Jeremy Corbyn

[stuartbert two hats]

1 minute ago, crazyfool1 said:

I just get more and more astounded by the day by this old man .... surely the labour party should do something about getting a new leader ... although like TM its a bit of a hiding to nothing  

Like with the Tories, the PLP ruined their chances of getting rid of him now by trying to remove him at the wrong time for the wrong reasons. It was interpreted by the membership and the wider left-leading country as being an attack of left-wing values rather than an attack on the man himself.  It's too late now, it's too hard for Corbyn's base to trust the motives of MPs attacking him for his Brexit policies when they found any excuse to attack him in the earlier attempts to unseat him.

[eFestivals]

7 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I'm not happy about it, but I can at least concede that the concessions he's demanding bring us closer to actually representing the views of the referendum - I.e. a reasonably soft Brexit.  From the Guardian:

but they don't, at all.

Unless you think people voted for brexit so that FoM was guaranteed to continue, and that the UK would continue to be a rule-taker of the EU but without any input? 

The Norway stuff gives none of either side what they want. In many ways its a worse option than no-deal (tho not economically of course).

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Like with the Tories, the PLP ruined their chances of getting rid of him now by trying to remove him at the wrong time for the wrong reasons. It was interpreted by the membership and the wider left-leading country as being an attack of left-wing values rather than an attack on the man himself.  It's too late now, it's too hard for Corbyn's base to trust the motives of MPs attacking him for his Brexit policies when they found any excuse to attack him in the earlier attempts to unseat him.

so we wait till after the next General election then ? when they get decimated and the tories have a chance to get themselves together , the tories can't get much worse and divided can they ?!

[bennyhana22]

4 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

The six tests were always unicorns - "exact same benefits" as the single market? What a load of guff.

I'm not happy about it, but I can at least concede that the concessions he's demanding bring us closer to actually representing the views of the referendum - I.e. a reasonably soft Brexit.  From the Guardian:

 

 

A Brexit with all of May's red lines never represented how close the referendum was and a "no deal" Brexit most certainly does not.  As much as I'd strongly prefer to simply stay or have a Norway style arrangement, if I'm honest neither of those really represent the views of the leavers.  Does something like the above actually come closest to representing what was actually campaigned on and how the vote came in?  Perhaps.

A total shitshow whatever happens, obvs.

You almost perfectly represent my current feelings/conflict on this, Stu.

I too would rather remain or Norway, but as time goes on and the ineptitude and duplicity of almost all the players continue to declare themselves (and I'm finding Corbyn the equal of any other guilty party here and am now terminally disenamoured of him, I'm afraid...), I find myself increasingly uncomfortable with the idea that the leavers' views might not be acknowledged. Regardless of the shitshow, as you rightly observe, we are democrats first and foremost, I hope.

Ben

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, bennyhana22 said:

I find myself increasingly uncomfortable with the idea that the leavers' views might not be acknowledged. Regardless of the shitshow, as you rightly observe, we are democrats first and foremost, I hope.

I'm with you here, but only up to a point.

What leavers voted for was never on offer. A deal where they needed us more than we needed them, that would be the easiest ever, and with countless upsides.

And when it comes to the real possibilities of how brexit might be done, none of them seem to be more popular than remaining.

Given that brexit was mis-sold, and the politicians can't even agree on which option we might take, the only sensible answer is more democracy by letting the people vote on those real options (via an ATV vote so there's a majority for the winner).

[stuartbert two hats]

1 minute ago, crazyfool1 said:

so we wait till after the next General election then ? when they get decimated and the tories have a chance to get themselves together , the tories can't get much worse and divided can they ?!

I've no idea. It's a really tough tactical position the PLP are in.  But I do know I still don't want a self-proclaimed "centerist" to swoop in and give us just more Blairism, even if that is vastly preferable to the Tories. It feels like in dropping the Brexit bomb, Cameron has managed to avert the chance of a proper left-wing attempt at Government for the first time in a generation (or two).  It makes me very sad how the whole thing has turned out.

1 minute ago, bennyhana22 said:

You almost perfectly represent my current feelings/conflict on this, Stu.

I too would rather remain or Norway, but as time goes on and the ineptitude and duplicity of almost all the players continue to declare themselves (and I'm finding Corbyn the equal of any other guilty party here and am now terminally disenamoured of him, I'm afraid...), I find myself increasingly uncomfortable with the idea that the leavers' views might not be acknowledged. Regardless of the shitshow, as you rightly observe, we are democrats first and foremost, I hope.

Ben

It's remarkable that this seems to be the first proposal that even looks like it might cover the actual views expressed in the referendum.  This was a bad situation handled badly by May and Corbyn.

[Wooderson]

9 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

but they don't, at all.

Unless you think people voted for brexit so that FoM was guaranteed to continue, and that the UK would continue to be a rule-taker of the EU but without any input? 

The Norway stuff gives none of either side what they want. In many ways its a worse option than no-deal (tho not economically of course).

Yes, this. Corbyn's idea of Brexit is laughable.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Cameron has managed to avert the chance of a proper left-wing attempt at Government for the first time in a generation (or two).

do you think?  

I reckon Corbyn wouldn't have got anywhere close to the tories at the last GE without the divide that is brexit (and of course, without brexit there wouldn't have been a shit tory leader),

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

It's remarkable that this seems to be the first proposal that even looks like it might cover the actual views expressed in the referendum.

how is BIINO without a say what people voted for? The remainers didn't and the leavers didn't.

It's the option furthest away from what voters voted for.

Edited February 7, 2019 by eFestivals

[Havors]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

do you think?  

I reckon Corbyn wouldn't have got anywhere close to the tories at the last GE without the divide that is brexit (and of course, without brexit there wouldn't have been a shit tory leader),

Not sure about that. Both parties campaigned on delivering Brexit... so in effect there may well have not been a brexit and the votes would have been split the same?? 

[Crazyfool01]

calling @jc2000  

[stuartbert two hats]

16 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

but they don't, at all.

Unless you think people voted for brexit so that FoM was guaranteed to continue, and that the UK would continue to be a rule-taker of the EU but without any input? 

The Norway stuff gives none of either side what they want. In many ways its a worse option than no-deal (tho not economically of course).

I may be misreading what the Guardian was reporting, but I don't see anything about FoM in those bullet points.  As I say, Norway definitely doesn't represent the views of the referendum - I think we agree on that?  Corbyn's latest proposal doesn't seem to be asking for FoM. 

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

do you think?  

I reckon Corbyn wouldn't have got anywhere close to the tories at the last GE without the divide that is brexit (and of course, without brexit there wouldn't have been a shit tory leader),

I do, the last GE was largely fought on grounds other than Brexit.  Although it's very true that Cameron would have run a much better campaign than May, so you may be right on that basis.

4 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

how is BIINO without a say what people voted for? The remainers didn't and the leavers didn't.

It's the option furthest away from what voters voted for.

Sorry, what's BIINO?

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, Havors said:

Not sure about that. Both parties campaigned on delivering Brexit... so in effect there may well have not been a brexit and the votes would have been split the same?? 

Nah. Labour were the *only* alternative to a tory brexit at the time. The extra votes were about that, along with UKIP becoming irrelevant in a country committed to brexit (Labour picked up around half the kippers, who could vote for a Labour party committed to brexit).

We can only speculate about how Corbyn might have done against the heir of Cameron (whoever that might have been), but given the continual lack of leadership from Corbyn over anything and everything I can't really see him doing as well as he did against May whn against someone (anyone) better than May.

[stuartbert two hats]

I love this debate.  It's the political equivalent of the Kobayashi Maru.

[eFestivals]

Just now, stuartbert two hats said:

I may be misreading what the Guardian was reporting, but I don't see anything about FoM in those bullet points. 

Starmer is publicly saying now that FoM would 'probably' be included as he can't see the EU doing "a" CU, only "the" CU.

It was always a crock of shit that they'd do "a" CU on Corbyn's stated terms.

 

Just now, stuartbert two hats said:

Corbyn's latest proposal doesn't seem to be asking for FoM. 

Corbyn doesn't do details.

 

Just now, stuartbert two hats said:

I do, the last GE was largely fought on grounds other than Brexit.  Although it's very true that Cameron would have run a much better campaign than May, so you may be right on that basis.

Grounds other than brexit? To an extent.

But without brexit in the mix there'd have been a strong UKIP, and reasons why Labour voters would have continued with or changed their vote for other parties (Green / libdem / etc).

 

Just now, stuartbert two hats said:

Sorry, what's BIINO?

Brexit In Name Only
(not sure why, in the media it often has another 'I').

[Havors]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Nah. Labour were the *only* alternative to a tory brexit at the time. The extra votes were about that, along with UKIP becoming irrelevant in a country committed to brexit (Labour picked up around half the kippers, who could vote for a Labour party committed to brexit).

We can only speculate about how Corbyn might have done against the heir of Cameron (whoever that might have been), but given the continual lack of leadership from Corbyn over anything and everything I can't really see him doing as well as he did against May whn against someone (anyone) better than May.

Disagree with the first part. Labour was not even a slight alternative to Tory Brexit.... they were still riding high on the massive influx of members and the much more socialist manifesto compared to previous Labour. (And the Corbyn cult). 

Agree with the current situation. Corbyn has painted himself into a corner and failed to capitalise on what they had gained. I would hate to predict the result of a GE right now... but I hazard a guess it would not end up with Labour in power without a coalition (which Corbyn probably wouldnt go for). 

[henry bear]

8 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I love this debate.  It's the political equivalent of the Kobayashi Maru.

 

[stuartbert two hats]

5 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Starmer is publicly saying now that FoM would 'probably' be included as he can't see the EU doing "a" CU, only "the" CU.

Ah, didn't see that.  Disregard anything else I've been saying then!

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Ah, didn't see that.  Disregard anything else I've been saying then!

what made you think the EU was offering the cake Corbyn was claiming, anyway?

The EU have made clear the whole way thru that there is no cake, and why would they give the UK a better deal than EU members get (they'd refused that to us as a member don't forget!)?

Edited February 7, 2019 by eFestivals

[stuartbert two hats]

11 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

what made you think the EU was offering the cake Corbyn was claiming, anyway?

The EU have made clear the whole way thru that there is no cake, and why would they give the UK a better deal than EU members get (they'd refused that to us as a member don't forget!)?

This was the story that led me astray:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/26/juncker-may-backstop-eu-customs-union

Juncker proposing a customs union for the UK without mentioning FoM.  I freely admit I'm finding the whole thing confusing still.  I initially thought we couldn't have a customs union or membership of the single market without FoM, but this story (and lack of noticing any pushback on Labour's long standing CU position) made me think that FoM was only contingent on the Single Market, not the/a customs union.

Was I right in the first place, or is there something else I've been missing all along?

[eFestivals]

29 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Was I right in the first place, or is there something else I've been missing all along?

hmm, perhaps you were. I'm getting muddled over what's what now.  

I think I might be right in saying a CU (by itself) doesn't address the NI border issues in full, as that's something I've often seen said.

For instance: Turkey is in a CU with the EU, but still operates a customs border with the EU.

[caleb]

I think there's a bit of confusion going on about whether Corbyn is proposing joining the EU Customs Union or to have a customs union with the EU, something like Turkey does. I was assuming the latter. The EU/Turkey doesn't have FoM but does have a CU. The EU/Turkey CU covers some things but not everything (e.g. services) and is credited for a lot of Turkey's growth.

I often read these forums (who are the bloody Headliners??) but rarely post but I was confused myself with this until recently and I think many politicians are either confused or deliberately misleading. To be clear, I'm a strong remainer and rely on brilliant minds from across the EU (people from France, Italy, Germany are in my team at present) so I'm quite heartbroken by the decision.

BTW, with 70% of labour constituencies voting to Leave, it would be electoral suicide for Labour to come out as remain and, worse still, it would give the Tories something to unite against.

[caleb]

Ah, just seen Efestivals has qualified the CU thing just before I finished writing my post!

[bennyhana22]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

I'm with you here, but only up to a point.

What leavers voted for was never on offer. A deal where they needed us more than we needed them, that would be the easiest ever, and with countless upsides.

And when it comes to the real possibilities of how brexit might be done, none of them seem to be more popular than remaining.

Given that brexit was mis-sold, and the politicians can't even agree on which option we might take, the only sensible answer is more democracy by letting the people vote on those real options (via an ATV vote so there's a majority for the winner).

And whilst I obviously agree with you regarding the mis-selling, I have listened to so much stuff on the radio over the past two years, from commentators, politicians and voters alike, to feel that they really must have 'a voice' in the denouement of this shambles.

ATV is clearly the logical option, but I'm not in any way optimistic we'll get it.

Ben

[eFestivals]

8 minutes ago, bennyhana22 said:

I'm not in any way optimistic we'll get it.

as Tusk pointed out recently (yesterday?) there's not the political leadership for another vote. Without that it doesn't appear to have much chance.

Then again, I'm not sure there's a majority to be had in the HoC for any of the possible options, so there's still the chance we'll get there by default.

Edited February 7, 2019 by eFestivals