to make a final ruling.

    From the Uk side I think it reasonable to assume that since the invoking of A50 required legislation then its revokation would likewise require legislation.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 1,582

    King Cole, surely that's the case? The Daily Mail is very pro-Leave. The Mail on Sunday is very pro-Remain.

    ?? Is MoS really "very pro-Remain"? Where does that leave Mail Online?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,339
    Mr. Pointer, no idea. But the Mail on Sunday has been doom-mongering about the referendum result for a long while.
  • MetatronMetatron Posts: 70
    Naïve article.If labour members were that concerned with Corbyns altitude to the EU they would not be hero-worshipping him at places like Glastonbury
    On the other hand it is clear Theresa May will be willing to pay a Brexit divorce bill.There has to be a question whether all hardline Brexiteer Tory MPs will accept that.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 7,060
    148grss said:

    I think people take Brexit as policy position too literally; you can't do that. There is no single idea of Brexit, coherent or otherwise. Before the Ref many Brexiteers said we'd never leave the single market, now they want to leave everything in ways they don't even understand (Euratom, for example). Brexit is not policy, it is a totem.

    Those who are more modern, cosmopolitan, internet savvy, pro feminist and LGBT etc. are Remainers. Those who are more traditional, culturally conservative, more concerned about sovereignty, more prone to isolationism and economic protectionism are Leavers. (there was a really good survey on this post-Ref but I can't find the link atm.) This explains why it wasn't simply a party vote during the Ref. But it also explains why Remainers can still vote with Corbyn's Labour: he is, for all the negatives thrown at him, the epitome of cosmopolitan life. Whereas the LDs (with Farron at the last election) were viewed with increased scepticism on those issues.

    Corbyn is threading the needle between a not-too-hard-stance on Brexit (which is actually a good place to start negotiating from) to keep some Leavers happy (and because of his own economic plans, which are more in line with economic protectionism / populism) whilst being a social cosmopolitan that appeals to those who can't vote for "The Nasty Party" (Fox Hunting, Dementia Tax, Austerity, Oh My).

    David Cameron did the same for the right; kept the base happy with right wing red meat, shrinking the government and (eventually) presenting the referendum, but passing things like equal marriage and not bringing up fox hunting to seem more cosmopolitan.

    I don't think Remainers will leave Labour until / unless: a) LDs come across as more cosmopolitan post Farron b) Tories come across more cosmopolitan post May or c) Corbyn loses cosmopolitan credibility.

    That seems a fair analysis. It would go a long way towards explaining Canterbury and Kensington, for a start.

    Welcome. May I inquire if there is any significance to your username? It seems a little unusual.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 7,060

    King Cole, surely that's the case? The Daily Mail is very pro-Leave. The Mail on Sunday is very pro-Remain.

    ?? Is MoS really "very pro-Remain"? Where does that leave Mail Online?
    In a complete muddle.

    Although the sidebar of models in bikinis would of course be unaffected by the editors making total tits of themselves.
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 1,096
    148grss said:

    I think people take Brexit as policy position too literally; you can't do that. There is no single idea of Brexit, coherent or otherwise. Before the Ref many Brexiteers said we'd never leave the single market, now they want to leave everything in ways they don't even understand (Euratom, for example). Brexit is not policy, it is a totem.

    Those who are more modern, cosmopolitan, internet savvy, pro feminist and LGBT etc. are Remainers. Those who are more traditional, culturally conservative, more concerned about sovereignty, more prone to isolationism and economic protectionism are Leavers. (there was a really good survey on this post-Ref but I can't find the link atm.) This explains why it wasn't simply a party vote during the Ref. But it also explains why Remainers can still vote with Corbyn's Labour: he is, for all the negatives thrown at him, the epitome of cosmopolitan life. Whereas the LDs (with Farron at the last election) were viewed with increased scepticism on those issues.

    Corbyn is threading the needle between a not-too-hard-stance on Brexit (which is actually a good place to start negotiating from) to keep some Leavers happy (and because of his own economic plans, which are more in line with economic protectionism / populism) whilst being a social cosmopolitan that appeals to those who can't vote for "The Nasty Party" (Fox Hunting, Dementia Tax, Austerity, Oh My).

    David Cameron did the same for the right; kept the base happy with right wing red meat, shrinking the government and (eventually) presenting the referendum, but passing things like equal marriage and not bringing up fox hunting to seem more cosmopolitan.

    I don't think Remainers will leave Labour until / unless: a) LDs come across as more cosmopolitan post Farron b) Tories come across more cosmopolitan post May or c) Corbyn loses cosmopolitan credibility.

    What a cracking first post! An interesting analysis.
  • RoyalBlue said:

    This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

    Whatever the Labour rule book says, in reality it's the manifesto that counts. I don't recall that advocating a second referendum or general election.
    Nope:

    A Labour approach to Brexit also means legislating to guarantee that Parliament has a truly meaningful vote on the final Brexit deal.

    http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/manifesto2017/brexit
    I don't understand that.

    Either we accept the deal offered, or we exit without any deal at all. Westminster has no power to force Brussels to renegotiate. That is the only "meaningful vote" possible.

    Voting a deal down to score points off the government, with the result that we exit without one, strikes me as something that could easily blow up in Labour's face. For ever after, adverse consequences of Brexit will then be pinned on Labour for refusing a better deal.

    It strikes me as a minefield for all parties. If I were Labour I would just abstain.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 10,668
    GeoffM said:

    So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

    I'm very happy with it actually.

    It's only the same as a one-time bribe to the Wehrmacht guard on the prison camp gate.
    As soon as he trousers the cash we've escaped and we're off into the rolling hills of freedom.
    what a stupid fucking analogy
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,006


    No one is convincing anyone either way.

    Agreed.

    Nor will they

    Not agreed. At some point one side or the other will start to persuade the other side's supporters. It may, however, take a little time.

    so maybe we should all drop the Brexit crap for a month and enjoy whats left of the summer

    This is political betting. Don't hold your breath.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 31,797
    Metatron said:

    it is clear Theresa May will be willing to pay a Brexit divorce bill.There has to be a question whether all hardline Brexiteer Tory MPs will accept that.

    No question.

    JRM has already been lamenting on Sky
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 665

    rkrkrk said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    rkrkrk said:

    On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

    Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

    http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

    "I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

    The Norway option is not Remain. Nice try :wink:
    Yes you're right - but my reading of what he is saying is... if the Norway option does not allow immigration control, then Mr Hitchens would prioritise remaining in the single market over leaving the EU.

    That's a dramatic shift in position.
    The co-auther of the book Hitchens cites as underpinning his support for leaving the EU has just written this:

    http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86563

    Having not had a plan from the very start, the government is now faced with a task way beyond its capability. Had the people currently involved known what they were doing, and immediately set about executing the only effective plan available, we might have stood a chance. But they left it too late.
    I would take Dr North with a slight pinch of salt. He has always been focussed on the EFTA/EEA route as a path to other political goals (Harrogate agenda, UNECE based European trade regulation). He might be right, and the book is very good and very detailed, but he is not a neutral observer when it comes to government, and especially this one (and parliament itself).
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 7,060
    Metatron said:

    Naïve article.If labour members were that concerned with Corbyns altitude to the EU they would not be hero-worshipping him at places like Glastonbury
    On the other hand it is clear Theresa May will be willing to pay a Brexit divorce bill.There has to be a question whether all hardline Brexiteer Tory MPs will accept that.

    Like Labour, although for different reasons, most Tories pride themselves on their moral superiority. In this particular case, that means they believe themselves to be people of integrity, reliability and a willingness to do the right thing rather than the necessary thing.

    Therefore they would probably accept a moral duty on things like pensions and agreed current spending, because it would fit their image of themselves as 'sound' people to do business with. Especially as much of that money would be taking on liabilities rather than making upfront payments and if say £45 billion were agreed it's still at least a 25% reduction on what the EU were demanding.

    And if it was put to them that they were showing how far superior they were to a lot of dodgy continentals, they would absolutely lap it up.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 17,656
    rkrkrk said:

    On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

    Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

    http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

    "I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

    Leaving aside the fact that columnists have to write stuff that will get people talking, not necessarily what they believe, I expect more previously strict-Brexit columnists and talking heads to stray towards (although not to) remain or soft-Brexit.

    The reason? It's often easier to argue against something than for something. By arguing for Brexit pre-referendum, they were challenging the status quo. They will want to continue arguing against, rather than for. I therefore expect many talking heads to show slight reversals in their position, albeit rarely to remain.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 183
    We did check the conditions. The bill is zero. We are talking about paying for a future FTA. If we don't get one, we won't be paying anything. The real question is whether it is worth 36 billion or something like it for an FTA, and exactly what that FTA will contain.

    So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

    £36 billion sounds a decent price to me, but what can we do anyway? If you leave a club without checking the exit conditions first, you can't be too surprised to find yourself stuck with a bill.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 4,760
    edited August 7

    So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

    Do you think the floating of a £36 billion exit payment only for it to be whacked down is government news management to soften up people for one of the many costs of Brexit in a deniable way, or is it a skirmish in the Conservative Civil War between the Regulars and the Die-hards where one side proposes something the other side will reject?

    The rhetoric in the papers would suggest the second.

    PS The problem with a Brexit Betrayal narrative is that it implies Brexit has failed.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,339
    On the suggested exit bill: it depends whether that's directly linked to a trade deal or entirely unconditional.

    If it's unconditional the EU will treat it as they did Blair's rebate for CAP reform approach.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    TOPPING said:

    GeoffM said:

    So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

    I'm very happy with it actually.

    It's only the same as a one-time bribe to the Wehrmacht guard on the prison camp gate.
    As soon as he trousers the cash we've escaped and we're off into the rolling hills of freedom.
    what a stupid fucking analogy
    It achieved the desired result though.

    One idiot bit.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,006

    On the suggested exit bill: it depends whether that's directly linked to a trade deal or entirely unconditional.

    If it's unconditional the EU will treat it as they did Blair's rebate for CAP reform approach.

    This is where the British government has been strikingly inept. It should never have agreed to the EU's timetabling (which in any case is questionable in whether it is in accordance with Article 50). Talking about money before talking about other terms is a recipe for disaster.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,339
    Mr. Jessop, I agree. Had we voted 52% Remain, then there would be a move the other way.

    It's easier to argue against real problems and for potential wonderfulness than against theoretical problems and for real positives.

    Similarly, at school I remember reading (forget which chap wrote it) that religious thinking was more likely to come about due to running away from something bad (fear of death, for example) than embracing something good.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 2,539

    rkrkrk said:

    On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

    Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

    http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

    "I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

    Leaving aside the fact that columnists have to write stuff that will get people talking, not necessarily what they believe, I expect more previously strict-Brexit columnists and talking heads to stray towards (although not to) remain or soft-Brexit.

    The reason? It's often easier to argue against something than for something. By arguing for Brexit pre-referendum, they were challenging the status quo. They will want to continue arguing against, rather than for. I therefore expect many talking heads to show slight reversals in their position, albeit rarely to remain.
    Yes - it's a good point.

    Peter Hitchens in particular I think rather enjoys playing a Cassandra role, and to me seems a bit put out when it appears that the government intends to do some of the things he suggests.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 183
    I have an idea for a second referendum. The question should be "Should we pay the EU 36 billion for an exit agreement which grants us limited access to the Single Market and which will need to be paid for by a one off tax on every citizen, or should we leave without an agreement and trade under WTO rules?"

    That should sort it out. Amazing that most people saying that we need to pay the EU a huge bill don't want to accept the fact that we don't have any money for it as we are running a budget deficit. If people actually had to pay the bill (rather than just borrow the money and screw over the next generation) I suspect there would suddenly be a total re-evaluation of whether we think it is worth paying for SM access.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,339
    Mr. Meeks, this is an area May doesn't get enough blame. A plan should have been developed and then Article 50 triggered.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 9,349

    Morning all. 6 weeks down the line ? 6 months down the line ... difficult to assess what may happen. I am in Berlin which must be the most graffiti ridden city in the world. Nothing is sacred bar guarded buildings. 're last thread lots of SPD posters about this area(andersonplatz) but little from Merkel supporters. I guess it's a left wing city like London?

    Yes, Berlin is a bit more than 50% centre-left with the former Communist Linke pretty strong (20+% in both halves of the city):

    http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/landtage/berlin.htm

    That said, I think Merkel is a shoo-in as Chancellor as suggested on a previous thread.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 10,668
    GeoffM said:

    TOPPING said:

    GeoffM said:

    So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

    I'm very happy with it actually.

    It's only the same as a one-time bribe to the Wehrmacht guard on the prison camp gate.
    As soon as he trousers the cash we've escaped and we're off into the rolling hills of freedom.
    what a stupid fucking analogy
    It achieved the desired result though.

    One idiot bit.
    stop digging.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 7,060

    On the suggested exit bill: it depends whether that's directly linked to a trade deal or entirely unconditional.

    If it's unconditional the EU will treat it as they did Blair's rebate for CAP reform approach.

    That's one things that could end up in the courts, although given the time pressures involved I hope not. Arguably under Article 50 it should be conditional. However, Barnier and Juncker will certainly try for unconditional if only because they don't want a trade deal.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 2,999

    On the suggested exit bill: it depends whether that's directly linked to a trade deal or entirely unconditional.

    If it's unconditional the EU will treat it as they did Blair's rebate for CAP reform approach.

    What happened to 'nothing is agreed until everything is agreed' ?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 2,999
    GeoffM said:

    TOPPING said:

    GeoffM said:

    So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

    I'm very happy with it actually.

    It's only the same as a one-time bribe to the Wehrmacht guard on the prison camp gate.
    As soon as he trousers the cash we've escaped and we're off into the rolling hills of freedom.
    what a stupid fucking analogy
    It achieved the desired result though.

    One idiot bit.
    Look in the mirror.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,025

    Morning all. 6 weeks down the line ? 6 months down the line ... difficult to assess what may happen. I am in Berlin which must be the most graffiti ridden city in the world. Nothing is sacred bar guarded buildings. 're last thread lots of SPD posters about this area(andersonplatz) but little from Merkel supporters. I guess it's a left wing city like London?

    Yes, Berlin is a bit more than 50% centre-left with the former Communist Linke pretty strong (20+% in both halves of the city):

    http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/landtage/berlin.htm

    That said, I think Merkel is a shoo-in as Chancellor as suggested on a previous thread.
    That’s an odd, but interesting polling result. Is it because for some sections of the population life was actually better under the DDR? I gather that in Russia it’s the old who tend to vote Communist as a sort of conservative ... ‘ah, times were better then’ vote.

    Bit like Leavers here!
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 4,760
    edited August 7

    On the suggested exit bill: it depends whether that's directly linked to a trade deal or entirely unconditional.

    If it's unconditional the EU will treat it as they did Blair's rebate for CAP reform approach.

    This is where the British government has been strikingly inept. It should never have agreed to the EU's timetabling (which in any case is questionable in whether it is in accordance with Article 50). Talking about money before talking about other terms is a recipe for disaster.
    I don't think the EU is totally dogmatic about the amount being committed to before anything else is decided. They would accept, and indeed expect, any proposal to be contingent on other things being in the agreement and it would be up to the UK side to make a counter offer. The money is important to them and they reckon future trading arrangements and continuity are more important to the UK than money so they have scheduled the negotiations accordingly. Their rational plan may fail because the UK side is not engaging as it cannot decide itself what it wants and will push for.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 7,060
    Tangentially related to policies and being out of line with reality, this article makes for fascinating if very depressing reading:

    http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2017/07/27/labour-talks-about-student-debt-butcrisis-debt-is-what-reall
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 9,349

    rkrkrk said:

    Danny565 said:



    Actually this is going to affect me personally. I really need to be heard on this. Voting Labour is the only thing that will scare the government.

    Why would voting Labour have scared the government more on Brexit specifically, than sending Lib Dem MPs to Parliament would've?
    I guess that the Lib Dems might prop up the Tories, whereas Labour wouldn't?
    Yeah something like that. But a bit more like voting Lib Dem is threatening to call the police, voting Labour is actually dialling them.
    That's a lovely metaphor!

    In general I agree with the majority of posters that Corbyn neither wants nor needs to dig into any particular position on this at the moment - the sensible thing is to say the result needs to be good for Britain Cabinet should stop squabbling and get on with it, and whatever the Government is saying is not adequate. A crunch will come, but right now there are no political prizes for tying ourselves to any particular position. If Corbyn was passionately pro or anti, that would be a problem, but he really isn't. Nor are most Labour MPs - they are overwhelmingly *mildly* pro-EU.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 2,999
    For those who think impeachment of Trump inevitable, an account of how it took 50 years to nail Nixon on his sabotage of the Vietnam talks:
    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/06/nixon-vietnam-candidate-conspired-with-foreign-power-win-election-215461
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,339
    Let's not argue about who trolled who. This is meant to be a happy website.

    As an aside, I'm reading The Wonder Book of Aircraft (from 1919), which is rather good. It's also got a small amount on the mechanics of flight, which I've just realised can apply in reverse to F1 quite nicely.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 7,060

    Morning all. 6 weeks down the line ? 6 months down the line ... difficult to assess what may happen. I am in Berlin which must be the most graffiti ridden city in the world. Nothing is sacred bar guarded buildings. 're last thread lots of SPD posters about this area(andersonplatz) but little from Merkel supporters. I guess it's a left wing city like London?

    Yes, Berlin is a bit more than 50% centre-left with the former Communist Linke pretty strong (20+% in both halves of the city):

    http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/landtage/berlin.htm

    That said, I think Merkel is a shoo-in as Chancellor as suggested on a previous thread.
    That’s an odd, but interesting polling result. Is it because for some sections of the population life was actually better under the DDR? I gather that in Russia it’s the old who tend to vote Communist as a sort of conservative ... ‘ah, times were better then’ vote.

    Bit like Leavers here!
    Russian joke from the 1970s:

    A young boy is telling his grandmother what life will be like when Communism is achieved.

    'We will all have nice houses to live in, and schools and work, and eat meat three times a day.'

    His grandmother sighed ecstatically.

    'Just like it was under the Tsars!'
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 7,060

    Let's not argue about who trolled who. This is meant to be a happy website.

    As an aside, I'm reading The Wonder Book of Aircraft (from 1919), which is rather good. It's also got a small amount on the mechanics of flight, which I've just realised can apply in reverse to F1 quite nicely.

    Unless you are Mark Webber in the Le Mans 24 hour race, when the mechanics memorably forgot to apply the aerodynamic principles in reverse.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 9,349



    What a cracking first post! An interesting analysis.

    Agreed, welcome to cryptically-named 148grss!

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 4,760

    Morning all. 6 weeks down the line ? 6 months down the line ... difficult to assess what may happen. I am in Berlin which must be the most graffiti ridden city in the world. Nothing is sacred bar guarded buildings. 're last thread lots of SPD posters about this area(andersonplatz) but little from Merkel supporters. I guess it's a left wing city like London?

    Yes, Berlin is a bit more than 50% centre-left with the former Communist Linke pretty strong (20+% in both halves of the city):

    http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/landtage/berlin.htm

    That said, I think Merkel is a shoo-in as Chancellor as suggested on a previous thread.
    That’s an odd, but interesting polling result. Is it because for some sections of the population life was actually better under the DDR? I gather that in Russia it’s the old who tend to vote Communist as a sort of conservative ... ‘ah, times were better then’ vote.

    Bit like Leavers here!
    I don't really get the seventies' nostalgia - either Brexiteers or Ossis.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 10,668
    edited August 7

    rkrkrk said:

    Danny565 said:



    Actually this is going to affect me personally. I really need to be heard on this. Voting Labour is the only thing that will scare the government.

    Why would voting Labour have scared the government more on Brexit specifically, than sending Lib Dem MPs to Parliament would've?
    I guess that the Lib Dems might prop up the Tories, whereas Labour wouldn't?
    Yeah something like that. But a bit more like voting Lib Dem is threatening to call the police, voting Labour is actually dialling them.
    That's a lovely metaphor!

    In general I agree with the majority of posters that Corbyn neither wants nor needs to dig into any particular position on this at the moment - the sensible thing is to say the result needs to be good for Britain Cabinet should stop squabbling and get on with it, and whatever the Government is saying is not adequate. A crunch will come, but right now there are no political prizes for tying ourselves to any particular position. If Corbyn was passionately pro or anti, that would be a problem, but he really isn't. Nor are most Labour MPs - they are overwhelmingly *mildly* pro-EU.
    I will take your word for it that Corbyn is neither pro- nor anti-EU (although that does beg the question of his referendum campaign).

    As you know him better than people on here - how likely is it that he waters down his redistributive policies?

    When the Cons were competently running the country, there was no merit in Lab positioning itself as a "me-too" centrist party. Now that the Cons have blown themselves up, I would have thought there would be great appetite for such a party of the type that perhaps the other three leadership candidates exemplified.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,339
    Mr. Doethur, I think it was at a Spanish Grand Prix that Webber also achieved significant air in an F1 car.

    Gutierrez did that once too, but he only gets half-points as it was Maldonado-assisted.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 15,752

    Morning all. 6 weeks down the line ? 6 months down the line ... difficult to assess what may happen. I am in Berlin which must be the most graffiti ridden city in the world. Nothing is sacred bar guarded buildings. 're last thread lots of SPD posters about this area(andersonplatz) but little from Merkel supporters. I guess it's a left wing city like London?

    Yes, Berlin is a bit more than 50% centre-left with the former Communist Linke pretty strong (20+% in both halves of the city):

    http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/landtage/berlin.htm

    That said, I think Merkel is a shoo-in as Chancellor as suggested on a previous thread.
    That’s an odd, but interesting polling result. Is it because for some sections of the population life was actually better under the DDR? I gather that in Russia it’s the old who tend to vote Communist as a sort of conservative ... ‘ah, times were better then’ vote.

    Bit like Leavers here!
    Berlin was always a "red" area following rapid industrialisation in the late C19. It annoyed the Kaisers and Hitler no end.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 31,797

    Mr. Meeks, this is an area May doesn't get enough blame. A plan should have been developed and then Article 50 triggered.

    If the plan had been developed, she may not have been able to get Article 50 through the house
This discussion has been closed.