Brexit Schmexit

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Jez is covering all the bases

"Theresa May’s Brexit negotiating strategy has been a disaster. The Tories have spent more time arguing among themselves than negotiating with the EU.

From day one, the Prime Minister has looked incapable of delivering a good Brexit deal for Britain. The political games from both the EU and our Government need to end because no deal is not an option."

then why has he said he'll vote against May's (desired) deal?

 

[zahidf]

10 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

then why has he said he'll vote against May's (desired) deal?

 

Because it's a bad deal. The Tories should resign and let labour take over, who would negotiate a MUCH better deal with the EU than the Tories.

(I appreciate it may not 100% end up like that, but hey, that's the politics of being the opposition. You can make that sort of argument)

I also would prefer starmer to Davis/rabb.  And anyone else to Liam fox!

 

[eFestivals]

23 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Because it's a bad deal.

but it's better than no deal, and there's going to be no better deal on the table.

25 minutes ago, zahidf said:

The Tories should resign and let labour take over, who would negotiate a MUCH better deal with the EU than the Tories.

But they wouldn't. They might negotiate a different deal, where the UK gives away something for other things in return, but it'll still be a shit deal.

And Corbyn would have the same problem, of having to sign away sovereignty over NI or reject all deals. I said months (probably years) ago that no British PM could sign up to that.

31 minutes ago, zahidf said:

I also would prefer starmer to Davis/rabb.

It really doesn't make any difference. One unacceptable plan is just like all the other unacceptable plans.

[pink_triangle]

2 hours ago, zahidf said:

Because it's a bad deal. The Tories should resign and let labour take over, who would negotiate a MUCH better deal with the EU than the Tories.

(I appreciate it may not 100% end up like that, but hey, that's the politics of being the opposition. You can make that sort of argument)

I also would prefer starmer to Davis/rabb.  And anyone else to Liam fox!

 

There won’t be a general election before the boundary changes. The trouble is the labour leader is more pro Brexit than the torys. Only pressure from members could change that, however the cult say any pressure is a betrayal.

[zahidf]

14 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

There won’t be a general election before the boundary changes. The trouble is the labour leader is more pro Brexit than the torys. Only pressure from members could change that, however the cult say any pressure is a betrayal.

Momentum are anti Breixt, as are any members. Any who are with Jez on hard brexit are a minority. A large majority of the membership are hard remain, sod the referendum 

[pink_triangle]

6 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Momentum are anti Breixt, as are any members. Any who are with Jez on hard brexit are a minority. A large majority of the membership are hard remain, sod the referendum 

They may be pro remain, but they prioritize the grand leader renaming in power above their remain views. It is only pressure that will cause Corbyn to change path, but the Corbynites put him under no pressure.

[zahidf]

No it isn't 

[zahidf]

Ha ha ha ha

'Show some respect for us acting like morons'

[eFestivals]

11 hours ago, zahidf said:

Momentum are anti Breixt,

laughable.

They've agreed not to stop a brexit debate at conference this year like they did last year.

And they've decided to have their own discussion about it after conference, so that what they decide can't bring about a change of party policy.

Momentum being anti-brexit would embarrass the Dear Leader, and that's not allowed.

[pink_triangle]

8 hours ago, eFestivals said:

laughable.

They've agreed not to stop a brexit debate at conference this year like they did last year.

And they've decided to have their own discussion about it after conference, so that what they decide can't bring about a change of party policy.

Momentum being anti-brexit would embarrass the Dear Leader, and that's not allowed.

Momentum maybe need to look at themselves. They have managed to put (and keep) in power someone who consistently supported (and would support now if not leader) Brexit as a backbencher. Then they are surprised when he can’t be bothered during the referendum and shows little interest now.

[pink_triangle]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45616308

 

Well done Tom Watson sticking up for members. Corbyn can't be allowed to hide behind waiting for a general election that may not come.

[pink_triangle]

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/brexit/news/98386/labour-could-gain-more-60-seats-and-15-million-votes

Standing against Brexit makes sense. A Corbyn government post Brexit will have no money to do the things theu want, so what would be the point.

Labour can not let Corbyn and McDonnell achieve their Brexit dream. The members must be willing to put pressure on. It may mean going against momentum, but sometimes you need to make a stand.

[eFestivals]

On 9/22/2018 at 10:01 PM, pink_triangle said:

Labour can not let Corbyn and McDonnell achieve their Brexit dream.

they can and they will.

The membership has rolled over and gone beigely-vague, because Jeremy cannot be challenged or suggested to be wrong.

But hey, I guess the brain-dead corbynistas can now shut the fuck up about red tories now that Jez and Co have proved themselves hard-brexiting tories.

[pink_triangle]

To me "keeping all options open" is a fudge as I never considered that all options were closed.  I think this is an issue that labour  need to show leadership on and support the option that wont hurt the economy. Maybe some momentum members will get some satisfaction if Chukka doesn't get his wish.

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

To me "keeping all options open" is a fudge as I never considered that all options were closed.  I think this is an issue that labour  need to show leadership on and support the option that wont hurt the economy. Maybe some momentum members will get some satisfaction if Chukka doesn't get his wish.

McConnell said their first preference is a general election, with the people's vote a second one 

An interesting take on it from non Jez fan remainer.

 

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, zahidf said:

McConnell said their first preference is a general election, with the people's vote a second one 

An interesting take on it from non Jez fan remainer.

 

just an excuse for no leadership.

Because leading isn't anything Corbyn is interested in doing.

[pink_triangle]

It is not in labours power to grant a general election. It is in their power to try and lead public opinion over this incredibly important situation.  If Corbyn get in power post Brexit there is no money to do the things he wants, so what is the point? There is of course a risk that a public change of opinion leads to Conservatives copying labour and try to take the credit, but that is far more preferable than a hard Brexit.

The vast majority of labour supporters support remain and on this issue we are completely correct. I know it will annoy some momentum types to admit that Chukka was correct all along, but on this issue Chukka is correct and Corbyns natural euroscepticism is wrong.

Another example of how these left wing commentators should be called out. There was something about Tom Watson supporting members being heard about their views on Europe. Aaron Bastani response not to debate the issue in hand, but to find a previous particle where Tom Watson said the result of the referendum should be respected, as if politicians are not meant to change their mind as the evidence changes. Why are these left wing commentators so full of hatred and unable to debate points properly. Zahidf there must be a decent Corbynite supporting commentator somewhere,  who are willing to debate points properly, occasionally disagree with others who they predominantly agree with ,  not full of hatred for anyone who has once wronged the great leader. I just struggle to find one, please help!!!

[zahidf]

5 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

It is not in labours power to grant a general election. It is in their power to try and lead public opinion over this incredibly important situation.  If Corbyn get in power post Brexit there is no money to do the things he wants, so what is the point? There is of course a risk that a public change of opinion leads to Conservatives copying labour and try to take the credit, but that is far more preferable than a hard Brexit.

The vast majority of labour supporters support remain and on this issue we are completely correct. I know it will annoy some momentum types to admit that Chukka was correct all along, but on this issue Chukka is correct and Corbyns natural euroscepticism is wrong.

Another example of how these left wing commentators should be called out. There was something about Tom Watson supporting members being heard about their views on Europe. Aaron Bastani response not to debate the issue in hand, but to find a previous particle where Tom Watson said the result of the referendum should be respected, as if politicians are not meant to change their mind as the evidence changes. Why are these left wing commentators so full of hatred and unable to debate points properly. Zahidf there must be a decent Corbynite supporting commentator somewhere,  who are willing to debate points properly, occasionally disagree with others who they predominantly agree with ,  not full of hatred for anyone who has once wronged the great leader. I just struggle to find one, please help!!!

Problem is that it MAY not be public opinion for another referendum or to reverse brexit. It's what labour members want, but do the 40% of labour voters who voted leave want that? Or non labour voters?

How is bringing up tom Watson's past (which is unfair in the example you gave) different to bringing up jezs past opinions? If blairites don't like it being done to them, then they shouldn't do it.

And you can't separate an argument from a person. Or if Alistair Campbell talks about how media manipulation is bad, we should ignore his past ?(for example)

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

full of hatred for anyone who has once wronged the great leader

two of the Bristol MPs are under constant attack from the cultists who are trying to deselect them - because they've dared to voice different opinions to the dear leader (one about brexit, not sure of the other one).

If Field and Hoey are the devil for voting for brexit, why is Thangam so evil for voting against it?

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, zahidf said:

do the 40% of labour voters who voted leave want that? Or non labour voters?

I love the way that the number of brexit-voting Labour supporters keeps on creeping up in defence of brexit.

in answer to your question: there's only one way to find out, and that's by having a vote.

If the country still wants to throw itself off the cliff that's what we'll have to do, but it would be wise to double-check about that if you care about not impoverishing people.

 

[pink_triangle]

21 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Problem is that it MAY not be public opinion for another referendum or to reverse brexit. It's what labour members want, but do the 40% of labour voters who voted leave want that? Or non labour voters?

It may not be, this is the time to plead your case and lead. As I have said the Corbyn project relies on having money to fund it, or else it's power for the sake of power.

 

23 minutes ago, zahidf said:

 

How is bringing up tom Watson's past (which is unfair in the example you gave) different to bringing up jezs past opinions? If blairites don't like it being done to them, then they shouldn't do it.

And you can't separate an argument from a person. Or if Alistair Campbell talks about how media manipulation is bad, we should ignore his past ?(for example)

Why can't you bring up what Watson has said in the past and then debate his new views on their merit?

Why can't you bring up Campbell past and then also debate his new points on their merit?

 

[zero000]

McDonnell showing his true colours: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/24/mcdonnell-new-brexit-referendum-should-not-include-remain-option

No remain option in any potential vote. Both he and Corbyn are leading us of the cliff edge hand in hand with the Tories. 

[eFestivals]

Just now, zero000 said:

McDonnell showing his true colours: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/24/mcdonnell-new-brexit-referendum-should-not-include-remain-option

No remain option in any potential vote. Both he and Corbyn are leading us of the cliff edge hand in hand with the Tories. 

w*nkers.

[pink_triangle]

8 minutes ago, zero000 said:

McDonnell showing his true colours: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/24/mcdonnell-new-brexit-referendum-should-not-include-remain-option

No remain option in any potential vote. Both he and Corbyn are leading us of the cliff edge hand in hand with the Tories. 

What a lot of labour members dont seem to realize is that Corbyn and McDonnell are bigger Brexiteers than May and Hammond. As I have said its only pressure that can force a change of direction. These people need to ignore Corbyn, Lansman, Owen Jones etc and make sure their voice is heard.

[zero000]

24 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

What a lot of labour members dont seem to realize is that Corbyn and McDonnell are bigger Brexiteers than May and Hammond. As I have said its only pressure that can force a change of direction. These people need to ignore Corbyn, Lansman, Owen Jones etc and make sure their voice is heard.

If they want to empower their members so widely as they claim to, then we can hope that the conference forces them to listen to them as Corbyn has implied . In reality they'll play upon support of their members when it suits them and ignore it when it's against their pro-brexit ideology, and disguise it with populist sentiments - "The will of the people".