Political round up.............

First topic message reminder :

Soft thread split, hard thread split, no-deal thread split. Who gives a sh!t as long as we get a thread split by the 15:35 deadline.

Let's hope the new Foreign Secretary rolls over and goes back to sleep when hearing the dreadful news.

That would still be more effective than Bojo.

You mean they'd release her even so? Oh drat. Damn diplomacy!

The idea that the problem in these negotiations is Britain didn't have enough 'teeth' is immature and inaccurate analysis.
The reality is, as Boris is in the process of finding out, whoever was Prime Minister wouldn't change the fact that the EU has greater leverage in these negotiations. No Deal hurts the UK more than it hurts the EU, so it can only be used as a legitimate threat by the EU, not the UK.
When it turns out Boris can't 'have his cake and eat it', will Brexiters just claim Boris needed some more teeth and call for Raab instead?
Please, don't take the easy option of regurgitating partisan points from your political bubble, and think about what you're saying.

Boris can bring whatever teeth he likes, he won't be able to bite through the exact same walls that May couldnt break through.

A tiny majority and no authority to whip for a deal, a parliament that is determined to prevent no deal and the EU that knows the above.

though I suppose we have to factor in that Farage is now offering an electoral pact and the support of his 0 MPs

No name Bertie wrote:Rather than moaning in your echo chambers you should make a stand and march to downing street with your accusations.   Otherwise you will be just emulating this guy:


But you only moan and whinge in order to attack posters who just might disagree with your hysterical pronouncments.

SecretFly wrote:What country did Yasmin Alibhai Brown emigrate to tonight?

Careful. Are you suggesting she should "go back to where she came from"?

GSC wrote:though I suppose we have to factor in that Farage is now offering an electoral pact and the support of his 0 MPs

Looking at some of the headlines....You'd think Churchill was leaving..

I can't think of a single positive thing this Lady did apart from resign.

Useless.

Johnson showing his can do attitude by axing almost the entire cabinet. Pissing of a good pile of new backbenchers whilst holding a wafer thin majority is political genius.

If its not a snap general election bid he is a bigger fool than we feared.

navyblueshorts wrote:

SecretFly wrote:What country did Yasmin Alibhai Brown emigrate to tonight?

Careful. Are you suggesting she should "go back to where she came from"?

Only if she chose USA. Did she? Where did she get to? I need to know!!!!! I need to know this lovely woman stands by her 'principles'.......

GSC wrote:Boris can bring whatever teeth he likes, he won't be able to bite through the exact same walls that May couldnt break through.

A tiny majority and no authority to whip for a deal, a parliament that is determined to prevent no deal and the EU that knows the above.

Election!

The Horror!  

The Boris and Nige barnstorming WIN show!!!!  There goes Parliament's teeth!  "Ordah!!  Ordah!!!!" the right honourable Jack Russell, Bercoe, shouts to his retirement slippers in his padded cell of Bombast

It Must Be Love wrote:
Please, don't take the easy option of regurgitating partisan points from your political bubble, and think about what you're saying.

Sir, yes Sir!

Pardon my partisanship. I foolishly believed it a basic definition of evolutionary humanity.

Anyone with common sense seems to have been sacked or resigned..

Raab...Patel...McVey....Mogg...all back in....Another job for the grovelling Gove.

Nutters galore...

GE very soon.

I think the problem and fear with Boris Johnson is that he might in fact be politically competent and deliver Brexit.   My issue is that I don't want Brexit at this point in time.  Although a full customs union seems like a reasonable compromise - it doesn't seem to be on the cards given the various promises linked to the Brexit vote + Theresa Mays 2017 general election promises.

I think the problem and fear is a lack of a competent opposition might leave the door wide open for Boris in a GE

It's an excellent start from Boris, but I won't get too excited just yet.

The Tory party is no less split now than it was before, it's just that Johnson has picked a side and gone all in. It'll be interesting to see how it pans out.

It looks designed to see off the perceived threat of the Brexit Party, but the danger to Johnson is that he loses the support of moderate Tories at the same time.

With regard to the apparent vanishing of a credible opposition to the conservatives - I see it as a consequence of Ed Miliband, who at times seemed to have been promoted to a level that was way beyond his competence level.  

His brother David Miliband was the one that seemed to be competent - but his brother's forthrightness and association with Tony Blair seemed to have created many enemies for him within the then Labour Party.  

Ed Miliband as Labour Leader was the one that changed the voting system for electing new Labour leaders.  And Jeremy Corbyn was its first product - someone at the fringe of the Labour Party with a history of supporting terrorist ("freedom") groups and protests.

Quite an accomplishment to get yourself installed as PM when only a minority of the electorate actually support your position on the biggest political crisis since WW2.

Hats off to him. He's still a self-serving charlatan, but credit where credit's due.

Pr4wn wrote:Quite an accomplishment to get yourself installed as PM when only a minority of the electorate actually support your position on the biggest political crisis since WW2.

Hats off to him. He's still a self-serving charlatan, but credit where credit's due.

0.31% of the Country voted for the idiot apparently.

No name Bertie wrote:With regard to the apparent vanishing of a credible opposition to the conservatives - I see it as a consequence of Ed Miliband, who at times seemed to have been promoted to a level that was way beyond his competence level.  

His brother David Miliband was the one that seemed to be competent - but his brother's forthrightness and association with Tony Blair seemed to have created many enemies for him within the then Labour Party.  

Ed Miliband as Labour Leader was the one that changed the voting system for electing new Labour leaders.  And Jeremy Corbyn was its first product - someone at the fringe of the Labour Party with a history of supporting terrorist ("freedom") groups and protests.

I see it more as a consequence of Corbyn and his core group being ****ing useless

Problem Labour have is that like with Trump in the US.....Corbyn has 90% of the media against him.....So he relies on Social media to get his message out.

For a Party with no MSM backing one can argue that Labour leading in 3/4 of the polls isn't too bad.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:For a Party with no MSM backing one can argue that Labour leading in 3/4 of the polls isn't too bad.

No MSM backing - apart from the Guardian, the Mirror, the New Statesman...

And Labour are leading with 3 out of 6 polling companies (ahead with Survation/Comres/Opinium, behind with YouGov/BMG/Ipsos MORI).

Corbyn's problem is he scares the Establishment because like Sanders he is radical.

No doubt a Centrist hammers Boris.. like Yvette Cooper who will get MSM support...

I guess Labour members think there wouldn't be must change so she has no chance..

But Labour do need to compromise...Can't take 5 years of this Johnson idiot..

Problem Labour have is...It wants rid of Corbyn but there is no real successor that appeals to both camps..

Comrade Watson!  Or O'Brien as I tend to see him.  

He's the only one.  He leads in all but name anyway....in his style of leaking, undermining and nibbling at the edges.  Always the controlling 'side kick' but does he have the courage to come out from under the cloak and dagger stuff and brand his name openly to his version of Labour?

Any new Labour leader that isn't Watson will have Watson as the parrot on his or her shoulder again, whispering and fawning and preening and noting down all potential weaknesses of the 'Leader' on whose shoulder he sits, whilst waiting for appropriate time to undermine and inform the media.

So Mr Watson, do you have the balls to be Leader?  First thing I'd do if I were new Leader of Labour, and my name wasn't Anthony Watson, is drop Watson to the lowest backbench and then start a campaign to have him expelled from the party entirely.  With skulking, creeping friends like Watson you don't need many more enemies.

The plotting, criticism and leaking that went on in the Tory party makes Watson look like a rank amateur.

Bit premature to use the past tense!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Problem Labour have is that like with Trump in the US.....Corbyn has 90% of the media against him.....So he relies on Social media to get his message out.

For a Party with no MSM backing one can argue that Labour leading in 3/4 of the polls isn't too bad.

He has media against him because he's an easy target. Plenty of 'interesting' history and he doesn't fight back. Instead seems to use the abuse to somehow convince his supporters that he has something about him because the establishment thinks hes dangerous.

The problem with this is that although it may play out well with those supporters, it does sod all with the wider electorate.

Two issues with relying on 'social media'
1) The message won't go far beyond those who want to hear it
2) There is no real cross examination of the message beyond the endless and easily ignored comments that get attached.

Corbyn tends to do very badly when he's cross examined, which leads to him not often engaging with mainstream media unless its with a very compliant journalist, which also leads to the issue of not fighting back. As a consequence of this and the fact that he's not setting any kind of agenda in the media the stories associated with him are about him rather than current affairs. The battle he fights is for the Labour party, not the country. As a consequence the conservatives get an easy ride with him despite their utter incompetence.

lostinwales wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Problem Labour have is that like with Trump in the US.....Corbyn has 90% of the media against him.....So he relies on Social media to get his message out.

For a Party with no MSM backing one can argue that Labour leading in 3/4 of the polls isn't too bad.

He has media against him because he's an easy target. Plenty of 'interesting' history and he doesn't fight back. Instead seems to use the abuse to somehow convince his supporters that he has something about him because the establishment thinks hes dangerous.

The problem with this is that although it may play out well with those supporters, it does sod all with the wider electorate.

Two issues with relying on 'social media'
1) The message won't go far beyond those who want to hear it
2) There is no real cross examination of the message beyond the endless and easily ignored comments that get attached.

Corbyn tends to do very badly when he's cross examined, which leads to him not often engaging with mainstream media unless its with a very compliant journalist, which also leads to the issue of not fighting back. As a consequence of this and the fact that he's not setting any kind of agenda in the media the stories associated with him are about him rather than current affairs. The battle he fights is for the Labour party, not the country. As a consequence the conservatives get an easy ride with him despite their utter incompetence.

Sounds a lot like Trump doesn't it?

Pr4wn wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Problem Labour have is that like with Trump in the US.....Corbyn has 90% of the media against him.....So he relies on Social media to get his message out.

For a Party with no MSM backing one can argue that Labour leading in 3/4 of the polls isn't too bad.

He has media against him because he's an easy target. Plenty of 'interesting' history and he doesn't fight back. Instead seems to use the abuse to somehow convince his supporters that he has something about him because the establishment thinks hes dangerous.

The problem with this is that although it may play out well with those supporters, it does sod all with the wider electorate.

Two issues with relying on 'social media'
1) The message won't go far beyond those who want to hear it
2) There is no real cross examination of the message beyond the endless and easily ignored comments that get attached.

Corbyn tends to do very badly when he's cross examined, which leads to him not often engaging with mainstream media unless its with a very compliant journalist, which also leads to the issue of not fighting back. As a consequence of this and the fact that he's not setting any kind of agenda in the media the stories associated with him are about him rather than current affairs. The battle he fights is for the Labour party, not the country. As a consequence the conservatives get an easy ride with him despite their utter incompetence.

Sounds a lot like Trump doesn't it?

Yes. And the only difference with Boris is that he seems to be prepared to talk to anybody, just he's never prepared to actually say anything at all.

Many people are wanting the Conservatives to be "incompetent" so that Brexit is not brought into effect.  If the Conservatives suddenly become "competent" and deliver Brexit then some people will call them racist, bigotted, and destroying the country (they are calling them that anyway).

The main issue with the Conservatives is their deep seated division over the issue of "Europe" (i.e. the EU).  Theresa May lacked decisiveness and maybe as a leader she wasn't particularly competent - which was maybe revealled in the way she handled the 2017 GE campaign.  She was also seen as a weak and sometimes clueless negotiator against the EU.

Again my own view is that David Cameron opened up a can of worms in making the EU Referendum a central feature of his 2015 General Election Campaign - without thinking through its consequences. He was later shown to be a political chancer / gambler.

No name Bertie wrote:Many people are wanting the Conservatives to be "incompetent" so that Brexit is not brought into effect.  If the Conservatives suddenly become "competent" and deliver Brexit then some people will call them racist, bigotted, and destroying the country (they are calling them that anyway).

The main issue with the Conservatives is their deep seated division over the issue of "Europe" (i.e. the EU).  Theresa May lacked decisiveness and maybe as a leader she wasn't particularly competent - which was maybe revealled in the way she handled the 2017 GE campaign.  She was also seen as a weak and sometimes clueless negotiator against the EU.

Again my own view is that David Cameron opened up a can of worms in making the EU Referendum a central feature of his 2015 General Election Campaign - without thinking through its consequences.  He was later shown to be a political chancer / gambler.

Simply enacting Brexit, doesn't equate with 'competence' as far as I can see; only really being slightly less 'incompetent'. Not sure about the racist/bigoted charges as they're too simple to chuck around, but they're certainly risking a break up of the UK.

Agree re. internal Tory issues around EU; been a problem since '75, none of them have squared that circle and Cameron fell into that trap too. May screwed up from the moment she triggered A50, simply as a sop to the right-leaning Brexiteers in her own party; from that moment, she'd lost any and all leverage with the EU.

You know the Withdrawal Agreement? The one that is now 'dead' and includes the hated backstop? Clearly unacceptable to any self-respecting Brexiter.

Well all but two of this new cabinet voted in favour of that Withdrawal Agreement.

You can decide for yourself what that says about their principles.

(The two who never voted in favour are Theresa Villiers and Priti Patel.)

No name Bertie wrote:Many people are wanting the Conservatives to be "incompetent" so that Brexit is not brought into effect.  If the Conservatives suddenly become "competent" and deliver Brexit then some people will call them racist, bigotted, and destroying the country (they are calling them that anyway).

The main issue with the Conservatives is their deep seated division over the issue of "Europe" (i.e. the EU).  Theresa May lacked decisiveness and maybe as a leader she wasn't particularly competent - which was maybe revealled in the way she handled the 2017 GE campaign.  She was also seen as a weak and sometimes clueless negotiator against the EU.

Again my own view is that David Cameron opened up a can of worms in making the EU Referendum a central feature of his 2015 General Election Campaign - without thinking through its consequences.  He was later shown to be a political chancer / gambler.

I don't know how accurate this is but somebody said of this cabinet that none of them have ever successfully developed legislation on anything.

This is good:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49125929

Anybody on here thinking of voting for Johnson ???

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Anybody on here thinking of voting for Johnson ???

At the moment it is sort of irrelevant because unless Brexit and the "Brexit deadline" is kicked down the road for another three years - Britain would be in a post Brexit environment if and when Johnson calls the next general election. If there is a loss of confidence in Johnson and the government falls then I think Johnson would no longer be the Conservative Party leader.

I think you should read the article I've posted a link to, Bertie. It explains why it's quite likely we'll have an election before 31st October, with Johnson as Tory leader and without the can having been kicked anywhere.

I doubt Johnson would call a snap election - May already did that in 2017. However, if it happened I would vote Lib Dem (as I did in the EU elections) - because I think they said they would revoke A50. I personally just want a pause to this whole Brexit process.

The way I see it is that Johnson knows he won't get his way over Brexit. He aches, craves, desires a No Deal Brexit but the current make-up of Parliament he will never get such a deal backed by Westminster. He knows he must try to change that and the only way he can is by gambling on a General Election.

Pr4wn wrote:The plotting, criticism and leaking that went on in the Tory party makes Watson look like a rank amateur.

Wouldn't disagree Pr. Carbon copy stuff and Torys have their O'Brien too of course in the guise of Gove. Why are slippery whispering double-speak characters always seen in a more positive media light than the blunt black and white characters like Johnson and Corbyn?

Johnson isn't black and white at all. Saying someone is black and white implies they have principles. He has had completely contrasting views on Brexit over the years.

Unless, of course, you mean black and white in the sense that he'll just say whatever he feels like most likely to give him power.

Pr4wn wrote:... Saying someone is black and white implies they have principles ...

This is an interesting statement but I am uncertain whether you consider this a "good" thing or a "bad" thing. Do you mean that a person who has a "black and white" worldview based on "principles" is a good thing?

No name Bertie wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:... Saying someone is black and white implies they have principles ...

This is an interesting statement but I am uncertain whether you consider this a "good" thing or a "bad" thing.  Do you mean that a person who has a "black and white" worldview based on "principles" is a good thing?  

It's neither good nor bad. I'm saying that someone that could be considered to have "black and white" views usually have principles, be they good or bad ones.

Thought that was pretty clear.

I know it's all bull but it is still refreshing to hear a politician being optimistic in the current climate

GSC wrote:I know it's all bull but it is still refreshing to hear a politician being optimistic in the current climate

I see it more as brainwashing people into the idea that No Deal can work in the hope more will jump onboard and help coax it through Parliament. I mean he is talking about ripping up the backstop idea whereas the EU have already said that part will not be changed even if negotiations were re-opened as have the Irish government. That being the case BJ's stance is a surefire way of getting quickly to a No Deal situation. It is what Boris wants lets all be honest here. The problem is Parliament won't back it so we are still stuck in deadlock. How can this deadlock be broken?

General Election which may, just may, help BJ get more Leavers voted into Parliament who will back a No Deal Brexit.

Parliament arrange a deal wherein they allow Boris to pursue a No Deal Brexit if he holds a General Election and manages to somehow hold onto power - if you will it would act as a sort of unofficial second referendum.

Parliament doesn't need to back no-deal for it to happen. It'll happen automatically on October 31st, as per Article 50, which MPs long ago voted to trigger.

Duty281 wrote:Parliament doesn't need to back no-deal for it to happen. It'll happen automatically on October 31st, as per Article 50, which MPs long ago voted to trigger.

True but if No Deal looks highly imminent I am presuming Labour will roll out their vote of no confidence in the government but cannot see that will happen in time to prevent a No Deal Brexit. Running down of the clock has been the Tories game all along hence multiple attempts to get May's Deal through despite it being crystal clear it had no chance of being accepted. No Deal is exactly the same but if time runs out then it will happen.