Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Elizabeth
Posts: 4406
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
Been Liked: 1259 times
Has Liked: 1368 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Elizabeth » Fri Jul 05, 2019 9:02 pm

Is that Rowan Atkinson, one of the most loved English personalities in history. Oh, yes it is.

And guess who is blowing kisses to the post, yes another poster who when driven into a corner takes the easy way out.

Why dont some people who have nothing further to say just do the honourable thing

LeuvenClaret
Posts: 108
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 2:32 pm
Been Liked: 18 times
Has Liked: 118 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by LeuvenClaret » Fri Jul 05, 2019 9:06 pm

See ya later .. question still stands what did the UK do to combat free movement?

Elizabeth
Posts: 4406
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
Been Liked: 1259 times
Has Liked: 1368 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Elizabeth » Fri Jul 05, 2019 9:14 pm

Yawl come back now y'hear

Some questions have remained unanswered since the beginning of time so I'm sure we can wait for Ringo to get out of the Big Window.

Steve-Harpers-perm
Posts: 5770
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
Been Liked: 1876 times
Has Liked: 837 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Steve-Harpers-perm » Fri Jul 05, 2019 9:28 pm

Damo wrote:MP's use Rehtoric all the time DA. But what is offensive about likening leaving the EU to slaves rising up against its masters?
How much did slaves get paid in way of expenses?
This user liked this post: Elizabeth

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Sat Jul 06, 2019 11:37 am

AndrewJB wrote:I haven't said I think the EU is undemocratic. The constituent parts are all democracies. What I was getting across - clumsily - is the federal nature of the EU makes is difficult to invest the parliament with more power, because that reduces the clout of the smaller countries (because they have fewer MEPs). It's finding the right balance.
That's an argument why the EU is undemocratic, not that it isn't.

It's not one I buy, either, because it assumes MEPs from the same country would form an alliance, like Brexit forming an alliance with the Lib Dems, say, to gang up on Malta. This doesn't happen in the European Parliament. Interestingly, this absolutely does happen in the unelected Council!

evensteadiereddie
Posts: 9591
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
Been Liked: 3148 times
Has Liked: 10224 times
Location: Staffordshire

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by evensteadiereddie » Sat Jul 06, 2019 12:32 pm

Elizabeth wrote:Yawl come back now y'hear

Some questions have remained unanswered since the beginning of time so I'm sure we can wait for Ringo to get out of the Big Window.

Creepy ! ;)

Ringo, your lame charade is getting worse. Although not even attempting to be subtle now, it is, however, pretty interesting in a very odd and irresistable way. I can't wait for the next instalment.

Ringo and Elizabeth sitting in a tree,
K - I - S -S - I - N - G,
First came Brexit then came marriage,
Who was best man ? Nigel Farage !

Drink responsibly.

android
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 10:01 am
Been Liked: 121 times
Has Liked: 43 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by android » Sat Jul 06, 2019 2:39 pm

Elizabeth is Imploding Turtle

Elizabeth
Posts: 4406
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
Been Liked: 1259 times
Has Liked: 1368 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Elizabeth » Sat Jul 06, 2019 7:07 pm

There was a Burnley fan real name Ted
No one could ever get him out of bed
He took so much time, he could never get a date
And for football matches he was always late
That's why people called him Never Ready Eddie

android
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 10:01 am
Been Liked: 121 times
Has Liked: 43 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by android » Sun Jul 07, 2019 10:50 am

Great - at least Elizabeth can now be put out to pasture. I don't reckon many will miss her (except some of those who fell for her being created by Ringo perhaps). If she was ever funny, I think she was a long way past her sell by date.

evensteadiereddie
Posts: 9591
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
Been Liked: 3148 times
Has Liked: 10224 times
Location: Staffordshire

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by evensteadiereddie » Sun Jul 07, 2019 12:57 pm

Of course it's Ringo, don't be so daft. God knows why he carries on with it but there you go.
Love how he occasionally makes "Elizabeth" look a complete cretin.
This user liked this post: Claret-On-A-T-Rex

South West Claret.
Posts: 5642
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:55 pm
Been Liked: 766 times
Has Liked: 499 times
Location: Devon

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by South West Claret. » Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:13 am

Morning campers,

Read the link "Outsiders" ... and then tell us that it is in all our long term interests to leave!

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-brita ... KKCN1U20UG" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Imploding Turtle » Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:18 am

South West Claret. wrote:Morning campers,

Read the link "Outsiders" ... and then tell us that it is in all our long term interests to leave!

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-brita ... KKCN1U20UG" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Facts don't matter to the people you want them to matter to.

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10889
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5546 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by TheFamilyCat » Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:31 am

South West Claret. wrote:Morning campers,

Read the link "Outsiders" ... and then tell us that it is in all our long term interests to leave!

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-brita ... KKCN1U20UG" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Project Fear..... you lost get over it..... will of the people...... undemocratic...... sovereignty..... libtards.....

Have I missed any?

South West Claret.
Posts: 5642
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:55 pm
Been Liked: 766 times
Has Liked: 499 times
Location: Devon

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by South West Claret. » Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:43 am

TheFamilyCat wrote:Project Fear..... you lost get over it..... will of the people...... undemocratic...... sovereignty..... libtards.....

Have I missed any?
You certainly have and that is to give the "latest evidence" time to process properly in your brain ... and therefore failed to give a creditable answer.

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10889
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5546 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by TheFamilyCat » Mon Jul 08, 2019 9:02 am

My Ringo impersonation must be better than I realised.

keith1879
Posts: 865
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 1:28 pm
Been Liked: 262 times
Has Liked: 363 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by keith1879 » Mon Jul 08, 2019 3:50 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:Project Fear..... you lost get over it..... will of the people...... undemocratic...... sovereignty..... libtards.....

Have I missed any?
"bitter remoaners" is the obvious one I think
This user liked this post: AndyClaret

Damo
Posts: 4505
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1777 times
Has Liked: 2761 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Damo » Tue Jul 09, 2019 9:47 am

Lots of people offended by sausages on twitter this morning.
That's the end of satire for me
This user liked this post: AndyClaret

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Tue Jul 09, 2019 11:59 am

Under pressure from Tom Watson and other centrists, Labour's position on Brexit has now descended into complete farce:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... referendum" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Up till now I knew exactly what their policy was, and it was entirely logically consistent (despite constant and willful misrepresentation in the media). Now even I don't know what their policy is. It completely lacks any coherence, as far as I can tell. It's embarrassing and - as a big Corbyn fan - excruciating to watch!

Good luck Barry Gardiner. It'll be interesting to see how you try and spin this one...

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6576
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lowbankclaret » Tue Jul 09, 2019 12:46 pm

Labour are now firmly a remain party and will campaign as such in a second referendum , which they now firmly back.

It’s what the major trade unions have always wanted who fund the Labour Party, no surprise really.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Tue Jul 09, 2019 1:04 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:Labour are now firmly a remain party and will campaign as such in a second referendum , which they now firmly back.

It’s what the major trade unions have always wanted who fund the Labour Party, no surprise really.
That's not true. McCluskey, of the most influential union UNITE, strongly believes we should leave. and ASLEF, another biggie, were outright Brexiters from the start. The unions were actually the last to throw in the towel to the Blairites.

This shambles was due to the overwhelmingly remain membership finding themselves on the same side as the blairites (and on the opposite side to Corbyn), and so the blairites won. The big turning point was last year's conference. The second big turning point was Thornberry siding with blairites live on telly a few weeks back.

martin_p
Posts: 10371
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3765 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by martin_p » Tue Jul 09, 2019 1:11 pm

If it be your will wrote:Under pressure from Tom Watson and other centrists, Labour's position on Brexit has now descended into complete farce:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... referendum" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Up till now I knew exactly what their policy was, and it was entirely logically consistent (despite constant and willful misrepresentation in the media). Now even I don't know what their policy is. It completely lacks any coherence, as far as I can tell. It's embarrassing and - as a big Corbyn fan - excruciating to watch!

Good luck Barry Gardiner. It'll be interesting to see how you try and spin this one...
Seems pretty clear to me, they’re against anything but a Labour defined Brexit. So they’d support a referendum to decide on no deal or a ‘bad’ Tory Brexit and recommend remain, but if by some miracle they got into power and were allow to define Brexit they’d go to a referendum supporting their deal.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Tue Jul 09, 2019 1:38 pm

martin_p wrote:Seems pretty clear to me, they’re against anything but a Labour defined Brexit. So they’d support a referendum to decide on no deal or a ‘bad’ Tory Brexit and recommend remain, but if by some miracle they got into power and were allow to define Brexit they’d go to a referendum supporting their deal.
My interpretation is a bit different, but still unclear. It goes like this:

Labour in favour of a second referendum, whatever happens. If it's no-deal or any Tory deal, they'll campaign for remain. If it's their own deal going to a referendum, they might campaign for remain - against their own negotiated deal - or they might not. Regarding what the referendum question will be, or what form of voting it will take (AV with 3 or more options? Just 2 options, and if so, which options?), or any attempt to address the other problems associated with a second referendum, as far as I can see, is entirely absent.

You can't ask people to vote for that. What on earth do I say whilst out canvassing and get asked 'What's your Brexit policy again, mate?' If I say what I've just said I'd be rightly laughed at. I think I'd have to go with the ultimate truth: "Honestly? I haven't the faintest clue. But Labour's position on brexit makes not one iota of difference anyway - it won't affect the outcome. They're not in power. As such, I can't for the life of me understand why they've allowed themselves to look so ridiculous in all this." and hope they warm to my searing honesty.

What would you say? Remember, you've generally only got about 5 seconds before they shut the door shaking their head.

CrosspoolClarets
Posts: 5284
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
Been Liked: 1632 times
Has Liked: 399 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by CrosspoolClarets » Tue Jul 09, 2019 1:49 pm

If it be your will wrote:My interpretation is a bit different, but still unclear. It goes like this:

Labour in favour of a second referendum, whatever happens. If it's no-deal or any Tory deal, they'll campaign for remain. If it's their own deal going to a referendum, they might campaign for remain - against their own negotiated deal - or they might not. Regarding what the referendum question will be, or what form of voting it will take (AV with 3 or more options? Just 2 options, and if so, which options?), or any attempt to address the other problems associated with a second referendum, as far as I can see, is entirely absent.

You can't ask people to vote for that. What on earth do I say whilst out canvassing and get asked 'What's your Brexit policy again, mate?' If I say what I've just said I'd be rightly laughed at. I think I'd have to go with the ultimate truth: "Honestly? I haven't the faintest clue. But Labour's position on brexit makes not one iota of difference anyway - it won't affect the outcome. They're not in power. As such, I can't for the life of me understand why they've allowed themselves to look so ridiculous in all this." and hope they warm to my searing honesty.

What would you say? Remember, you've generally only got about 5 seconds before they shut the door shaking their head.
I agree.

This is clearly Corbyn wanting one thing, and most of them wanting the other.

It would be in Labour’s interest to vote for whatever deal Boris tables (not no deal obviously) then get on with representing the masses, like they are meant to do. That’s how they take power - not through supporting Remain.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7304
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1827 times
Has Liked: 3958 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Tue Jul 09, 2019 2:38 pm

If it be your will wrote:My interpretation is a bit different, but still unclear. It goes like this:

Labour in favour of a second referendum, whatever happens. If it's no-deal or any Tory deal, they'll campaign for remain. If it's their own deal going to a referendum, they might campaign for remain - against their own negotiated deal - or they might not. .
But why would they need to campaign for one or the other if they were in power?
They could negotiate the best deal possible and explain why it is the best deal they can get.
They can then hold a referendum on it and adapt a neutral stance, saying "this is what we've been able to negotiate, we can't see how we can get anything better, if you don't accept it then we favour remaining.
Question 1. Do you want to accept it or not? Yes / No
2nd question, if you reject this deal do you want to remain or leave with no deal? (Our position is clear on this that if you reject the deal then we support remain).
That should cover all bases.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7304
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1827 times
Has Liked: 3958 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Tue Jul 09, 2019 2:46 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote: It would be in Labour’s interest to vote for whatever deal Boris tables (not no deal obviously) then get on with representing the masses, like they are meant to do. That’s how they take power - not through supporting Remain.
Labour will get obliterated by Lib Dems in most of the country if it doesn't adopt a basically pro-remain agenda. All the polling data suggests this, and the pragmatists (as opposed to the idealists) in the party recognise this. It might lose some seats in Yorkshire leave areas, and maybe one or two elsewhere, but that's the least damaging scenario. Just look at he EU election results and the polls.
If they don't appeal to the majority of their supporters - and young people in particular -then the Lib Dems will steal their clothes.

Claret-On-A-T-Rex
Been Liked: 1 time
Has Liked: 828 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Claret-On-A-T-Rex » Tue Jul 09, 2019 2:51 pm

Wow, Trump just called May "foolish" and the British Ambassador to the US a "pompous fool".
Poor Theresa, she's been chapping her lips on the wrong **** for the past three years.

tiger76
Posts: 25697
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 4644 times
Has Liked: 9849 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by tiger76 » Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:02 pm

If it be your will wrote:My interpretation is a bit different, but still unclear. It goes like this:

Labour in favour of a second referendum, whatever happens. If it's no-deal or any Tory deal, they'll campaign for remain. If it's their own deal going to a referendum, they might campaign for remain - against their own negotiated deal - or they might not. Regarding what the referendum question will be, or what form of voting it will take (AV with 3 or more options? Just 2 options, and if so, which options?), or any attempt to address the other problems associated with a second referendum, as far as I can see, is entirely absent.

You can't ask people to vote for that. What on earth do I say whilst out canvassing and get asked 'What's your Brexit policy again, mate?' If I say what I've just said I'd be rightly laughed at. I think I'd have to go with the ultimate truth: "Honestly? I haven't the faintest clue. But Labour's position on brexit makes not one iota of difference anyway - it won't affect the outcome. They're not in power. As such, I can't for the life of me understand why they've allowed themselves to look so ridiculous in all this." and hope they warm to my searing honesty.

What would you say? Remember, you've generally only got about 5 seconds before they shut the door shaking their head.
Forgive me i've only skim read the BBC article.as far as i can ascertain Labour's brexit policy is to stay in the CU,and also have a close SM relationship,TBH if that's the case they might as well come out for remain,at least people understand what remain means,yes it's a risk in some seats but they can't keep fence-sitting,there is a strong chance of a GE in the next 6 months or so,in which case Labour's bluff would be called if they attained power,it's not clear to me if Labour would put their deal to a public vote or not,yet he expects the current government to have a confirmatory vote,what makes Labour's proposed deal any better,and the elephant in the room is the EU 27,there's no guarantee they will renegotiate the WA,and until the WA is signed off,talks on any future trading relationship can't commence,unless of course Corbyn believes the EU is playing cat and mouse,and will come back to the table.

JohnMcGreal
Posts: 2223
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:37 am
Been Liked: 1348 times
Has Liked: 440 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by JohnMcGreal » Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:15 pm

Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:Wow, Trump just called May "foolish" and the British Ambassador to the US a "pompous fool".
Poor Theresa, she's been chapping her lips on the wrong **** for the past three years.
'Special Relationship'

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6576
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lowbankclaret » Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:31 pm

If it be your will wrote:That's not true. McCluskey, of the most influential union UNITE, strongly believes we should leave. and ASLEF, another biggie, were outright Brexiters from the start. The unions were actually the last to throw in the towel to the Blairites.

This shambles was due to the overwhelmingly remain membership finding themselves on the same side as the blairites (and on the opposite side to Corbyn), and so the blairites won. The big turning point was last year's conference. The second big turning point was Thornberry siding with blairites live on telly a few weeks back.

That may be your view, as a member of Unite I have been pushed to support remain from the start. Which I 100% do not, I nearly cancelled my membership but as there are lots of redundancy at work I decided not to.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6576
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lowbankclaret » Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:38 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:Labour will get obliterated by Lib Dems in most of the country if it doesn't adopt a basically pro-remain agenda. All the polling data suggests this, and the pragmatists (as opposed to the idealists) in the party recognise this. It might lose some seats in Yorkshire leave areas, and maybe one or two elsewhere, but that's the least damaging scenario. Just look at he EU election results and the polls.
If they don't appeal to the majority of their supporters - and young people in particular -then the Lib Dems will steal their clothes.
I am not sure your correct, I think the new position will bring some votes back from Lib Dem but push some to the Brexit party, the opinion polls are very interesting at the moment.
Tories Labour and Brexit Party very close with Lib dens a few points behind.

This move could get interesting.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7304
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1827 times
Has Liked: 3958 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:42 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:That may be your view, as a member of Unite I have been pushed to support remain from the start. Which I 100% do not, I nearly cancelled my membership but as there are lots of redundancy at work I decided not to.
So to be clear: There's threat of redundancies at work and yet you're 100% against remain, which (in the short to medium term at least* ) offers the lowest risk to jobs?
(* Of course Jeremy Hunt says that losing your job will be a small price to pay, but can you explain for what? He apparently can't.)

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7304
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1827 times
Has Liked: 3958 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Tue Jul 09, 2019 3:54 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:I am not sure your correct, I think the new position will bring some votes back from Lib Dem but push some to the Brexit party, the opinion polls are very interesting at the moment.
Tories Labour and Brexit Party very close with Lib dens a few points behind.
This move could get interesting.
In the most recent poll 57% of Labour 2017 voters now say they would vote for another party, with 28% going to the Lib Dems, 15% moving to the Greens and 10% moving to the Brexit party.
So basically a Labour move towards remain potentially retrieves most of these votes and loses just 10%. This is what the polls have been consistently been telling them, and that's why after procrastinating for so long they've finally accepted that they need a clear position one way or the other.
This user liked this post: LeuvenClaret

summitclaret
Posts: 3907
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 830 times
Has Liked: 1318 times
Location: burnley

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by summitclaret » Tue Jul 09, 2019 4:18 pm

If it be your will wrote:My interpretation is a bit different, but still unclear. It goes like this:

Labour in favour of a second referendum, whatever happens. If it's no-deal or any Tory deal, they'll campaign for remain. If it's their own deal going to a referendum, they might campaign for remain - against their own negotiated deal - or they might not. Regarding what the referendum question will be, or what form of voting it will take (AV with 3 or more options? Just 2 options, and if so, which options?), or any attempt to address the other problems associated with a second referendum, as far as I can see, is entirely absent.

You can't ask people to vote for that. What on earth do I say whilst out canvassing and get asked 'What's your Brexit policy again, mate?' If I say what I've just said I'd be rightly laughed at. I think I'd have to go with the ultimate truth: "Honestly? I haven't the faintest clue. But Labour's position on brexit makes not one iota of difference anyway - it won't affect the outcome. They're not in power. As such, I can't for the life of me understand why they've allowed themselves to look so ridiculous in all this." and hope they warm to my searing honesty.

What would you say? Remember, you've generally only got about 5 seconds before they shut the door shaking their head.
Easy peesy. In places like burnley you say we want Brexit and no ref and in remain areas you say we support a second ref. You will get a stonking majority im a GE and then have to implement something.

CrosspoolClarets
Posts: 5284
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
Been Liked: 1632 times
Has Liked: 399 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by CrosspoolClarets » Tue Jul 09, 2019 4:19 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:Labour will get obliterated by Lib Dems in most of the country if it doesn't adopt a basically pro-remain agenda. All the polling data suggests this, and the pragmatists (as opposed to the idealists) in the party recognise this. It might lose some seats in Yorkshire leave areas, and maybe one or two elsewhere, but that's the least damaging scenario. Just look at he EU election results and the polls.
If they don't appeal to the majority of their supporters - and young people in particular -then the Lib Dems will steal their clothes.
Are you sure?

Look at the facts.

a) 60% of Labour seats had a Leave majority (source: BBC fact check)
b) 78% of the 45 main Tory seats targeted by Labour had a Leave majority (source: London School of Economics)

Will a turn into b or will b turn into a? I predict the former.

The other angle is what happens after Brexit - blue collar Labour voters will have long, long memories (look how good their memory is of Thatcher) whereas Labour to Lib Dem switchers will have no great love for the Lib Dem’s, it is a 1 issue switch (as opposed to feelings of complete betrayal) and they would return to Labour under a new leader post Brexit.

It is lucky for Labour if they do pursue this policy that there isn’t an incoming Tory leader who is a bit of a radical populist with a history of winning elections in staunch Labour areas. Oh, wait.......

CrosspoolClarets
Posts: 5284
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
Been Liked: 1632 times
Has Liked: 399 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by CrosspoolClarets » Tue Jul 09, 2019 4:26 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:I am not sure your correct, I think the new position will bring some votes back from Lib Dem but push some to the Brexit party, the opinion polls are very interesting at the moment.
Tories Labour and Brexit Party very close with Lib dens a few points behind.

This move could get interesting.
Question - what happens if the Brexit party step back and give the Tories a free run (basically by Boris agreeing a deal that Farage is content with), and then Boris calls an immediate election?

Boris = Tory vote + Brexit vote + (much of) blue collar Labour vote (particularly with Northern Powerhouse intent)
Corbyn = Labour vote (after departures to Lib Dem’s)

Easy to see that being 40% of the vote vs 25% of the vote. In other words, a 100+ seat majority that will give Boris free rein for 5 years.

Even without the Farage deal the BP would lose most of its support IF Boris is 100% unequivocal about properly leaving and has a deal on the table to that effect.

summitclaret
Posts: 3907
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 830 times
Has Liked: 1318 times
Location: burnley

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by summitclaret » Tue Jul 09, 2019 4:34 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote:Question - what happens if the Brexit party step back and give the Tories a free run (basically by Boris agreeing a deal that Farage is content with), and then Boris calls an immediate election?

Boris = Tory vote + Brexit vote + (much of) blue collar Labour vote (particularly with Northern Powerhouse intent)
Corbyn = Labour vote (after departures to Lib Dem’s)

Easy to see that being 40% of the vote vs 25% of the vote. In other words, a 100+ seat majority that will give Boris free rein for 5 years.

Even without the Farage deal the BP would lose most of its support IF Boris is 100% unequivocal about properly leaving and has a deal on the table to that effect.
It may not even need a deal. The electorate is getting pretty good at sorting things itself. There was no BP at the locals. Brexiteers voted for independents up and down the country to deny both main parties control of councils. Just like remainers did for the LDs.

The BP would win loads of seats in the north and midlands from both tory and labour in a GE if held today. The LDs would gain many seats from tory and labour in the south and west country.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6576
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lowbankclaret » Tue Jul 09, 2019 4:46 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:So to be clear: There's threat of redundancies at work and yet you're 100% against remain, which (in the short to medium term at least* ) offers the lowest risk to jobs?
(* Of course Jeremy Hunt says that losing your job will be a small price to pay, but can you explain for what? He apparently can't.)
Brexit has nothing to do with these redundancies. My company has been hell bent on moving production from the uk for years. In about ten years it will go bust. Following the model of Boeing’s 737 Max without even seeing the parallels and without the cash backing to save it from such a catastrophic strategy.
Boeing will survive just I think, my company will not.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6576
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lowbankclaret » Tue Jul 09, 2019 4:47 pm

Following on from me trying to get you guys to see the world view of what’s going on.
Please read what Peter Zeihan thoughts are on Hong Kong.

4 July 2019 by Peter Zeihan
Hong Kong has been one of the most important economic locations on the planet for over a century.

China has always had problems holding together, but it has also always been a land of opportunity for outsiders who held a logistical and technological edge. Few powers in history have held a sharper edge than the British Empire. Hong Kong sits at the mouth of the Pearl River Delta, and in dominating HK the Brits were able to exploit the cheap labor of the lower basin, while also controlling any exports from the broader Pearl. It was a strategy the Brits had used to great success in locations as diverse as Suez, Calais, the Gambia, Durban, Charleston, and New York City.

As Mao’s de facto alliance with the Americans took form in the 1970s, British Hong Kong became internationalized. The Hong Kongers would use foreign tech and capital – repeating a pattern that stretched back literally a millennium – to create products for export.

In the late 1980s then-British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher negotiated the transfer of Hong Kong to the Chinese mainland and a new chapter began. Hong Kong shifted from being a manufacturing base to being a financial and logistical hub. The same foreign tech and cash came in, but HK used its already-sophisticated managerial skills to funnel it into the lower Pearl.

That’s the economics. Here’s the politics:

It is not an oversimplification to say the Chinese Communist Party is obsessed with national unity. The “country” of China has historically not held together well, and Hong Kong was no expectation. For most of Chinese history, the southern coastal cities from Shanghai south to Hong Kong were integrated more with the wider world than with their own countrymen. But with the Order’s advance in the late 1940s, the imperial age ended and Maoist China was able to establish control over the entire coast… aside from Hong Kong. The handover from London to Beijing in the 1990s brought Hong Kong into the fold as well.

But there was a poison pill.

The British ran Hong Kong like the imperial territory it was. While the Americans forced the Brits to divest nearly all their empire, the Americans made an exception when it came to Hong Kong. It would have been ludicrous to squander the intelligence opportunities of having British control of such a rich and strategically located bit of allied territory. But when it became obvious to Thatcher that handover was inevitable, the Brits started democratizing Hong Kong. In the aftermath of the June 1989 Tiananmen massacre, the effort intensified. When the handover finally occurred in July 1997, Hong Kong was a full-fledged democracy (albeit one who obviously had no say as to which country it would be associated with).

Thatcher hardwired into the handover treaty a looooong political transition period. While Hong Kong would immediately and officially become “Chinese” territory in 1997, its political system would remain largely self-governing for another half-century. An island of democracy in a sea of authoritarianism. The Chinese call it One Nation, Two Systems.

Say what you will about Thatcher, she was very good at monkeywrenches.

So long as the Chinese economy performed well, Two Systems was an annoyance Beijing was willing to tolerate. But things have changed:

First, the Chinese export-led system has peaked. Global demographics have turned negative and global consumption can no longer absorb exports on the scale China can churn out.

Second, the Chinese financial system is in dire straits. Lending in China isn’t like lending in most places where you… well… have to pay back the loan. In China the government banks funnel cheap credit to firms who guarantee high employment, and to hell with profitability. The goal is to keep everyone in a job so they don’t protest. A side effect of this policy generates scads of subpar quality products that no one needs. China then dumps those products on the international market. Not only can the global market no longer absorb all the Chinese stuff, the financial model has pushed to the point that there are so many debt bombs on the foundations of so many sub-sectors that it would make the bad actors of the US financial crisis blush.

Third, Chinese demographics have peaked. Replacing global demand with Chinese demand was never really an option, and in 2019 it became obvious that Chinese demand was plateauing. Automotive sales – typically the purest indicator of customer demand – have dropped more than most countries do during heavy recessions. Blame the One Child policy – China is running out of twentysomethings. That’s driving labor costs up at the same time it is driving consumption down.


Fourth, the friendly geopolitical environment that China has thrived under – that all-important American-led Order – is in its final days. Much of what has brought China rapid economic development – foreign technology and capital, bottomless global markets, endless raw material imports – is ending. With local markets insufficient to replace global markets, the Chinese hold an economy designed for the 1990s that has no place in today’s world.

Fifth, the Americans are formally and directly targeting Chinese industrial and trade policy. U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer has already dusted off plans to triple the total American tariff load on China as soon as he gets the go-ahead from his boss. There may be a bit of an American-Chinese trade truce in place, but I doubt it will last much longer than the last two (which each lasted about 75 days).

Sixth, an oil crisis is brewing in the Persian Gulf. Should the Americans do anything to impinge upon Persian Gulf oil flows – and “anything” includes leaving – China faces an energy crisis far worse than what the Americans struggled through in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Some two-thirds of China’s oil is imported, with over half of that coming from the Gulf. China’s navy is utterly incapable of convoying what it needs should convoys become necessary.

The Chinese leadership is fully aware of all these concerns and is fully aware that the Chinese ship of state can no longer sail in its current direction. President Xi Jinping – rightly – fears for the future of the unified Chinese state. To that end Xi spent the bulk of his six years in office to date eliminating anyone in the Communist Party who was willing to defy him under the guise of an anti-corruption purge. The effort was done with more than a bit of side-eye to smashing any sort of regional autonomy. Now’s he’s working on new tech-heavy programs designed to purge dissent throughout wider society. The jury is still out on how successful that will be, but it points to the it’s-not-paranoia-if-they’re-really-out-to-get-you feel of the Party at the moment.

Enter the Hong Kong protests of recent weeks.

Part and parcel to Xi’s efforts to preserve national unity is to lock down Hong Kong. In partial violation of the Two Systems policy, Xi pushed an “extradition law” on the Hong Kong government which would enable any mainland Chinese judicial entity – all of which are arms of the Chinese Communist Party – to issue arrest warrants for any Hong Kong citizen. China’s security services already kidnap Hong Kongers and smuggle them back to the mainland as they need to, but with the new law any local magistrate could force the abduction of anyone in broad daylight. (Such legal authority already exists within mainland China for everyone else.)

The Hong Kongers, realizing the extradition law’s adoption would mean the end of their special status some three decades early, have resisted. And protested.

The timing is far from coincidental. Beijing is ratcheting down on Hong Kong because it fears for the unity of the Chinese state as a whole. Hong Kong is resisting because it doesn’t want to be part of the Chinese state. The primary rationale for Xi’s new law is to keep the country together. The Hong Kongers’ rebellion is largely because of the new law. And now the phrase “Hong Kong is not China” keeps popping up in the protests.

Something’s gotta give, and it isn’t going to be Beijing.

The question, as it seems to be with everything, is timing. Much of the Chinese government’s actions these days – as regards Trump and trade talks, or Japan and territorial disputes, or Iran and oil – seems to be about buying time, but that time may be running out. On July 1, a group of Hong Kong protestors stormed the local legislative assembly with a degree of intensity that was new for the protests. This was less families-with-children-in-strollers and more clubs-and-pipes-of-the-Antifa-type. In the aftermath some of the graffiti caught my attention: “It was you who told me peaceful marches did not work.”


Hong Kong, People’s Republic of China
I don’t have the insight to know who spawned this particular action of vandalism.

Was it the leaders of what have so far been a hyper-organized protest movement? Are they testing the waters for a new push?

Was it some imported anarchists who just love a good riot?

Was it a false flag operation launched from the mainland to justify a crackdown?

Was Beijing aware the storming was imminent, and yet did nothing so that the radicals would provide a justification for their own destruction?

I don’t know. And unfortunately, it doesn’t really matter. Whoever thought that ransacking the assembly building was a good idea has crossed the Rubicon. Whether you view the true power in China as President Xi, the government in Beijing, or the Chinese Communist Party, it cannot tolerate this sort of action in Hong Kong – especially at this time. No matter what your view of Chinese history is, no matter what your view on Xi’s personal vindictiveness might be, the Hong Kong protests have become a threat to national unity. A new crackdown is imminent.

The scale of what’s about to happen is difficult to grasp:

At their peak, the Tiananmen protests involved 300,000 people, mostly students. The Chinese government sent in nearly as many troops to crush the movement. Fatality reports varied wildly from zero (the number Beijing proffered) to 10,000 (the estimate of the British embassy).

In Hong Kong, the protestors have regularly managed to get a million people out in the streets, a figure that has swelled to two million on several occasions. They aren’t just young people. They are families. Retirees. Bankers. Lots of people who normally never protest. I’ve not seen anything like this since the broad-spectrum Iranian protests that dislodged the Shah back in 1979. It is a huge proportion of Hong Kong’s total population (less than 7.5 million).

Ending the protests means nothing less than a full military invasion and occupation of the island. And unlike the Tiananmen massacre where reports of the military operation made it out piecemeal, in today’s social media age Hong Kong’s fall will be broadcast live for the world to see. It will be like Japan’s 2001 Sendai earthquake, but with a wall of tanks instead of a wall of water.

This all feels… momentous but I can’t quite put my finger on the implications. I’m a context guy and for this I just don’t have any. I cannot think of a military crackdown in a first-world economy in modern times. In the United States the last one was the Kent State shooting in 1970, but that was only a few hundred students and 67 bullets. Paris in 1968 got pretty messy, but the violence there was…what, threeorders of magnitude less than what’s imminent in Hong Kong. I’ve got to go back to the riots in Europe in the 1930s at the height of the Depression. The norms of our age are breaking apart and we’ve not yet developed the frames of reference to process what’s coming.

For the immediate future, the bottom line is that while Hong Kong lacks the size and reach and means to export its protest movement to the mainland, the CCP certainly has the size and reach and means to export its forces to Hong Kong. China’s information control systems are sufficient – and the grip of the CCP strong enough – to prevent meaningful contamination of the mainland political system. The protests will not only fail, they signal the end of Hong Kong.

Hong Kong is about to become an absolutely horrible place to be. The degree of Chinese… reconstruction of the island will be on par with the cultural genocide already being imposed upon the Uyghurs of China’s western Xinjiang region. It won’t last a week or a month or a year. We’re looking at something that will last at least a decade.

That will have deep implications for anyone doing business in the country.

At a minimum every ongoing reservation about operating in China is about to get a hard underline. Foreign business magnates like Tim Cook have so far been able to ignore the ethical implications of their firms’ China dependency. It is difficult to see that continuing in light of what’s about to occur.

And it isn’t simply about ethics. Many of the financiers that make Hong Kong work are Chinese citizens. Whether Bank of America or whoever is willing to stay in a place where their workers disappear is… questionable. But it doesn’t end there. It’s not just Chinese citizens; the extradition law also applies to foreigners. These companies are used to working in China, so it’s not that the Chinese system is so scary that they can’t stomach the country. It’s that none of these companies have tried to operate in China during an active crackdown.

The coming violence and occupation will utterly remove Hong Kong from the global network of logistical and financial hubs. Hong Kong has been China’s primary entry point, China’s primary export point, and most capable financial center. Its end takes the gem out of the Chinese crown, as it were. For the past thirty years, China has provided foreign investors with scale, cheap labor, security and local expertise. The ending of Hong Kong damages all that and more.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6576
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lowbankclaret » Tue Jul 09, 2019 4:58 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:So to be clear: There's threat of redundancies at work and yet you're 100% against remain, which (in the short to medium term at least* ) offers the lowest risk to jobs?
(* Of course Jeremy Hunt says that losing your job will be a small price to pay, but can you explain for what? He apparently can't.)
Also I have travelled to China and Thailand to view manufacturing facilities.

Been involved with quotes from the whole of the world. Funny thing is we are very competitive, would love to say more but cannot without being sacked.

What I can say is many of the manufacturers I visit in Burnley are winning work from America, in fact they are declining work they could win as they fear expanding too quickly could be unsustainable and Good Engineers are getting hard to find to develop and deliver new contracts.

I know there are good vacancies for great Engineers in our area..

Hence free from the EU we could Develop and expand more over time.

South West Claret.
Posts: 5642
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:55 pm
Been Liked: 766 times
Has Liked: 499 times
Location: Devon

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by South West Claret. » Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:07 pm

Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:Wow, Trump just called May "foolish" and the British Ambassador to the US a "pompous fool".
Poor Theresa, she's been chapping her lips on the wrong **** for the past three years.
Pot and kettle springs to mind.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:13 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:But why would they need to campaign for one or the other if they were in power?
They could negotiate the best deal possible and explain why it is the best deal they can get.
They can then hold a referendum on it and adapt a neutral stance, saying "this is what we've been able to negotiate, we can't see how we can get anything better, if you don't accept it then we favour remaining.
Question 1. Do you want to accept it or not? Yes / No
2nd question, if you reject this deal do you want to remain or leave with no deal? (Our position is clear on this that if you reject the deal then we support remain).
That should cover all bases.
All this convoluted ifs, whats and maybes? That's the message Labour should go for? That'll get a fair hearing in The Guardian, I expect.

As of last night, Labour's position on Brexit has become incomprehensible gibberish.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:24 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:Labour will get obliterated by Lib Dems in most of the country if it doesn't adopt a basically pro-remain agenda. All the polling data suggests this, and the pragmatists (as opposed to the idealists) in the party recognise this. It might lose some seats in Yorkshire leave areas, and maybe one or two elsewhere, but that's the least damaging scenario. Just look at he EU election results and the polls.
If they don't appeal to the majority of their supporters - and young people in particular -then the Lib Dems will steal their clothes.
If Labour adopted full remain position, perhaps even to the extent of advocating revoking article 50, that would at least be coherent.

But then Corbyn would be completely the wrong person to lead the party. Corbyn is of the view that remaining in the EU means: no monopoly state owned railway, no bringing outsourced NHS contracts back in-house, no National Investment Bank, no nationalisation and public support of strategic industry (e.g. British Steel) etc etc.. If Corbyn goes into the next election with a manifesto anything like his last one, claiming he can do it as a member of the EU, he'll consider himself to be doing so an a total lie. As such, he would have to step down.

aggi
Posts: 8801
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2111 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:47 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote:Question - what happens if the Brexit party step back and give the Tories a free run (basically by Boris agreeing a deal that Farage is content with), and then Boris calls an immediate election?

Boris = Tory vote + Brexit vote + (much of) blue collar Labour vote (particularly with Northern Powerhouse intent)
Corbyn = Labour vote (after departures to Lib Dem’s)

Easy to see that being 40% of the vote vs 25% of the vote. In other words, a 100+ seat majority that will give Boris free rein for 5 years.

Even without the Farage deal the BP would lose most of its support IF Boris is 100% unequivocal about properly leaving and has a deal on the table to that effect.
I think most would be a lot less naive than you in believing Boris' Tory Northern Powerhouse talk. He's not a man famed for keeping his promises.

On top of that, seat by seat analysis of seats that are both Labour & Leave suggest that a lot of the leave voters aren't currently labour voters and that the pro-leave votes they'd lose would be offset by remain votes gained in most cases so the seat impact would be minimal. I'm not 100% convinced by the analysis but it is certainly a possibility.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7304
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1827 times
Has Liked: 3958 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:52 pm

If it be your will wrote:All this convoluted ifs, whats and maybes? That's the message Labour should go for? That'll get a fair hearing in The Guardian, I expect.

As of last night, Labour's position on Brexit has become incomprehensible gibberish.
What you mean is that you don't agree with the new angle. Labour has been hammered by the press and the polls for its previous - try to please everyone / please nobody - stance, and all the data / evidence suggests that a significant majority Labour supporters / voters, (especially the young), favour remaining. The position is clearer now than it's been.
If you are searching for incomprehensible gibberish then just look at the incoherence and unrealistic content of the messages that Johnson and Hunt are campaigning on.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14566
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:53 pm

Elizabeth wrote:Is that Rowan Atkinson, one of the most loved English personalities in history. Oh, yes it is.

And guess who is blowing kisses to the post, yes another poster who when driven into a corner takes the easy way out.

Why dont some people who have nothing further to say just do the honourable thing
He's actually a bit of a knob away from the camera.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7304
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1827 times
Has Liked: 3958 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Tue Jul 09, 2019 6:05 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote:Are you sure?

Look at the facts.

a) 60% of Labour seats had a Leave majority (source: BBC fact check)
b) 78% of the 45 main Tory seats targeted by Labour had a Leave majority (source: London School of Economics)
..
a) It doesn't prove that the majority of leave votes in those seats were Labour voters. Many would be Tory and UKip. (And it was over 3 years ago).
b) So that's about 35 seats then that they might not win. (Significant, but better than being wiped out in many areas of the country.)
In any event, if there's a snap election in most cases remain voters will vote tactically for the party who they think has the best chance of defeating the "no deal" Tory candidate. This will include many trad. Conservative supporters. If EU election results are replicated then Lib Dems will do well in some areas and Labour in others.

RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by RingoMcCartney » Tue Jul 09, 2019 6:23 pm

dsr wrote:They could have done that without being in the EU. Rackmann was doing the same sort of thing in the sixties. No amount of law or political system can give protection against people who don't obey the law; it would be no harder to get Poles into the country when we are outsde the EU (they would still need a passport) and there would be no more likelihood of the authorities keeping track on them and checking they weren't being treated as slaves, if we were outside the EU.
Rackmann was indeed doing it in the 60s , but it's my belief that he'd have had a field day now. The clue is in the title "Free Movement of PEOPLE ". Persuading immigration officials that people are entering the country for honest employment and then hoodwinking them into slavery has, in my opinion got to be easier than if free movement was stopped.

The Labour Party of old were very Eurosceptic. They'd have been absolutely against the , so called "4 freedoms"
- Goods, Capital, Services and LABOUR.
It's just a politically correct term for making a commodity out of human beings.

martin_p
Posts: 10371
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3765 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by martin_p » Tue Jul 09, 2019 6:23 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote:Are you sure?

Look at the facts.

a) 60% of Labour seats had a Leave majority (source: BBC fact check)
b) 78% of the 45 main Tory seats targeted by Labour had a Leave majority (source: London School of Economics)

Will a turn into b or will b turn into a? I predict the former.
I’m afraid both statistics are pretty meaningless in terms of ascertaining support for Brexit amongst Labour supporters.
This user liked this post: nil_desperandum

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Tue Jul 09, 2019 6:25 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:What you mean is that you don't agree with the new angle. Labour has been hammered by the press and the polls for its previous - try to please everyone / please nobody - stance, and all the data / evidence suggests that a significant majority Labour supporters / voters, (especially the young), favour remaining. The position is clearer now than it's been.
If you are searching for incomprehensible gibberish then just look at the incoherence and unrealistic content of the messages that Johnson and Hunt are campaigning on.
I don't agree, but that isn't my disagreement. I think Labour's position should be to keep strategically quiet about anything relating to brexit, and let the Tories impale themselves on their own project, there's nothing they can do to influence the brexit outcome anyway. Equally, I wouldn't agree with a full remain position either, but at least I wouldn't disagree on its coherence.

If the position is now clear, what is it?? What part of my interpretation (a few posts up) have I got wrong? Or do you consider this to be clear? It seems a big lot of nonsense to me.
If it be your will wrote:My interpretation is a bit different, but still unclear. It goes like this:

Labour in favour of a second referendum, whatever happens. If it's no-deal or any Tory deal, they'll campaign for remain. If it's their own deal going to a referendum, they might campaign for remain - against their own negotiated deal - or they might not. Regarding what the referendum question will be, or what form of voting it will take (AV with 3 or more options? Just 2 options, and if so, which options?), or any attempt to address the other problems associated with a second referendum, as far as I can see, is entirely absent.

RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by RingoMcCartney » Tue Jul 09, 2019 6:28 pm

aggi wrote:I was expecting your link to include something about The EU free moment of people rule makes people trafficking , exploitation and modern day slavery easier.. Was it the wrong one?
The link was a fact based report on criminal behaviour of people trafficking and exploitation on an industrial scale. Why would you expect it to include an opinion when it's simply reporting the crime and the sentences that were given out for those crimes? You'd be wrong to expect an opinion.

I expressed the opinion that free movement of people makes it easier form vermin like this to operate.

Locked