Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:41 pm

It’s looking more and more likely it’s going to be a vote of no confidence next week.

Corbyn as PM.

6 month extension and a GE.

After a few minor laws are passed like giving 16 year olds a vote

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:50 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:It’s looking more and more likely it’s going to be a vote of no confidence next week.

Corbyn as PM.

6 month extension and a GE.

After a few minor laws are passed like giving 16 year olds a vote

I must admit, I'm a bit surprised the Lib-Dems would agree to Corbyn as PM. However, I suspect they are very worried at what both Boris & Cummings might be planning. It'll be seen as the lesser of two evils for Jo Swinson.

Going forward, if it does happen I think Boris Johnson will be given an ultimatum that if he wants to stay as leader he'll have to ditch Dominic Cummings as I'd imagine he's becoming too toxic for many members of the Conservatives.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 7:15 pm

They are getting worried there is some loophole they the Tories can exploit.

I hope they do vote him out and replace him with Corbyn.

Many people will see that as the ultimate betrayal and lose Even more votes.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 7:36 pm

Spijed wrote:I must admit, I'm a bit surprised the Lib-Dems would agree to Corbyn as PM. However, I suspect they are very worried at what both Boris & Cummings might be planning. It'll be seen as the lesser of two evils for Jo Swinson.

Going forward, if it does happen I think Boris Johnson will be given an ultimatum that if he wants to stay as leader he'll have to ditch Dominic Cummings as I'd imagine he's becoming too toxic for many members of the Conservatives.

I thought Swinson had already ruled out backing a Corbyn interim government?

I can't see Boris ditching Cummings either. The Tories he doesn't want are already out of the party and now sitting as independents!

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 7:47 pm

fidelcastro wrote:I thought Swinson had already ruled out backing a Corbyn interim government?

I can't see Boris ditching Cummings either. The Tories he doesn't want are already out of the party and now sitting as independents!

Yes but if they think Boris has Trick up his sleeve to get out on a no deal.

She will back a coalition to stop it.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 7:50 pm

If they do form a Government of national disunity I see things getting really ugly. For a start there are about 40 mps that have either resigned from their former parties or veing kicked out. Can't see many of these voting for a GE as nearly all will not get back in.

I don't trust Corbyn to actually call a GE anytime soon as he won't win it. I don't trust the SNP full stop. Swinson is loony thinking she just revoke. Farage is a major threat to everyone.

What does this all mean? I think the tories, well all but a handful of the erg i.e. people like Redwood, will want to get a deal thro. It will all come down to the tory wets and the labour leave seat mps.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 7:50 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:Yes but if they think Boris has Trick up his sleeve to get out on a no deal.

She will back a coalition to stop it.

Possibly, and I actually hope you're right, but surely the only thing Boris can cling to with the hope of no deal, is going through the courts.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 7:55 pm

[quote="fidelcastro"]Possibly, and I actually hope you're right, but surely the only thing Boris can cling to with the hope of no deal, is going through the courts.[/
quote]

He wants a deal and to leave no deal on the table so yes he is going to challenge the way in which surrender act was rushed thro without proper scrutiny. He won't win but he might just string it out long enough to get the EU to move enough on the backstop.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 7:56 pm

summitclaret wrote: I don't trust Corbyn to actually call a GE anytime soon as he won't win it.

I’d trust him a hundred more times than Johnson! Besides, once Article 50 has been extended he’ll be as vulnerable to a vote of no confidence as Johnson is now, in fact probably more so. So he won’t be able to stop a general election once he’s done what any possible coalition is brought together to do.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 7:57 pm

fidelcastro wrote:Possibly, and I actually hope you're right, but surely the only thing Boris can cling to with the hope of no deal, is going through the courts.

I admit to having no clue what’s going to happen.

The only thing I know is the politicians are turning the public against them.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 7:59 pm

summitclaret wrote:

You think the EU won’t know that he won’t win? If a random person on a football message board can work it out I’m sure they can.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 7:59 pm

summitclaret wrote:

That doesn't read very well, but I haven't seen much evidence that he actually wants a deal. The EU are saying as much too.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:00 pm

martin_p wrote:I’d trust him a hundred more times than Johnson! Besides, once Article 50 has been extended he’ll be as vulnerable to a vote of no confidence as Johnson is now, in fact probably more so. So he won’t be able to stop a general election once he’s done what any possible coalition is brought together to do.p

If the total toties plus BP continue to poll 45% plus he .really won't. Every nail the anti- democrats knock to undermining the ref result will add votes for leave imo.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:00 pm

martin_p wrote:I’d trust him a hundred more times than Johnson! Besides, once Article 50 has been extended he’ll be as vulnerable to a vote of no confidence as Johnson is now, in fact probably more so. So he won’t be able to stop a general election once he’s done what any possible coalition is brought together to do.

Trusting Corbyn is like trusting a fox to babysit your favourite chicken.

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:01 pm

I think Corbyn would be better off with a govt of unity led by someone like Ken Clarke coming in and having to get their hands dirty with stopping No Deal.

Corbyn is at his most effective in an election campaign and if he can come into it from the background that will give him and Labour their best chance.IMO of course

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:02 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:I admit to having no clue what’s going to happen.

The only thing I know is the politicians are turning the public against them.

Its all about proving that the HOC are preventing Brexit now.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:04 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:I think Corbyn would be better off with a govt of unity led by someone like Ken Clarke coming in and having to get their hands dirty with stopping No Deal.

Corbyn is at his most effective in an election campaign and if he can come into it from the background that will give him and Labour their best chance.IMO of course

Agree.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:04 pm

summitclaret wrote:Its all about proving that the HOC are preventing Brexit now.

Preventing no deal. You keep saying you want a deal!

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:05 pm

Corbyn is offering the moon on a stick.

Less hours.

More and more and more and more spending.

For us who were around in the 70’s 80’s.

It’s like second coming of the devil.

For those born after 1990’s, what’s not to like.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:06 pm

summitclaret wrote:If the total toties plus BP continue to poll 45% plus he .really won't. Every nail the anti- democrats knock to undermining the ref result will add votes for leave imo.

The BP are polling enough to reduce other parties votes but not win any seats.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:06 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:Trusting Corbyn is like trusting a fox to babysit your favourite chicken.

Utter rubbish.

You've been reading too many right-wing papers.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:10 pm

martin_p wrote:Preventing no deal. You keep saying you want a deal!

I do but Labour just want string it out until they think they can win a GE.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:10 pm

fidelcastro wrote:Utter rubbish.

You've been reading too many right-wing papers.

No I have been listening to Corbyn.

I don’t read papers, that’s a bit 1970’s. Papers are a waste of killing trees.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:12 pm

summitclaret wrote:I do but Labour just want string it out until they think they can win a GE.

Labour will call for a GE once no deal is off the table.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:13 pm

martin_p wrote:The BP are polling enough to reduce other parties votes but not win any seats.

The Tories will not canvas seriously in places like Burnley if the BP don't in places like Sunderland.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:15 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:No I have been listening to Corbyn.

I don’t read papers, that’s a bit 1970’s. Papers are a waste of killing trees.

I agree with your last sentence, but I fail to see what you hate so much about Corbyn's policies.

Clearly some people don't want a fairer society. Sad.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:17 pm

summitclaret wrote:The Tories will not canvas seriously in places like Burnley if the BP don't in places like Sunderland.

Canvas or not the Tories will get votes in Burnley.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:19 pm

martin_p wrote:Canvas or not the Tories will get votes in Burnley.

From the same kind of people who thought that Enoch Powell was speaking for them in the late sixties.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:20 pm

martin_p wrote:Canvas or not the Tories will get votes in Burnley.

From party faithful yes but most of the 2/3 rds leave voters will surely work out that in burnley voting tory is more likely to stop brexit and give into the surrenders.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:29 pm

fidelcastro wrote:Labour will call for a GE once no deal is off the table.

And lose massively.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:40 pm

fidelcastro wrote:I agree with your last sentence, but I fail to see what you hate so much about Corbyn's policies.

Clearly some people don't want a fairer society. Sad.

A fairer society.

Going back to 16 year old girls seeing having having loads of kids a career choice .

Where two adults were earning more money having 6 kids than two parents with two kids holding down 3 jobs and earning less than people on benefits.

Councils having to build 7 bedroom houses for people with six kids.

Who the hell is going to pay for all this massive give away.

Oh yes people like me who earn a good living are going to be taxed to death to pay for the sick, lame and lazy.

Whilst I am more than happy to support those who really need it, under Labour it would return to the abuse than happened before.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:45 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:A fairer society.

Going back to 16 year old girls seeing having having loads of kids a career choice .

Where two adults were earning more money having 6 kids than two parents with two kids holding down 3 jobs and earning less than people on benefits.

Councils having to build 7 bedroom houses for people with six kids.

Who the hell is going to pay for all this massive give away.

Oh yes people like me who earn a good living are going to be taxed to death to pay for the sick, lame and lazy.

Whilst I am more than happy to support those who really need it, under Labour it would return to the abuse than happened before.

I go back to my earlier point of too much reading of right-wing newspapers. You sound just like the political editor of the SUN.

Siddo · Post by **Siddo** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:47 pm

summitclaret wrote:If they do form a Government of national disunity I see things getting really ugly. For a start there are about 40 mps that have either resigned from their former parties or veing kicked out. Can't see many of these voting for a GE as nearly all will not get back in.

I don't trust Corbyn to actually call a GE anytime soon as he won't win it. I don't trust the SNP full stop. Swinson is loony thinking she just revoke. Farage is a major threat to everyone.

What does this all mean? I think the tories, well all but a handful of the erg i.e. people like Redwood, will want to get a deal thro. It will all come down to the tory wets and the labour leave seat mps.

I think you don't actually understand what is happening at the moment. This post and your subsequent ones show a deep misunderstanding of what is happening in British politics at the moment.

Darthlaw · Post by **Darthlaw** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:47 pm

“Dear chief secretary, I'm afraid to tell you there's no money left“

Let’s give em the credit cards again, though.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:50 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:A fairer society.

Going back to 16 year old girls seeing having having loads of kids a career choice .

Where two adults were earning more money having 6 kids than two parents with two kids holding down 3 jobs and earning less than people on benefits.

Councils having to build 7 bedroom houses for people with six kids.

Who the hell is going to pay for all this massive give away.

Oh yes people like me who earn a good living are going to be taxed to death to pay for the sick, lame and lazy.

Whilst I am more than happy to support those who really need it, under Labour it would return to the abuse than happened before.

Do you know how much the benefit cap saves per year?

timshorts · Post by **timshorts** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:55 pm

summitclaret wrote:That second question is not fair for 2 reasons. First if 2A won we are in a worse position now as regards discussions with the EU. Secondly 2B gas no chance as no remain voters would back it.

Ir would be better to stick to a simple leave or remain with the leave option defined along the following lines

a canada style free trade deal but if the EU won't agree one within x months we leave with no WA.

Let me re-run this.

The suggestion is not fair as remainers would never vote for 2b.

So it's fine if we somehow stop remainers voting so that an option that less than 47% want might have a chance of winning when the 47% option won't?

We have three options on the table right now.
a) remain
b) no deal
c) the deal that the EU already agreed with may, perhaps with a small bit of Johnson tinkering.

This is pretty much what we had in the first place, but a had to play b+c combined. It lost, but no doubt a would have beaten c if b wasn't an option.

Id think we need all 3 on the ballot paper. We mark the best option 1 and the second best 2.
Count the 1 votes. If any of them get 50% then we are stuck with that and go for it.
Assuming no-one gets to 50%, then count all the 2's and add them to the 1's. Effectively this eliminates the one the country wants least and leaves us with the one that more people would tolerate winning. A first transferable vote wouldn't achieve that, I don't think, with quite so much certainty.

No doubt this will get objections that its too hard for some of the electorate to understand, but if it is, they shouldn't be voting in the first place. And of course the entire electorate was able to understand what they were voting for last time, despite the lies, as Ringo says so.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:06 pm

fidelcastro wrote:I go back to my earlier point of too much reading of right-wing newspapers. You sound just like the political editor of the SUN.

I was there watching these things and made me and others so angry.

Returning to the past that didn’t work rarely brings a better result second time around.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:26 pm

martin_p wrote:Do you know how much the benefit cap saves per year?

Let’s go back to Labour leaving a message for the incoming government.

We spent all the money, ha ha.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:29 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:Let’s go back to Labour leaving a message for the incoming government.

We spent all the money, ha ha.

That’s not an answer to the question (although I guess you’re saying no).

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:34 pm

Siddo wrote:I think you don't actually understand what is happening at the moment. This post and your subsequent ones show a deep misunderstanding of what is happening in British politics at the moment.

Go on then what is happening?

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:42 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:Let’s go back to Labour leaving a message for the incoming government.

We spent all the money, ha ha.

Corbyn said 2 billion a year.

Easy to spend in his world.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 10:04 pm

timshorts wrote:Let me re-run this.

The suggestion is not fair as remainers would never vote for 2b.

So it's fine if we somehow stop remainers voting so that an option that less than 47% want might have a chance of winning when the 47% option won't?

We have three options on the table right now.
a) remain
b) no deal
c) the deal that the EU already agreed with may, perhaps with a small bit of Johnson tinkering.

This is pretty much what we had in the first place, but a had to play b+c combined. It lost, but no doubt a would have beaten c if b wasn't an option.

Id think we need all 3 on the ballot paper. We mark the best option 1 and the second best 2.
Count the 1 votes. If any of them get 50% then we are stuck with that and go for it.
Assuming no-one gets to 50%, then count all the 2's and add them to the 1's. Effectively this eliminates the one the country wants least and leaves us with the one that more people would tolerate winning. A first transferable vote wouldn't achieve that, I don't think, with quite so much certainty.

No doubt this will get objections that its too hard for some of the electorate to understand, but if it is, they shouldn't be voting in the first place. And of course the entire electorate was able to understand what they were voting for last time, despite the lies, as Ringo says so.

You have missed my point and any 3 options with May's deal as the middle one is a total fix as it is leave in name only. After all this time any further referendum must have a proper leave option and a straight choice between that and remain. Surely leave is entitled to define what leave means?

TheFamilyCat · Post by **TheFamilyCat** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 10:16 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:A fairer society.

Going back to 16 year old girls seeing having having loads of kids a career choice .

Where two adults were earning more money having 6 kids than two parents with two kids holding down 3 jobs and earning less than people on benefits.

Councils having to build 7 bedroom houses for people with six kids.

Who the hell is going to pay for all this massive give away.

Oh yes people like me who earn a good living are going to be taxed to death to pay for the sick, lame and lazy.

Whilst I am more than happy to support those who really need it, under Labour it would return to the abuse than happened before.

You missed "massive tellies".

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 10:34 pm

summitclaret wrote:That second question is not fair for 2 reasons. First if 2A won we are in a worse position now as regards discussions with the EU. Secondly 2B gas no chance as no remain voters would back it.

Ir would be better to stick to a simple leave or remain with the leave option defined along the following lines

a canada style free trade deal but if the EU won't agree one within x months we leave with no WA.

Not sure you understood my post.
1.Negotiations would obviously have been concluded so we would know what the deal was, so there wouldn't be discussions.
2. There's no reason why it couldn't be the Canada style deal that's on the ballot paper, in fact I'm pretty sure that that's the sort of deal a coalition govt would be trying to agree with the EU.
I thought my post and proposal were pretty clear tbh, but hopefully I've cleared it up

timshorts · Post by **timshorts** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 10:43 pm

summitclaret wrote:You have missed my point and any 3 options with May's deal as the middle one is a total fix as it is leave in name only. After all this time any further referendum must have a proper leave option and a straight choice between that and remain. Surely leave is entitled to define what leave means?

Clearly, no. "leave" isn't an entity so is unable to define anything.

There is no point in giving an option that doesn't exist either which was pretty much what happened last time when both sides were sort of guessing what leave was supposed to look like. I imagine that it varied wildly in voters minds. Some were voting for "the easiest trade deal ever and 350 million" . Some for an immigration free zone and sending people home - and most somewhere in between. All those fantasies now boil down to two different options. The EU deal or no deal. So we have three options. Those two or remain.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 10:53 pm

All those fantasies now boil down to two different options. The EU deal or no deal. So we have three options. Those two or remain.[/quote]
Actually I disagree.
I believe that a deal negotiated by a coalition,(without May's impossible red lines),would look much different to the current deal, and that's what would be on the ballot paper.
It would most likely be more like a Canada + versus no deal.

Swizzlestick · Post by **Swizzlestick** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 10:56 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:You missed "massive tellies".

“PlayStations” another fave.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:03 pm

timshorts wrote:Clearly, no. "leave" isn't an entity so is unable to define anything.

There is no point in giving an option that doesn't exist either which was pretty much what happened last time when both sides were sort of guessing what leave was supposed to look like. I imagine that it varied wildly in voters minds. Some were voting for "the easiest trade deal ever and 350 million" . Some for an immigration free zone and sending people home - and most somewhere in between. All those fantasies now boil down to two different options. The EU deal or no deal. So we have three options. Those two or remain.

Only a remainer could think like that. I am talking about getting us in a situation where we tell the EU what we want. They have been asking for ages for that.

Nobody talked about sending people home or stopping immigration. Clearly the argument was about controlling immigration. Remember the debate about an Australian points system?

Murger · Post by **Murger** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:24 pm

Dynamite if there's owt in it.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:29 pm

Hahahahaha!

Dynamite if there is owt in it!

Yeah, wonder why this being made up now?

Johnson is in deep ****

Seriously, is there anything you won't believe?