Don't vote Tory

[Teddington]

50 minutes ago, babyblade41 said:

I'm still none the wiser here.  I always thought that Corbyn wanted a soft Brexit... and May wanted a hard Brexit ( whatever hard and soft really are ) now it seems Corbyn has the same view on Brexit as the tories do... am I right or wrong ?

Also the hard labour voters were mostly remainers. am I getting confused as some especially here swear total allegiance to the hard left of Labour and Corbyn and yet their views are totally at odds with each other re: Brexit 

Perhaps I'm a bit slow on the uptake !!!

What you also have to remember is that Brexit is a minefield for political leaders.

Lot's of "working class" Labour voters voted out, as they perceived the cheap influx of labour taking their jobs, and/or had very simplistic views on immigration.

 He needs their votes now, so can't exactly do a reversal of Brexit. 

 

Additionally one of the charactersitics of the EU is increased "globalisation" for wont of a better word.

Corbyn mistrusts this with every instinct that his firebrand Communism demands.

 

[Teddington]

1 minute ago, Mattyb12 said:

The 'dementia tax' is already there, but it's currently set at £23,000 rather than £100,000 of savings. 

 

Houses are currently excluded.

[babyblade41]

1 minute ago, Teddington said:

What you also have to remember is that Brexit is a minefield for political leaders.

Lot's of "working class" Labour voters voted out, as they perceived the cheap influx of labour taking their jobs, and/or had very simplistic views on immigration.

 He needs their votes now, so can't exactly do a reversal of Brexit. 

 

Additionally one of the charactersitics of the EU is increased "globalisation" for wont of a better word.

Corbyn mistrusts this with every instinct that his firebrand Communism demands.

 

It does get confusing the more you read into it.

 

 

[babyblade41]

2 minutes ago, Teddington said:

 

Houses are currently excluded.

that is correct... going through that with FIL , he will have to into a home and as his wife is still independent and yes the house isn't included 

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, DeanoL said:

The aggressive position has been linked with a hard Brexit. Which sort of makes sense. "No deal" would be the hardest Brexit.

Only if your imagination is severely limited and is unable to process all possibilities.

A deal that costs us more than WHO terms would cost us is a worse deal than no deal - it a deal like that is very possible. 

After all, we (essentially) pay a fee now for our access, and the fee for a new deal could be much much higher, and could cost more than WHO terms might do.

[DeanoL]

Just now, eFestivals said:

Only if your imagination is severely limited and is unable to process all possibilities.

A deal that costs us more than WHO terms would cost us is a worse deal than no deal - it a deal like that is very possible. 

After all, we (essentially) pay a fee now for our access, and the fee for a new deal could be much much higher, and could cost more than WHO terms might do.

I didn't say "no deal" was the worst Brexit. I said it was the hardest.

Agreeing to give the EU 100 billion quid to stay in the single market would obviously be a worse deal, but we'd still be in the single market, so it'd be a "softer" Brexit.

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, Zac Quinn said:

I agree, they'll have to be more decisive going forward. Exit poll data suggests a majority of the Labour vote wasn't to do with their Brexit strategy at all,

The majority wasn't, but a sizable element of it was, too.

After all, it's exceedingly unlikely that Labour would have attracted the same number of kippers to vote for them if they'd been wedded to remain - and those kippers (previously all racist and hated, now not a word is said ) were a very significant part of that increased vote share.

 

1 hour ago, Zac Quinn said:

those two may have done but there's been plenty of senior Labour voices pushing the idea that 'the electorate rejected the idea of a hard Brexit and we're going to comply with that'

But it's McD and Corbyn (and probably in that order for this) that control where that policy goes .... and if anyone dares oppose them they'll have some people screaming at them that they're tories.

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I didn't say "no deal" was the worst Brexit. I said it was the hardest.

Agreeing to give the EU 100 billion quid to stay in the single market would obviously be a worse deal, but we'd still be in the single market, so it'd be a "softer" Brexit.

Hmmm.

Surely 'hard' and 'soft' is more about the effect onto the UK than it is about playing silly buggers with the semantics of EU rules/legislation?

It certainly is for me. The hardest brexit is the brexit that comes at the greatest cost.

Edited June 15, 2017 by eFestivals

[DeanoL]

Just now, eFestivals said:

Hmmm.

Surely 'hard' and 'soft' is more about the effect onto the UK than it is about playing silly buggers with the semantics of EU legislation?

It certainly is for me. The hardest brexit is the brexit that comes at the greatest cost.

I don't think that's the common definition. If it were, why would anyone be in favour of a hard Brexit?

It's not about the semantics of the legislation, it's about bodies associated with the EU that membership of the EU makes compulsory but leaving the EU doesn't necessarily mean leaving. The European Court of Human Rights, the free movement area, the single market, the customs union. And then there's the possibility with all of those of having half a foot in and half out.

[Rose-Colored Boy]

9 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I don't think that's the common definition. If it were, why would anyone be in favour of a hard Brexit?

the economy tanking benefits the far right in political terms, and Rees Mogg etc would love nothing more than to roll back Health and Safety regs to curry favour with their mates

Edited June 15, 2017 by Zac Quinn

[Rose-Colored Boy]

20 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

But it's McD and Corbyn (and probably in that order for this) that control where that policy goes .... and if anyone dares oppose them they'll have some people screaming at them that they're tories.

sure, although worth bearing in mind that for a fair number of Corbynistas his stance on the EU is the only thing they dislike about him. so much so that they're in denial about his desire to campaign properly last June. He doesn't hold the same sway with his fans on the EU that he does when it comes to most things.

[eFestivals]

27 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I don't think that's the common definition. If it were, why would anyone be in favour of a hard Brexit?

Who is, apart from the likes of Eddie Hitler and a smallish number of tory headbangers, who think we should just tell the EU to fuck off?

May certainly isn't, and that's been clear to anyone who's actually listened to what she's said rather than going with self-serving rhetoric.

She's merely said that she won't accept a bad deal. Who does?

 

Quote

It's not about the semantics of the legislation, it's about bodies associated with the EU that membership of the EU makes compulsory but leaving the EU doesn't necessarily mean leaving. The European Court of Human Rights, the free movement area, the single market, the customs union. And then there's the possibility with all of those of having half a foot in and half out.

ECJ: both tories and Labour want out.
Free movement: both tories and Labour want out.
Single market: both tories and Labour want out.
Customs Union: only Labour definitely want out.

Meanwhile, the likes of Canada and South Korea have access to the single market without any of those requirements, thus proving they're not requirements (and the non-requirement is a big part of what caused the leave vote).

Edited June 15, 2017 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, Zac Quinn said:

sure, although worth bearing in mind that for a fair number of Corbynistas his stance on the EU is the only thing they dislike about him. so much so that they're in denial about his desire to campaign properly last June. He doesn't hold the same sway with his fans on the EU that he does when it comes to most things.

Yup ... but it's not his forgive-everything fans who decide whether Labour get elected or not, which is why I've said Labour need to be careful around this.

[jonodillieono]

4 hours ago, rubenz said:

My 75 year old mother voted Tory, has done all her life, is she a c**t?

Maybe I need to get her one of those H.M.V t-shirts - #imnotac**t

 

Nah she'd be a lying c**t if she wore that then

[Rose-Colored Boy]

New poll out showing Corbyn ahead of May in their net personal approval ratings for the first time. And not just ahead, but ahead by some 34 points. When May called the election she was 50+ points ahead. Just extraordinary and it feels like, for the first time since IDS, the Tory leader is a burden on their party's electability rather than the other way around.

[eFestivals]

41 minutes ago, Zac Quinn said:

New poll out showing Corbyn ahead of May in their net personal approval ratings for the first time. And not just ahead, but ahead by some 34 points. When May called the election she was 50+ points ahead. Just extraordinary and it feels like, for the first time since IDS, the Tory leader is a burden on their party's electability rather than the other way around.

Yep, but don't forget a leader is easily changed, popular policies can be nicked, and events can run in anyone's favour and not just Jezza's.

Now's the time to be thinking about what will ensure enough votes to win in all circumstances and not just the favourable ones that exist right now but might not last.

[Rose-Colored Boy]

14 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Yep, but don't forget a leader is easily changed, popular policies can be nicked, and events can run in anyone's favour and not just Jezza's.

Now's the time to be thinking about what will ensure enough votes to win in all circumstances and not just the favourable ones that exist right now but might not last.

oh of course, I'm under no delusion that the next election will be in any way easy. In fact, it'll probably be more difficult - the Torys won't run as bad a campaign again, and people who voted Labour last Thursday because they thought we wouldn't win or because they admired Corbyn's underdog status won't do so again. But the momentum is with Jeremy, which is amazing given where we were not even two months ago.

[eFestivals]

7 minutes ago, Zac Quinn said:

But the momentum is with Jeremy, which is amazing given where we were not even two months ago.

apparently, that's a lie.

[p.pete]

25 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Now's the time to be thinking about what will ensure enough votes to win in all circumstances and not just the favourable ones that exist right now but might not last.

It has to be (for me at least...) a combination of Corbyn + a more sensibly structured manifesto + something that conveys this package in a more assured way to more senior voters (more senior than the age of 30).  More positivity towards 'business' as well would be nice - wanting to make it easier to do business so that there's some money there to give away.

Looking for the best combination of what Labour can do to achieve the best possible outcome, obviously any action for obviously positive motives will also have negatives associated with it.  

The most positive thing for some people would be to get rid of Corbyn - and that would definitely appease some voters, but instantly lose a large chunk of other voters.  Maybe the gains would be of more weight - e.g. if they're achieved from Tory voters they're worth double? - and the losses would largely be people who wouldn't turn up.  Others still would give their vote elsewhere though.  Given his current popularity, the assumed battering that popularity will take between now and whenever the next election is, and the re-emergence of his popularity when an election resupplies him with a platform - what is the balance of him gaining votes that wouldn't otherwise exist & that would go elsewhere verses the votes that he loses.

The most positive step for others would be a move back towards New Labour and Tory-Lite.  Once again, well done Sir Blair, but is that what people really want?  And that will again turn off as many voters as it gains, unless the papers like it and get behind it - but a rule of thumb should be, if it's supported by the Sun is it really the best strategy?

With regards to a new leader making the Tories more electable - I'd see that as a no-brainer for them.  Also the Lib Dems will actually have a new leader - presumably someone better than what they had previously.  While the Tories can steal labours ideas and put up someone more likeable, Labour also need to be mindful of losing ground on the Lib Dem front for any maneuvers they make to combat tory gains.

[Rose-Colored Boy]

chatter on the wires of the Lib Dems talking to the Torys about another coalition. Lol.

[Zoo Music Girl]

3 minutes ago, Zac Quinn said:

chatter on the wires of the Lib Dems talking to the Torys about another coalition. Lol.

Is that Chuka Umunna on your avatar? Sat opposite him on the tube the other day. 

Also, interesting... Maybe why Farron really stepped down? I do kind of believe the official line though.

[Rose-Colored Boy]

5 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

Is that Chuka Umunna on your avatar? Sat opposite him on the tube the other day. 

Yeah, used to be Yanis Varoufakis but Gonzo rightly pointed out the other day that Mr V has made noises in support of Assange so the change was triggered. Love Chuka. 

5 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

Also, interesting... Maybe why Farron really stepped down? I do kind of believe the official line though.

Apparently they changed their constitution to ensure it couldn't happen again without the members saying so, so probably unlikely to go through with it. Thank goodness 

Edited June 15, 2017 by Zac Quinn

[Keva]

Get Corbyn to Glastonbury!

https://www.change.org/p/michael-eavis-cbe-get-jeremy-corbyn-on-stage-at-glastonbury?recruiter=89129694&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=share_petition&utm_term=autopublish&utm_content=nafta_share_post_title_en_2%3Acontrol

[Spindles]

Hasn't it been confirmed he's speaking from the Pyramid on Saturday?  I bet Neil is going to be front and centre in his "jez we can" T-shirt, blushing like a schoolgirl.

[Keva]

Na, he was supposed to be last year but pulled out.