Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: BillyStubbsTears on September 26, 2018, 01:41:35 pm
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-45653499/page/2
Lords knows I've had my own criticisms of him but that speech sounds like a PM in waiting.
He hit the nail on the head on every topic. It is time for a change.
-
Actually, there IS one thing to take issue with him on.
https://mobile.twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1044930126948040710
-
Certainly
Was a confident speech bst
-
https://youtu.be/M92QzPjgbag
As with all politicians
-
Do you think he has done enough to change people's opinion of him bst, while he was very confident some of the things like 400k new skilled jobs are questionable and the nurseries now are complaining there is not enough money for the free child places, so to make more and up the wage by 2 pound a hour would need a massive load of cash?
They literally had a fully costed manifesto. This has been pointed out to you in the past.
-
Just watched if, bang on the money, bring it on!
-
Nothing new really. Like him you'll like it, if you don't you won't. He spoke well though, much better than he was.
Didn't like the cheers at carillions liquidation though, little bit out of order that for the many workers who lost alot.
-
Easy to make the promises.
More difficult to make them happen though.
-
I for one hopes he never becomes Prime Minister,to much of a yes man
-
I for one hopes he never becomes Prime Minister,to much of a yes man
Possibly the most ridiculous statement ever written on here. If anything I'd argue to the complete contrary and that if he wants to be Prime Minister then he needs to back down on a few of his principles including Brexit which is why Labour don't have my vote at present.
-
I for one hopes he never becomes Prime Minister,to much of a yes man
Possibly the most ridiculous statement ever written on here. If anything I'd argue to the complete contrary and that if he wants to be Prime Minister then he needs to back down on a few of his principles including Brexit which is why Labour don't have my vote at present.
Well in my view, Corbyn caving in to the anti-Brexit brigade (largely about telling half of the country to eff-off) would end any chance of him becoming Prime Minister.
Thankfully he's not that daft. There's a window of opportunity to change the country opening up here.
-
I have my views,you have yours
-
I for one hopes he never becomes Prime Minister,to much of a yes man
Possibly the most ridiculous statement ever written on here. If anything I'd argue to the complete contrary and that if he wants to be Prime Minister then he needs to back down on a few of his principles including Brexit which is why Labour don't have my vote at present.
Well in my view, Corbyn caving in to the anti-Brexit brigade (largely about telling half of the country to eff-off) would end any chance of him becoming Prime Minister.
Thankfully he's not that daft. There's a window of opportunity to change the country opening up here.
Strange I never got that impression from the speech . Fact is , it's not about ignoring half of the country's citizens whichever way he goes - it has to be what's best for the best for the country. Let's face it 13,000,000 people didn't even vote at all - the majority of whom probably thought tjheir vote wasn't necessary to keep the status quo. I don't care who has to sacrifice their principles/ red lines as long as any deal reached or avoided is the best for our country.
Some would treat this like an fa cup final - it's far more important to us than that !
Anyway it was a good speech, I don't necessarily agree with all or most of the content however Socialists should be happy that their Party seems to be marching in tune again if only temporarily.
Appears that we have an Opposition again but we still have Brexiters who think it's the ONLY thing that matters !
-
Apparently Labour has a brexit shadow minister...Who knew??,any chance of him giving us Labours full brexit plan anytime soon,one which is acceptable to both the EU and doesn't shaft the people they want to represent rather than just slamming the Tory's..Thats the Uk by the way and not Palestine,although you wouldn't know it judging by the hundreds of Palestinian flags the party members were waving in the conference hall....
Always been in the minority of this issue as it's Donny but if Comrade Corbyn and Mcluskey get anywhere near power it will be a sad day...I'll pop my tin hat on now...lol
-
WC
Labour's shadow Brexit Secretary has been carefully and rationally making Labour's case for months. You might not have been looking but that doesn't mean it's not been happening. He's pulled Corbyn kicking and screaming to a more sensible position than it looked like being a year ago.
It's far more than bashing the Tories. There's a whole set of proposals and principles set out.
But can you blame them for making political capital? There was only ever one driver of the Referendum and the ridiculous interpretation that May put in the result. Sorting out who controls the Tory party. That has brought us to the edge of economic disaster. Labour would be folks not to remind everyone of that, every day.
-
I for one hopes he never becomes Prime Minister,to much of a yes man
Possibly the most ridiculous statement ever written on here. If anything I'd argue to the complete contrary and that if he wants to be Prime Minister then he needs to back down on a few of his principles including Brexit which is why Labour don't have my vote at present.
Well in my view, Corbyn caving in to the anti-Brexit brigade (largely about telling half of the country to eff-off) would end any chance of him becoming Prime Minister.
Thankfully he's not that daft. There's a window of opportunity to change the country opening up here.
Strange I never got that impression from the speech . Fact is , it's not about ignoring half of the country's citizens whichever way he goes - it has to be what's best for the best for the country. Let's face it 13,000,000 people didn't even vote at all - the majority of whom probably thought tjheir vote wasn't necessary to keep the status quo. I don't care who has to sacrifice their principles/ red lines as long as any deal reached or avoided is the best for our country.
Some would treat this like an fa cup final - it's far more important to us than that !
Anyway it was a good speech, I don't necessarily agree with all or most of the content however Socialists should be happy that their Party seems to be marching in tune again if only temporarily.
Appears that we have an Opposition again but we still have Brexiters who think it's the ONLY thing that matters !
There are a fair number of people in Labour who want Corbyn and the party to oppose Brexit. He hasn't, and has tried to steer the party away from doing so, including in his latest conference speech. Correctly in my view, if he wants to win an election.
Sorry if you got the wrong end of the stick.
-
Not "a fair number". 81% of members in a recent poll.
Strange. Corbynism is supposed to be about putting power in the hands of the members. Except when the members want something that Corbyn has spent his life opposing for ideological reasons.
-
I for one hopes he never becomes Prime Minister,to much of a yes man
Possibly the most ridiculous statement ever written on here. If anything I'd argue to the complete contrary and that if he wants to be Prime Minister then he needs to back down on a few of his principles including Brexit which is why Labour don't have my vote at present.
Well in my view, Corbyn caving in to the anti-Brexit brigade (largely about telling half of the country to eff-off) would end any chance of him becoming Prime Minister.
Thankfully he's not that daft. There's a window of opportunity to change the country opening up here.
Strange I never got that impression from the speech . Fact is , it's not about ignoring half of the country's citizens whichever way he goes - it has to be what's best for the best for the country. Let's face it 13,000,000 people didn't even vote at all - the majority of whom probably thought tjheir vote wasn't necessary to keep the status quo. I don't care who has to sacrifice their principles/ red lines as long as any deal reached or avoided is the best for our country.
Some would treat this like an fa cup final - it's far more important to us than that !
Anyway it was a good speech, I don't necessarily agree with all or most of the content however Socialists should be happy that their Party seems to be marching in tune again if only temporarily.
Appears that we have an Opposition again but we still have Brexiters who think it's the ONLY thing that matters !
There are a fair number of people in Labour who want Corbyn and the party to oppose Brexit. He hasn't, and has tried to steer the party away from doing so, including in his latest conference speech. Correctly in my view, if he wants to win an election.
Sorry if you got the wrong end of the stick.
I'm not sure in what way I have got the wrong end of the stick . Basically I have said it was a good speech but I don't care for all the content - I merely said that we want the best for the country regardless of artificial red lines imposed by the PM or Brexiters/Remainers who have read certain things from a binary vote.
To summarise I want the best for the country and want pragmatism and good sense to win the day - which part of that was getting the " wrong end of the stick " - incidentally I did watch the whole speech as I have from all the leading front bench speakers ?
-
Not "a fair number". 81% of members in a recent poll.
Strange. Corbynism is supposed to be about putting power in the hands of the members. Except when the members want something that Corbyn has spent his life opposing for ideological reasons.
If it's the poll I think you're referring to then I'd say that there's a big difference between:
A) a party member personally 'supporting a vote on the outcome of Brexit negotiations'.
B) wanting the party and its leadership to oppose Brexit.
-
I for one hopes he never becomes Prime Minister,to much of a yes man
Possibly the most ridiculous statement ever written on here. If anything I'd argue to the complete contrary and that if he wants to be Prime Minister then he needs to back down on a few of his principles including Brexit which is why Labour don't have my vote at present.
Well in my view, Corbyn caving in to the anti-Brexit brigade (largely about telling half of the country to eff-off) would end any chance of him becoming Prime Minister.
Thankfully he's not that daft. There's a window of opportunity to change the country opening up here.
Strange I never got that impression from the speech . Fact is , it's not about ignoring half of the country's citizens whichever way he goes - it has to be what's best for the best for the country. Let's face it 13,000,000 people didn't even vote at all - the majority of whom probably thought tjheir vote wasn't necessary to keep the status quo. I don't care who has to sacrifice their principles/ red lines as long as any deal reached or avoided is the best for our country.
Some would treat this like an fa cup final - it's far more important to us than that !
Anyway it was a good speech, I don't necessarily agree with all or most of the content however Socialists should be happy that their Party seems to be marching in tune again if only temporarily.
Appears that we have an Opposition again but we still have Brexiters who think it's the ONLY thing that matters !
There are a fair number of people in Labour who want Corbyn and the party to oppose Brexit. He hasn't, and has tried to steer the party away from doing so, including in his latest conference speech. Correctly in my view, if he wants to win an election.
Sorry if you got the wrong end of the stick.
I'm not sure in what way I have got the wrong end of the stick . Basically I have said it was a good speech but I don't care for all the content - I merely said that we want the best for the country regardless of artificial red lines imposed by the PM or Brexiters/Remainers who have read certain things from a binary vote.
To summarise I want the best for the country and want pragmatism and good sense to win the day - which part of that was getting the " wrong end of the stick " - incidentally I did watch the whole speech as I have from all the leading front bench speakers ?
I thought your post was based on the impression of me seeing Corbyn as neglecting half of the electorate in his speech?
Am I being thick? Quite possibly.
-
But.
But.
But.
Corbynistas always tell us that we should put what the membership wants above grubby stuff like trying to be electable.
It's bizarre that this is the one policy on which the party membership is ignored. And on which, the leadership has manoeuvred for 2 years to prevent a substantive vote at Conference.
So. Is the membership really in charge of the party? Or is it Corbyn's version of The Will of the People? Trotted out when it is convenient.
-
I got the numbers wrong by the way.
86% of the members say they would back a second referendum.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/22/corbyn-under-pressure-from-labour-members-over-brexit
You can twist and turn all you want, trying to second guess what they mean by that. The fact is, the members want a second referendum. So why would they Corbyn give them one?
-
I for one hopes he never becomes Prime Minister,to much of a yes man
Possibly the most ridiculous statement ever written on here. If anything I'd argue to the complete contrary and that if he wants to be Prime Minister then he needs to back down on a few of his principles including Brexit which is why Labour don't have my vote at present.
Well in my view, Corbyn caving in to the anti-Brexit brigade (largely about telling half of the country to eff-off) would end any chance of him becoming Prime Minister.
Thankfully he's not that daft. There's a window of opportunity to change the country opening up here.
Strange I never got that impression from the speech . Fact is , it's not about ignoring half of the country's citizens whichever way he goes - it has to be what's best for the best for the country. Let's face it 13,000,000 people didn't even vote at all - the majority of whom probably thought tjheir vote wasn't necessary to keep the status quo. I don't care who has to sacrifice their principles/ red lines as long as any deal reached or avoided is the best for our country.
Some would treat this like an fa cup final - it's far more important to us than that !
Anyway it was a good speech, I don't necessarily agree with all or most of the content however Socialists should be happy that their Party seems to be marching in tune again if only temporarily.
Appears that we have an Opposition again but we still have Brexiters who think it's the ONLY thing that matters !
There are a fair number of people in Labour who want Corbyn and the party to oppose Brexit. He hasn't, and has tried to steer the party away from doing so, including in his latest conference speech. Correctly in my view, if he wants to win an election.
Sorry if you got the wrong end of the stick.
I'm not sure in what way I have got the wrong end of the stick . Basically I have said it was a good speech but I don't care for all the content - I merely said that we want the best for the country regardless of artificial red lines imposed by the PM or Brexiters/Remainers who have read certain things from a binary vote.
To summarise I want the best for the country and want pragmatism and good sense to win the day - which part of that was getting the " wrong end of the stick " - incidentally I did watch the whole speech as I have from all the leading front bench speakers ?
I thought your post was based on the impression of me seeing Corbyn as neglecting half of the electorate in his speech?
Am I being thick? Quite possibly.
Hmm I'm not sure whether we are at cross- purposes here , perhaps I'm not quite sure from your post which half of the population you feel has his support or up to now has felt neglected seems he's walking a tight- rope too . My point irrespective of all this is that Corbyn/ May and the HofC need to stop thinking of Brexit in a partisan manner - it should be about 100 % of the nation now and going forward NOT the 35/ 37 / 25 % and myriad other calcuable %s of the population holding different viewpoints. This is now about all of us not just those that " think " they won.
It should no longer be about the ' will ' of the people for, as we know, that can mean countless things - time for real politicians to look at all of this in the round and take this forward without all the meaningless sound bites. Time for journalists to step up and call them out , the public must be tired of every answer prefaced with " when/as we leave..." , " Brexit means Brexit ", " it's the will of the people " , " 17.4 million " , " the biggest vote in our history " etc etc
Ffs stop them doing it , call them out when they constantly use the platitude of the day to fill the gaps in their knowledge, the fact they can't find positives/ negatives that the whole of the public can now see as all too obvious . Politicians are getting away with bluffing aided and abetted by the same level of ' piss poor ' journalism.
-
Not "a fair number". 81% of members in a recent poll.
Strange. Corbynism is supposed to be about putting power in the hands of the members. Except when the members want something that Corbyn has spent his life opposing for ideological reasons.
And that, thank god, is the reason why corbyns crypto communist new labour will never get into number 10.
The nu labour members are simply not representative of the electorate, even in the nu labour heartlands.
-
Not "a fair number". 81% of members in a recent poll.
Strange. Corbynism is supposed to be about putting power in the hands of the members. Except when the members want something that Corbyn has spent his life opposing for ideological reasons.
And that, thank god, is the reason why corbyns crypto communist new labour will never get into number 10.
The nu labour members are simply not representative of the electorate, even in the nu labour heartlands.
They are very much akin to Hitler's Brown shirts, anti Semitic and like to revert to abuse and violent behaviour when some one says something they don't like. And WTF are the Palestinian flags about.
We'll be seeing Irish flags and boys and girls in black berets and face covering balaclavas next!
-
:laugh:
It's stunts like that palastinian flag thing that makes people's minds up whether to vote for them or not.
They are unelectable
-
:laugh:
It's stunts like that palastinian flag thing that makes people's minds up whether to vote for them or not.
They are unelectable
As my dear old sainted Mum used to say "A Leopard cannot change its spots"
Corbyn has had 30/40 years to sort himself out and he still thinks he can spout his anti Semitic beliefs, and wholesale support for Proscribed organisations in his current role?
-
(https://www.telesurtv.net/__export/1470196246138/sites/telesur/img/news/2016/08/02/jezza-aparted.jpg_1718483346.jpg) Yeah, look at this racist shitbag!
Also you do know that Hitler's gang and the Communists didn't really get on, so you may want to make your mind up whether he's a Nazi or a Communist.
-
:laugh:
It's stunts like that palastinian flag thing that makes people's minds up whether to vote for them or not.
They are unelectable
As my dear old sainted Mum used to say "A Leopard cannot change its spots"
Corbyn has had 30/40 years to sort himself out and he still thinks he can spout his anti Semitic beliefs, and wholesale support for Proscribed organisations in his current role?
What is wrong about calling out Isreal on their persecution of the Palestinian people and their illegal occupation of Palestinian lands?
-
:laugh:
It's stunts like that palastinian flag thing that makes people's minds up whether to vote for them or not.
They are unelectable
As my dear old sainted Mum used to say "A Leopard cannot change its spots"
Corbyn has had 30/40 years to sort himself out and he still thinks he can spout his anti Semitic beliefs, and wholesale support for Proscribed organisations in his current role?
What is wrong about calling out Isreal on their persecution of the Palestinian people and their illegal occupation of Palestinian lands?
There is nothing wrong with it, I specifically refereed to his open support for proscribed organisations, The IRA , Hezbullah et al ,it's something I wouldn't want to see in a leader of out great country.
-
But.
But.
But.
Corbynistas always tell us that we should put what the membership wants above grubby stuff like trying to be electable.
It's bizarre that this is the one policy on which the party membership is ignored. And on which, the leadership has manoeuvred for 2 years to prevent a substantive vote at Conference.
So. Is the membership really in charge of the party? Or is it Corbyn's version of The Will of the People? Trotted out when it is convenient.
I couldn't give two hoots what 'Corbynistas' supposedly say. It's not relevant to my own point that I don't think Corbyn and Labour should oppose Brexit.
I'll tell you what I find equally bizarre. It's those who have spent the previous three years moaning how the decisions taken by the membership are making the party unelectable, yet now conveniently call for the members to have a say on this one issue in particular. Even if - you guessed it - it makes the party unelectable. It's just two cheeks of the same arse.
-
I got the numbers wrong by the way.
86% of the members say they would back a second referendum.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/22/corbyn-under-pressure-from-labour-members-over-brexit
You can twist and turn all you want, trying to second guess what they mean by that. The fact is, the members want a second referendum. So why would they Corbyn give them one?
The only one twisting here is you I'm afraid.
You initially claimed that 80-odd percent of party members want the party to oppose Brexit, which is simply incorrect. You then changed your argument from 'opposing Brexit' to 'wanting a second referendum' - the poll in question is actually worded as 'a public vote on the Brexit outcome' which is slightly different still, but never-mind.
Whichever way you look at it, wanting your party to oppose Brexit is not the same as indicating personal support for 'a public vote on the Brexit outcome'. Not even close.
Anyhow, all of this does highlight an interesting but worrying dissonance between people within the Labour party and those it seeks to represent. And that's not a Corbyn thing, it's been growing a problem with the left in general for years.
-
:laugh:
It's stunts like that palastinian flag thing that makes people's minds up whether to vote for them or not.
They are unelectable
As my dear old sainted Mum used to say "A Leopard cannot change its spots"
Corbyn has had 30/40 years to sort himself out and he still thinks he can spout his anti Semitic beliefs, and wholesale support for Proscribed organisations in his current role?
What is wrong about calling out Isreal on their persecution of the Palestinian people and their illegal occupation of Palestinian lands?
There is nothing wrong with it, I specifically refereed to his open support for proscribed organisations, The IRA , Hezbullah et al ,it's something I wouldn't want to see in a leader of out great country.
He didn't support the IRA, he was in conversation with them to get their issues resolved and stop the violence. That's usually how wars stop...
-
That's how Wars stop!!!. If Corbyn becomes PM there is every possibility of the UK being dragged into a war that is totally not in our interest,his support of Hezzbullah and other extremist organisations in the Middle East will lead to the UK losing any credibility we had with the Us and Europe,
We already have a crackpot in charge over the Pond, what is going to happen when those 2 go head to head?
The stayers keep ranting and Raving about the UK losing a Trillion £ in a decade .I can see us losing a Trillion £ in three years.
He will fall out with our Defence chiefs, he will fall out with our defence industry, he will fall out with the Criminal Justice system, he will fall out with the Police.( An enquiry into Orgreave will no doubt go down well)
There will be left wing/right wing, pro terrorist marches on a weekly basis and what is left of the Police force will wipe their hands of it all.
(By the way that has already started under this Tory regime) the increase in knife attacks and knife carrying coincides with a 24% fall in complaints against SYP that is due to Police officers being 'Risk averse' and the fact that most Police Foces have lost 30 % of the staff they had in 2010.
-
Akinfenwa
Yes, you're right. I conflated wishing for a second referendum with your comment about opposing Brexit. That was a mistake.
Let's put it this way then. There is very strong circumstantial evidence that a large majority of members would wish the party to actively oppose Brexit. We don't actually know that, because the leadership has manoeuvred to make sure it doesn't come up at Conference.
Corbyn, Bennite that he is, has spent his entire career preaching that the members' wishes should direct Labour policy. That's a principled stance. It's one I disagree with but it's a principled stance.
The point is that, on this issue, Corbyn has consistently manoeuvred to STOP the members having a say on policy.
You say you think that's right, for electoral reasons.
Grand. So the idea that the members' wishes are sovereign is not out of the window and can be ignored the next time someone brings it up. If they DO try to argue from that stance, they are being knowingly hypocritical.
Back to politics as normal.
-
Well looks like Mrs May just about summed the opposition up today...unelectable.
Labour voters with more than 2 Ameoba in between their ears will have got the message, he gets in and within 6 to 12 months all of the sensible Labour MP's will have been marginalised and then bullied out of office by THE 'PARTY' MEMBERS. To be replaced but Goons from the Far
left and Momentum.
-
Well looks like Mrs May just about summed the opposition up today...unelectable.
Labour voters with more than 2 Ameoba in between their ears will have got the message, he gets in and within 6 to 12 months all of the sensible Labour MP's will have been marginalised and then bullied out of office by THE 'PARTY' MEMBERS. To be replaced but Goons from the Far
left and Momentum.
Mrs May had nothing to say about the Country's current situation, she just slagged Corbyn off all the time, a sure sign she's running scared, and what a t**t she looked coming on stage, was she trying to stamp on a spider or something?
-
Well looks like Mrs May just about summed the opposition up today...unelectable.
Labour voters with more than 2 Ameoba in between their ears will have got the message, he gets in and within 6 to 12 months all of the sensible Labour MP's will have been marginalised and then bullied out of office by THE 'PARTY' MEMBERS. To be replaced but Goons from the Far
left and Momentum.
Mrs May had nothing to say about the Country's current situation, she just slagged Corbyn off all the time, a sure sign she's running scared, and what a t**t she looked coming on stage, was she trying to stamp on a spider or something?
Did she really spend 55 minutes attacking Corbyn?
-
So she now says Austerity has ended. Kind of shows it was always about the politics and never about the economics.
The economic argument for EVER having had Austerity was destroyed years ago. It has been the worst and most destructive economic policy of the past 80 years and we have endured a lost decade of economic underperformance and stagnating wages as a result. And the national debt has taken twice as long as planned to bring under control, precisely because of this underperformance. All exactly as the sensible economists were predicting 9 years ago. It's been an absolute calamity.
And now Labour are setting the economic agenda, suddenly May decides Austerity is done. Because it was never about the economics. It was about politics. The Tories APPEARING to be sensible and prudent, and winning the political argument. The moment it starts to be unpopular, they drop it.
Charlatans, cheats and spivs, the f**king lot of them. And we're all far poorer as a result.
-
This is what Austerity has done for us by the way.
https://d3fy651gv2fhd3.cloudfront.net/charts/united-kingdom-gdp-per-capita@3x.png?s=gbrnygdppcapkd&v=201807061645x&d1=19180101&d2=20181231
The worst recovery from a recession for over 200 years. We're now about $10k PER YEAR, PER HEAD poorer now than we would have been if we'd recovered from the last recession and got back onto our post-War trend of economic growth. And we knew EXACTLY how to do that. But we chose to go for the Voodoo Economics of Austerity instead. For political reasons.
And these t**ts claim that as a success.
-
Great darts walk on though 😂😂😂😂
-
Sproty
How can you continue to support what is the worst government in my lifetime.
They have complety messed up everything for the past 8 years. That idiot Osborne and his ridiculous fiscal policies ably supported by Call me Dave (who by the way Tory supporting Jeremy Paxman rates as the worst ever PM)
Cameron only called the referendum to attempt to heal rifts in the party and both of them jumped ship when the result went against them. May has fudged and stumbled through the negotiations with the same aim, with the good of the country a secondary issue.
They are a complete and utter disgrace and should be out ASAP.
I don't care who replaces them. The Monster raving loonies would probably have done a better job.
-
TT
There's no question that the last 8 years have seen the most bone-headedly idiotic economic policy since the 1920s.
We've known since then that the single most stupid economic thing a Govt can do is to rein in spending when private business confidence is low. But that's precisely what they did. And we will all be A LOT poorer now for the rest of our lives as a result. It is a national tragedy of historic proportions.
And somehow, they are able to claim that they have been a resounding success.
-
TT
There's no question that the last 8 years have seen the most bone-headedly idiotic economic policy since the 1920s.
We've known since then that the single most stupid economic thing a Govt can do is to rein in spending when private business confidence is low. But that's precisely what they did. And we will all be A LOT poorer now for the rest of our lives as a result. It is a national tragedy of historic proportions.
And somehow, they are able to claim that they have been a resounding success.
Its like the old one they had on repeat that Labour caused the global financial crisis, say it often enough and people start believing ot
-
Some people have very short memories. The last Labour government was overly excessive at spending the voters hard earned Money.
Gordon Brown's plllaging tax raids on the once excellent Private retirement funds and to cap it all he showed his complete financial buffoonery with the sale of the nations gold reserves.
I haven't got any stocks and shares but I can't see how stealing 10% of every companies shares will encourage free enterprise.
As for the current Labour Party the 'Idiots are running the Asylum.
-
To be fair to Osborne, he was a genius politician. A f**king catastrophe as a Chancellor, but in coining the term Deficit Denier he won the Tories ten years in power.
His idea of Austerity was founded on two influential research papers by American right-wing economists. Both papers have been shredded by subsequent research.
One said that by cutting Govt spending, you could get economic growth. There was no sensible theory behind that and subsequent research has out that idea in the dustbin.
The other said that if Govt debt got above 90% of GDP, economic growth collapsed. Osborne quoted that as a reason for cutting Govt spending when they came to power in 2010. But it turned out (and I shit you not) that the American profs who had done that research had entered an incorrect formula in their Excel spreadsheet. When it was corrected, there was no link between debt and growth.
In the meantime, we cut investment in housing, schools, hospitals, rail projects, broadband infrastructure. We saw productivity flatline for the first time since the War. Wages stagnate. High quality jobs evaporate. Just like the economists who knew their shit predicted.
Osbourne claimed he would eliminate the deficit by 2015. The current predictions are that it will not be eliminated before 2025. Because we're not earning enough to do so. Because that f**king spiv cut investment exactly when it was needed, and we're all poorer as a result.
This bunch of ignorant con men don't even understand the Capitalism they claim to represent. It'll be a blessing for us all when they are chucked in the dustbin of history. And the irony is that a Marxist Chancellor will replace them, who actually DOES understand how the Capitalist economy works.
-
Sproty.
You haven't got a clue. Not a clue. You're spouting nonsense about Labour spending, and the gold reserves issue is dwarfed a hundred times over by what we have lost through Austerity. Finally, the issue with pensions is that the Stock Market has stagnated for nearly 20 years.
-
For someone that is so unelectable, the Tories spent over half of their conference attacking Corbyn.
On the economy, I think it is time for a real debate about what constitutes a 'strong' economy. We keep hearing that the country has the 6th largest economy and now (thanks to 'austerity') less than 2% budget deficit.
But even on a basic level, what's the point in having such a strong economy where food bank usage is through the roof, record levels of rough sleepers and record levels of children living in poverty?
-
Some people have very short memories. The last Labour government was overly excessive at spending the voters hard earned Money.
Gordon Brown's plllaging tax raids on the once excellent Private retirement funds and to cap it all he showed his complete financial buffoonery with the sale of the nations gold reserves.
I haven't got any stocks and shares but I can't see how stealing 10% of every companies shares will encourage free enterprise.
As for the current Labour Party the 'Idiots are running the Asylum.
Ah yes, the complete financial buffoonery that reduced the National Debt by 10% of GDP from 40% to 30% until the banks went tits up.
-
Which party had been in power for a decade when the Banks went tits up Glyn? Maybe they were complicit! Did you watch the HSBC documentary the other night?
-
Ah, so Gordon Brown was responsible for the sub prime mortgage scandal in the US which set the dominoes falling.
Clever bloke old Gordon.
-
Which party had been in power for a decade when the Banks went tits up Glyn? Maybe they were complicit! Did you watch the HSBC documentary the other night?
'Maybe' it all happened due to events in America, far away from where even UK government complicity can stretch. You know, like history says it did.
-
Ah, so Gordon Brown was responsible for the sub prime mortgage scandal in the US which set the dominoes falling.
Clever bloke old Gordon.
He reaped all the praise and rewards leading up to 2008, whilst claiming an end to boom and bust.
When the crash happened, it was on his watch, and he was quick as a flash saying it was a global crisis, and deflecting any responsibility.
If you claim praise in the good years, you can't shirk responsibility when it goes wrong.
-
Ah, so Gordon Brown was responsible for the sub prime mortgage scandal in the US which set the dominoes falling.
Clever bloke old Gordon.
He reaped all the praise and rewards leading up to 2008, whilst claiming an end to boom and bust.
When the crash happened, it was on his watch, and he was quick as a flash saying it was a global crisis, and deflecting any responsibility.
If you claim praise in the good years, you can't shirk responsibility when it goes wrong.
It WAS a global crisis though...
-
That rabid Tory Isobel Oakshott came up with that old chestnut on QT last night inferring the crash was Labour's fault, which got a big round of applause.
Backs up Filo's point that if you lie about summat often enough it becomes a fact.
-
That rabid Tory Isobel Oakshott came up with that old chestnut on QT last night inferring the crash was Labour's fault, which got a big round of applause.
Backs up Filo's point that if you lie about summat often enough it becomes a fact.
.... AND if you say the words "strong and stable Government" about a billion times it still does not work and you look a d******d (if that is possible for a Woman) when you lose your Majority - but no matter you can still go on to make mugs of the rest of the people propped up by 10 people in NI with just 293000 votes having elected them
I hate Politics more and more by the day
-
Ah, so Gordon Brown was responsible for the sub prime mortgage scandal in the US which set the dominoes falling.
Clever bloke old Gordon.
He reaped all the praise and rewards leading up to 2008, whilst claiming an end to boom and bust.
When the crash happened, it was on his watch, and he was quick as a flash saying it was a global crisis, and deflecting any responsibility.
If you claim praise in the good years, you can't shirk responsibility when it goes wrong.
Gordon Browns plan to tackle the GLOBAL CRISIS was acclaimed world wide as the sensible way to tackle it, it was used as a blueprint for all the other major econmy’s around the world
-
Boomstick
If you live near a river that has flooded many times and you spend time and effort protecting your house from flooding, then it gets hit by a meteorite, were you wrong to be proud of the work you had done on the flood protection?
The Boom and Bust that Brown referred to was the disastrous way in which our economy had been run since the War. Lower interest rates too far because it's politically attractive.
Encourage over-exuberant business activity as a result.
See that translate to rising inflation.
Raise interest rates drastically to dampen business activity and reduce inflation.
See unemployment rise.
Reduce interest rates to encourage business to grow again.
THAT was the boom and bust cycle that we'd had since the War. That was why we typically had a mad boom followed by a sharp slowdown on about a 5-8 year cycle.
We didn't have that under the Chancellorships of Ken Clarke and Gordon Brown. While the rest of the word was still seeing boom and bust, we had 16 years of boring stability.
The crash in 2008 was of a totally different form. Nothing to do with runaway business exuberance. Everything to do with banks engaging in (what we now see with hindsight as) utterly insane lending policies.
Brown didn't see that coming. Nor did anyone else.
-
I have to disagree with your final comment there, BST.
Quite a few people saw it coming, and positioned themselves to benefit from the crash.
Not only in the City, but in government too some saw the writing on the wall, but were too in awe of their own propaganda to act early enough to mitigate.
Basically, to do so would fly in the face of the policy prescription which allowed the situation to develop. Loss of face counts highly with the selective memory set.
If you can bank on a bail out under the "too big to fail" clause, then the opportunity to seize private profit, before socialising the consequences, seems like good business to a particular sociopathic mindset.
The worst is that it will all happen again. The same game is still in play.
-
I beg to differ Albie. Plenty of people CLAIM that they saw it coming. But at the time, no one even understood how the shadow banking system worked, how it was enabling huge existential risks to be taken, and what the consequences would be of a loss in confidence in the quality of its assets.
Once the crash did happen, we really were staring a major catastrophe in the face. There are many people today, in the comfortable position of knowing they never had to make the decision, who claim that we should have let banks fail. Had we dine that, we'd have been living in caves and eating rats in 2009.
-
Let’s be realistic, neither main party is fit to govern
-
Let’s be realistic, neither main party is fit to govern
Agread
-
On economic matters, Labour's policies are bang in the mainstream of established economic theory. They are sensible and well supported by evidence.
The Tories' economic policies have been a f**king car crash for a decade. The Right used to have a strong body of economic theory to support its policies. Now it's all Voodoo and smoke & mirrors. They don't even understand how capitalism is supposed to work.
There really is no competition between the parties on the economics. Labour wins hands down. Some of the smarter Tories know that and they are shitting it.
Whether Labour's approach to foreign policy stops them ever getting into power is a different issue.
-
On economic matters, Labour's policies are bang in the mainstream of established economic theory. They are sensible and well supported by evidence.
The Tories' economic policies have been a f**king car crash for a decade. The Right used to have a strong body of economic theory to support its policies. Now it's all Voodoo and smoke & mirrors. They don't even understand how capitalism is supposed to work.
There really is no competition between the parties on the economics. Labour wins hands down. Some of the smarter Tories know that and they are shitting it.
Whether Labour's approach to foreign policy stops them ever getting into power is a different issue.
Ok, I'll bite.
Which of the smarter Tories know it and are shitting it ? Do you have any evidence to back up your statement ?
-
In a risk of slipping over onto a different forum topic I thought this poll that came out yesterday was fascinating:
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1048223569883410432
2/3rds of people who voted leave in 2016 would vote tory in the next GE. Less than 1/5th would vote Labour.
That's your next election campaign there. How can Labour appeal to leave voters? Will those Tory voters desert the party if their idea of Brexit doesn't match with what it actually turns out to be?
-
On economic matters, Labour's policies are bang in the mainstream of established economic theory. They are sensible and well supported by evidence.
The Tories' economic policies have been a f**king car crash for a decade. The Right used to have a strong body of economic theory to support its policies. Now it's all Voodoo and smoke & mirrors. They don't even understand how capitalism is supposed to work.
There really is no competition between the parties on the economics. Labour wins hands down. Some of the smarter Tories know that and they are shitting it.
Whether Labour's approach to foreign policy stops them ever getting into power is a different issue.
Ok, I'll bite.
Which of the smarter Tories know it and are shitting it ? Do you have any evidence to back up your statement ?
Use your brain. Why do you think, with no hint of this over the past 8 years, May suddenly announces last week that Austerity is over?
Back at the start of the 2017 Election campaign, she was still falling back on that stupid but powerful line that if we don't stick with Austerity...Greece. They'd peddled that one since 2010. It was always b*llocks, but it worked politically.
Now the tide is turning. Labour's economic policies have got a broadly supportive hearing from business. And they are addressing the core problems of our chronic underperformance.
And...whaddya know? Suddenly May totters onto the stage and says it's the end of Austerity.
You need to be lobotomised not to see the link.
-
On economic matters, Labour's policies are bang in the mainstream of established economic theory. They are sensible and well supported by evidence.
The Tories' economic policies have been a f**king car crash for a decade. The Right used to have a strong body of economic theory to support its policies. Now it's all Voodoo and smoke & mirrors. They don't even understand how capitalism is supposed to work.
There really is no competition between the parties on the economics. Labour wins hands down. Some of the smarter Tories know that and they are shitting it.
Whether Labour's approach to foreign policy stops them ever getting into power is a different issue.
Ok, I'll bite.
Which of the smarter Tories know it and are shitting it ? Do you have any evidence to back up your statement ?
Use your brain. Why do you think, with no hint of this over the past 8 years, May suddenly announces last week that Austerity is over?
Back at the start of the 2017 Election campaign, she was still falling back on that stupid but powerful line that if we don't stick with Austerity...Greece. They'd peddled that one since 2010. It was always b*llocks, but it worked politically.
Now the tide is turning. Labour's economic policies have got a broadly supportive hearing from business. And they are addressing the core problems of our chronic underperformance.
And...whaddya know? Suddenly May totters onto the stage and says it's the end of Austerity.
You need to be lobotomised not to see the link.
So, again. Which Tories think labours economic policy is better?
-
On economic matters, Labour's policies are bang in the mainstream of established economic theory. They are sensible and well supported by evidence.
The Tories' economic policies have been a f**king car crash for a decade. The Right used to have a strong body of economic theory to support its policies. Now it's all Voodoo and smoke & mirrors. They don't even understand how capitalism is supposed to work.
There really is no competition between the parties on the economics. Labour wins hands down. Some of the smarter Tories know that and they are shitting it.
Whether Labour's approach to foreign policy stops them ever getting into power is a different issue.
Ok, I'll bite.
Which of the smarter Tories know it and are shitting it ? Do you have any evidence to back up your statement ?
Use your brain. Why do you think, with no hint of this over the past 8 years, May suddenly announces last week that Austerity is over?
Back at the start of the 2017 Election campaign, she was still falling back on that stupid but powerful line that if we don't stick with Austerity...Greece. They'd peddled that one since 2010. It was always b*llocks, but it worked politically.
Now the tide is turning. Labour's economic policies have got a broadly supportive hearing from business. And they are addressing the core problems of our chronic underperformance.
And...whaddya know? Suddenly May totters onto the stage and says it's the end of Austerity.
You need to be lobotomised not to see the link.
So, again. Which Tories think labours economic policy is better?
So the Tory Government takes a look at the books and decides it's safe to end austerity how does that equate to them following Labours economic Poliicies?
-
It doesnt, he's talking bobbins again ! 😂
-
The ones who are saying that they are going to ditch their policies of the past decade and ape Labour.
It's not hard. If you engage your brain.
It's how politics always works. When you are scared that your opponent is controlling the agenda,you copy them.
What are you asking for? A senior Tory to go on the record saying "We've been wrong for 10 years and Corbyn is right"? You reckon politics works like that?
-
Sproty.
But the books DON'T say that. The books say that we won't be running a structural balance until 2025. So, given that the sum of Austerity was to eliminate the structural deficit, and given that they've spent a decade telling us we were going to shit unless we eliminated the structural deficit, it's to think that the Tories would CHOOSE to ditch Austerity now.
Of course, if you don't actually engage with facts and just look for a pointless argument, you may well spout this sort of shite.
-
Oh aye. And if they reckoned they'd balanced the books and could end Austerity for that reason, don't you think the Chancellor might have mentioned it? Given that it's his area of responsibility.
But not a word from him about it. It was May who suddenly announced the End of Austerity.
But go on. Keep on spinning it how you want the world to be.
-
While I found his speech very good the latest you gov poll has the tories 6 points ahead, which at this stage is Very surprising, is it simply people just don't like him and McDonnell and will vote anyone but them or something else?
-
The ones who are saying that they are going to ditch their policies of the past decade and ape Labour.
It's not hard. If you engage your brain.
It's how politics always works. When you are scared that your opponent is controlling the agenda,you copy them.
What are you asking for? A senior Tory to go on the record saying "We've been wrong for 10 years and Corbyn is right"? You reckon politics works like that?
Nope, but until they do it's still your overinflated opinion.
-
While I found his speech very good the latest you gov poll has the tories 6 points ahead, which at this stage is Very surprising, is it simply people just don't like him and McDonnell and will vote anyone but them or something else?
I posted about this earlier up the page blackpool. It's still Brexit. The polling company found that more Leavers would vote Tory than Remainers would vote Labour.
-
Errr you do all know that May said austerity was over 18 months ago after she lost the election she won. She wasn't right then....
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/austerity-is-over-may-tells-tories-vvhrjk0tj
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-austerity-brexit-plans-uk-leave-eu-hard-soft-latest-tax-cuts-welfare-benefit-a7787001.html
-
BST,
The shadow banking system was well understood within the financial sector.
The greater tragedy is that the development of shadow banking was a consequence of policy failures.
At the time, Brown was dedicated to the idea of co-existence of New Labour with the City. The view was that to be a success, Labour needed to be an acceptable managerial option to the Tories. The liberation of the City from effective regulatory controls was a part of this charm offensive.
Needless to say, it did not work, and Brown was too far up their fundament to get out of the way in time to avoid the financial bums rush.
The real problem is the response after 2008. Instead of wholesale reform of the banking sector, we have reverted to the default assumptions of privatised banking practices.
Iceland took a more robust approach;
https://theconversation.com/how-to-deal-with-the-next-financial-crisis-take-some-lessons-from-iceland-104354
No reports of people eating rats as a result.
Same old story here.
-
While I found his speech very good the latest you gov poll has the tories 6 points ahead, which at this stage is Very surprising, is it simply people just don't like him and McDonnell and will vote anyone but them or something else?
I posted about this earlier up the page blackpool. It's still Brexit. The polling company found that more Leavers would vote Tory than Remainers would vote Labour.
. Thanks wilts I hadn't seen your other post, you're probably right
-
Albie
I couldn't agree more that the reforms haven't been instigated since the crash.
But your comments on Brown are fatuous (and all too familiar from the new Corbynistas unfortunately).
Your comments about he shadow banking system are nonsense. No one really understood the risks that were being taken. No one even understood how big the global shadow banking system was until years after the crash and no one seriously can claim to have predicted what happened. Admittedly, several people DO make that claim but their cases never stack up.
And the Iceland comments just put the cherry on the daft cake. Iceland could, and did get away with letting THEIR banks fail. Because THEIR banks didn't lose a systemic risk to the entire global financial system. That wasn't the case with the UK or the US banks. Or German, French, Spanish, Italian banks. Which is why all those countries, one way or another, bailed out their banks.
The Iceland story is a stupid one to extrapolate to eco omies and banks that were orders of magnitude larger. But it's done regularly by folk on the Left who want to write off everything that anyone on the Centre Left did as some sort of plot to keep the bankers in clover. I would say it's very silly. But it's not. It's actually a very dangerous re-writing of history.
EDIT. I may have misunderstood your meaning about Iceland. I assumed you were talking about them letting banks go bust. If you're really talking about the robust way in which they have shackled their banks since then, I fully agree with you. But that's nothing to do with what I was saying about how we'd have been eating rats if the global banking system had collapsed (and it came within days of doing so) in 2008. The two are different issues.
-
BST,
The shadow banking system was a product of the withdrawal of regulation in the US. The danger of over extension into sub-prime housing was flagged as early as 2006...nothing happened.
Brown (as Chancellor, as well as later as PM) sought to follow the lead of the Federal Reserve on this side, and looked to influence the European banking system on the same model.
The point about injecting liquidity into the banks as an emergency measure was to protect the wider economy from the predatory instincts of the banking sector.
Reform of the regulations was the necessary change to the banking market to revise the investment strategy in the future.
Both interventions require the other to take effect. Bailing out the banks to then allow them to repeat the scam is about as sensible as pissing down your own leg.
Iceland is important because they have made the case for liability. Bankers who take the same actions will in future face consequences. They have personal "skin in the game", and so will manage probabilities accordingly.
Your point about the UK banks being much bigger is correct, but that also implies the larger consequence of getting the response proportionate and direct...neither of which have happened.
It is worth considering who was exposed by the failure of the sector. Are we looking to the postion of institutional investors hunting profit taking positions, or small investors with their life savings?
It might be possible to safeguard the latter without parachuting the former away from their own greed. Perhaps one size fits all was not the only option.
Conventional wisdom talks about the value of the financial industry in the UK, but consideration of the counter argument is helpful;
https://www.opendemocracy.net/neweconomics/costing-country-britains-finance-curse/
Anyway, business as usual in Merrie Old England.
Rat pie anyone?
-
Why are labour struggling so badly???
Lets face it even a staunch tory like me has been disappointed with the performance of this administration..It has to be one of the most unpopular administrations that I can remember..So Labour should be flying in the polls mirroring Blair and new labours performance prior to election.Right now they shouldn't have anything to beat!!!
Yet labour still find themselves adrift in the polls and I'm going to give my reasons why.Billy wont agree with most of them but facts are facts and the electorate are just not buying it..
Identity??? Labour seems to have a problem appealing to its party membership and the average voter at the same time..The party membership is staunch socialist, where as the average voter is more centre left..The membership gives the impression of controlling the party and it's senior officials views are too left wing with the average Labour voter needed to win...
Brexit?? Now the Tory's have made a right mess of this granted but despite some posts on here,the British people don't quite know were Labour stands on it tbh,The people who voted leave but support Labour are torn as they don't like the wishy washy statements from the senior leadership depending on what suits..
Foreign Policy....This is a bigger factor than most people believe I think..Corbyn is a dove,not just any old Dove but a big fluffy one with sad eyes...That doesn't sit well with voters.Brittain has a history of standing up for what we believe in and fighting for it..And people are worried that he will just give up places like Gibraltar and the Falklands at a stroke of a pen,They also worry that we will be seen as a soft touch and will lose our place on the top table of world power..
Economy..Now this is a bone of contention,the tory's have failed to bring down the debt that we have and even Austerity hasn't achieved this..Yet Labour keep announcing all these spending plans which they say are fully funded but people are struggling to believe it.They remember the last Labour administration and how spending spiralled,they remember the note in the drawer mocking the incoming Tory government that there was nothing left in the bank...And they don't believe them...
Now I respect everybody's opinion whoever they vote for and some can give fancy rhetoric on why they are correct,but it's not people like that who will get Labour enough votes to get into government..It's your average voter who isn't interested in going that deep into every subject.They vote with there gut feeling,and I believe the reasons above are why they wont get into power with the senior leadership they have....I'll get my tory tin hat on guys..lol
-
I'm a centre-left voter, always have and always will be but you pretty much have summed up the way I see it, wing commander.
-
All very valid points but as I said in my earlier post - according to yougov it is down to Brexit.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1048223569883410432
Labour have strong support among people, over 50%, of those who voted Remain but are only polling at 17% with those who voted Leave. In contrast 66% of those who voted Leave said they would vote Tory.
That has always been Corbyn's dilema. How can he appeal to Leave voters when most of his party want to remain in the EU?
In contrast what does 'Leave' mean to the Leave voters and will those who say they will currently vote Tory desert the party if their idea of Brexit doesn't match with what it actually turns out to be?
-
The average Labour voter has views which are slightly to the right of Ghengis Khan in relation to benefits, access to social housing and Health care. They live in areas over run by Eastern European workers who they perceive to have a deal from the state than themselves.
If you don't agree with me get yersens down to Page Hall, Eastwood or Hexthorpe.
-
The average Sprotyrover spouts b*llocks. If you don't agree with me read the above post.
-
Whilst he deserves credit for sticking to his views unfortunately I personally could never vote for him/Labour at the moment
-
rgearding brexit, I don't see why Labour don't use Corbyn's anti-europe stance to their favour in pulling (moderate) brexit voters over? He can be honest and say he would have voted the same as them, he sees the failings of the EU, like them, and believes Britain can thrive outside of the EU, like them. HOWEVER he can also see, like them, that the Tories have completed messed up Brexit and to leave at his point would be a bad decision for the UK.
-
rgearding brexit, I don't see why Labour don't use Corbyn's anti-europe stance to their favour in pulling (moderate) brexit voters over? He can be honest and say he would have voted the same as them, he sees the failings of the EU, like them, and believes Britain can thrive outside of the EU, like them. HOWEVER he can also see, like them, that the Tories have completed messed up Brexit and to leave at his point would be a bad decision for the UK.
He spent ages getting a massive youth movement in the last election who for the majority are against Brexit, it'd be daft to alienate them.
-
He spent ages getting a massive youth movement in the last election who for the majority are against Brexit, it'd be daft to alienate them.
Fair point. The youth vote is an interesting point too regarding a 2nd referendum vote, as 1.5m more people have turned 18 since the last vote, and 1.3m have died!
That fact alone would point to a remain victory, and maybe also the correct result - should the votes of the dead matter more than those who are alive and have to live with any consequences?
-
The democratic process which we live by was laid out at the time..The country voted,the article was triggered and that should be that..Unless you believe in the SNP policy of keep asking for a referendum until you get the result you personally want..!!
-
The democratic process which we live by was laid out at the time..The country voted,the article was triggered and that should be that..Unless you believe in the SNP policy of keep asking for a referendum until you get the result you personally want..!!
Would another vote not be democracy? Especially now we're more educated on what leaving means.
-
The democratic process which we live by was laid out at the time..The country voted,the article was triggered and that should be that..Unless you believe in the SNP policy of keep asking for a referendum until you get the result you personally want..!!
Would another vote not be democracy? Especially now we're more educated on what leaving means.
No you had your chance we voted to leave and leaving we will be .
-
I thought democracy was when you voted on something and then carried out what was voted on by the winning majority. Or has that now changed?
-
He spent ages getting a massive youth movement in the last election who for the majority are against Brexit, it'd be daft to alienate them.
Fair point. The youth vote is an interesting point too regarding a 2nd referendum vote, as 1.5m more people have turned 18 since the last vote, and 1.3m have died!
That fact alone would point to a remain victory, and maybe also the correct result - should the votes of the dead matter more than those who are alive and have to live with any consequences?
That's interesting. Do we have any information as to how those who've died voted?
Is that what's meant by an exit poll....?
:coat:
-
I thought democracy was when you voted on something and then carried out what was voted on by the winning majority. Or has that now changed?
I know. It would be an insult to democracy to have another vote.
-
I thought democracy was when you voted on something and then carried out what was voted on by the winning majority. Or has that now changed?
I know. It would be an insult to democracy to have another vote.
Funny how it's those who call the EU a dictatorship that insist on telling us what we can't do, eh?
-
Why not make it best of five?
-
The more the better. The lies will lose their potency each time.
-
So at what point do you stop calling for another referendum? When you get the result you want?
It's not democratic, and is never going to happen.
-
I'll repeat. Farage himself basically said if he lost he'd keep agitating for a new vote.
-
I'd be delighted to just have one more. If we made sure that anyone connected with syphoning money from Putin into companies that illegally targeted the social media accounts of 7m people with little interest in politics and poured billions of adverts and videos packed with lies into their feeds was unable to get involved this time.
Democracy? Anyone who ignores what happened during the campaign, then lectures other people about democracy is a hypocrite.
-
I wonder how many of these people who want to remain would be so keen to have a re-run if the result would have gone the other way...Whatevever the grounds...
-
Farage was keen on having a re-run if he lost.
-
WingCo
But it's not about "Whatever the grounds."
It's about whether there are specific grounds.
And there are. Two.
1) We were told categorically by the Leave side that we'd get a wonderful deal with the EU. Now we are staring at a No Deal exit. That was never on the agenda in 2016 and there is a huge majority of the country against that. If we interpret the vote in 2016 as grounds for a No Deal Brexit, THAT absolutely is a perversion of democracy.
2) There is overwhelming evidence of interference in the campaign by Russian funded companies, illegally targeting social media feeds to direct a tsunami of lies at people they identified as gullible to that approach. Once again, that is an absolute perversion of the democratic process. This time by a hostile foreign power that has a huge interest in seeing Britain weakened. It's amazing that people who claim to be patriots don't seem to have any concerns about that.
-
As regards point 1 of the above post BST, I don't think people who voted Leave were interested in or aware of any deal. They just wanted to leave.
-
I thought democracy was when you voted on something and then carried out what was voted on by the winning majority. Or has that now changed?
Farage was keen on having a re-run if he lost.
EXACTLY that. Those that are in Parliament (a Parliamentary Democracy) took is into the EEC / EU a long long time ago. Since then the "anti" EU MPs and Farage etc have NEVER ceased in their efforts to get us out "somehow"
Now they and others got a vote (I say too close and devisive - they say overwhelming Majority) they are saying "Its Democracy - get over it" and I as an ordinary man in the street are expected to take that lying down. Well NO. I hope that minds superior to mine (thats many people) will force a second Vote on the deal and we Vote to stay IN
That too would be Democratic - especially if the Vote was held on "the facts" rather than just being a Yes / No on an unknown outcome.
I have said it before (on Democracy so sorry for the repeat) - those who think it undemocratic take a look at the Scottish Independence Vote. Twice at least the people have not wanted to break up the Union with the UK the last one being called a once in a Generation Vote. Only 10 "metaphorical minutes" ago - and yet they are already doing the groundwork for the next Referendum. See Nicola Sturgeon the other day ? How many times did she mention " independence" " being Independant" or alluding to being Independant
Is THAT democratic too - cos all they are doing is what the anti EU boys did till they got the right result - and if it is right why are we the Remainers wrong to put the opposite view now ?
-
I wonder how many of these people who want to remain would be so keen to have a re-run if the result would have gone the other way...Whatevever the grounds...
The big mistake Cameron made (well the second one after calling the Referndum itself) was not to try to get a Referendum that set a precept of - say - a 60% Majority must vote "Leave" for the status quo to be altered. In that way the Leavers could have continued their challenge for years to come till they convinced whatever majority was decided upon
Having ia vote that produced a 51 49 majority was and is just too divisive
-
As regards point 2) above I hope people saw this article yesterday. The Met Police are not investigating the alleged criminality by the Leave campaigns because of 'political sensitivities'.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/james-cusick-adam-ramsay/met-police-stall-brexit-campaign-investigations-claiming-polit
-
As regards point 1 of the above post BST, I don't think people who voted Leave were interested in or aware of any deal. They just wanted to leave.
Not correct TT. In poll after poll there are fewer than 30% of people say they want a No Deal Brexit.
So, think about it. If we DO leave with No Deal, then the entire country will have to deal with something that little more than a quarter of us support.
I struggle to see how that is a triumph for democracy.
-
They are saying that NOW BST I agree.
I'm going back to the vote in 2016 which was Leave or Stay.
I don't think many of the leave voters then were concerned or even aware of or bothered about the type of leave deal they were voting for.
They were told immigration would stop and we'd have all our own money to spend as we liked. Millions per week for the NHS etc.
I'll guarantee the majority hadn't even heard of the customs union.
F**k me even the Government hadn't considered the NI border issue.
-
Point of order. I don't know of anyone who wanted immigration to stop and don't remember it being on the agenda.
-
I do. I work with several people who voted to leave based on immigration and nothing else.
-
RedJ, No doubt you do, but voting to leave based on immigration is not exactly wanting immigration to stop.
-
RedJ, No doubt you do, but voting to leave based on immigration is not exactly wanting immigration to stop.
Fair enough BB. To be greatly reduced then.
-
RedJ, No doubt you do, but voting to leave based on immigration is not exactly wanting immigration to stop.
Fair enough BB. To be greatly reduced then.
But of course Tommy. Don't you agree?
-
Thanks BB, that gives me the perfect opportunity to show what people are saying above is true. That he public's views on Brexit have changed now we know more about it.
If Tommy had voted to Leave to control immigration from the EU then he was not alone as this was seen as the main priority by the public when negotiations began in 2017
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/08/15/eurotrack-britons-top-brexit-priority-immigration-/
However as negotiations have gone on and people been more informed about the cost of Brexit, the economy, and security co-operation, have now become far more important than controlling immigration.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2018/08/14/few-brits-see-protecting-rights-uk-citizens-living/
-
Perhaps no one imagined such a demanding divorce settlement! Is that a reason to stay with a partner you're not happy with?
-
BB
What I'm saying is that most people who voted Leave didn't even think there would be a divorce settlement.
They thought 'Right I'll vote leave. We'll leave and that'll be the end of it. Then we can stop all these foreigners taking our jobs and we'll have all these billions to spend on what we want.
The number of times I've heard from people over the last 2 years 'I'm fed up with this, why can't we just leave?'
-
RedJ, No doubt you do, but voting to leave based on immigration is not exactly wanting immigration to stop.
Fair enough BB. To be greatly reduced then.
But of course Tommy. Don't you agree?
I did agree thanks no need for the sarcasm
-
Perhaps no one imagined such a demanding divorce settlement! Is that a reason to stay with a partner you're not happy with?
That's really witty BB.
Nothing to do with what we are discussing, but really witty.
-
Tommy, I wasn't being sarcastic. I leave the sarcasm to others.
Billy, thanks for the compliment!
-
If you want to use the divorce analogy, the UK are the ones being the demanding other half who wants everything but also demands a divorce. We are the asshole in this relationship.
-
I do like the divorce analogy.
Brexit supporters are saying to the EU:
It's not working. I don't love you any more. You are too controlling. I'm going to leave you because I want to have some dalliances with others.
I'm prepared to pay what I owe you for the things we bought together that I will still have access to. Like the car. Although every once in a while I'll fly off into a strop and threaten to not pay you a penny. And I'll continually whine about how unfair it is that I have to pay for stuff that I willingly signed up to.
I expect you to let me use your CostCo card so that I can buy stuff cheap. But no, I don't want to pay the annual fee on the card. If you don't let me, I'll keep on bitching about how unfair you're being.
While I'm driving off, I'll smash in the fence that we share with the neighbours. And no, of course I've got no f**king idea how to fix it - I'll leave that to you to sort out.
I reserve the right to call you names in front of all our friends, but if you dare to so much as think about having a joke at my expense, I'll get really, REALLY upset and accuse you of trying to make this divorce harder than it should be.
I think that just about covers it.