Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

hometruths

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

incredible stuff.
i was expecting corbyn to receive some flack about his past 'er "associations", but even the corbynistas must have been blind-sided by this.

to paraphrase Wilde "to lose one leading party member is unfortunate, but to lose 2 is carelessness"

if others are to follow (and i suspect there are others), bojo will be doing a jig all the way to No. 10.

Yep, it is certainly possible that this is the start of a backlash within Labour against Corbyn and his faction. If so it will be terminal for Corbyn's chances.

FrancieBrady

schmittel wrote: »

Yep, it is certainly possible that this is the start of a backlash within Labour against Corbyn and his faction. If so it will be terminal for Corbyn's chances.

Reports on Twitter last night speculated that there would be other walkouts.

Letwin_Larry

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are bluffing, here is what you said:

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

yes but as a previous poster pointed out corbyn's association with our republican child-killlers could well affect the upcoming Brexmas election.

That's what you were asked about. But you pretended you never said it would have an effect. :rolleyes:

again at the risk of repetition i would ask you to try and understand the difference between COULD & WOULD.
and i agree you should leave it there as you are going around in circles.

Joe_ Public

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Reports on Twitter last night speculated that there would be other walkouts.

I will bet that there wont be a single one.

Letwin_Larry

schmittel wrote: »

Yep, it is certainly possible that this is the start of a backlash within Labour against Corbyn and his faction. If so it will be terminal for Corbyn's chances.

the resignations in themselves are very bad, but the TIMING of them is disastrous imo, and not a coincidence.

how many more a lurking in the long grass remains to be seen, but poor jeremy must feeling a tad unnerved whilst muching his muesli this morning.

Joe_ Public

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I will bet that there wont be a single one.

You could be right, it may be more than one.

Professor Moriarty

Austin resigns his seat and gives an interview urging Labour supporters to vote for a populist right wing PM and a right wing Tory party. Wonder how the Labour members and activists in his constituency, who campaigned for him through four elections, are feeling today.

Nemesis

Yes the timing is important.
When did Ian Austin resign?

CelticRambler

Christy42 wrote: »

Though I think the user also said Switzerland so maybe they are more interested in freedom of movement?

Perhaps, but on the basis of last night's segue into the topic of democratic control, I reckon they're more interested in this (source: wikiP) :

the federal constitutional initiative allows citizens to put a constitutional amendment to a national vote, if 100,000 voters sign the proposed amendment within 18 months. The Federal Council and the Federal Assembly can supplement the proposed amendment with a counter-proposal, and then voters must indicate a preference on the ballot in case both proposals are accepted. Constitutional amendments, whether introduced by initiative or in parliament, must be accepted by a double majority of the national popular vote and the cantonal popular votes.

Is this a cherry I see before me?

Joe_ Public

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You could be right, it may be more than one.

Hardly when my post specifies zero, but nice attempt to twist anyway!

This ian austin thing being portrayed as some kind of "bombshell" is way ott imo. Been spouting poison against corbyn for a long time, even from the lab benches in the hoc, so nothing surprising. Calling to vote tory, well thats his right but this sums it up well for me.

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1192347967509925888?s=20

Letwin_Larry

Deleted User wrote: »

You could be right, it may be more than one.

2 in 2 days on the first days of a GE campaign is pretty unprecedented i would suggest.
when you've got (moderate) senior members of the Lab party saying they would rather see an Oxbridge/Ethonian tory in power than corbie, then you don't need to be a clairvoyant to know there is something rotten at the heart of the party.

whether the sluice-gates will burst open remains to be seen.

Nemesis

Nemesis wrote: »

Yes the timing is important.
When did Ian Austin resign?

By resigning early in the campaign, the affects will be limited as the resignation will be almost forgotten by polling day.

Joe_ Public

Nemesis wrote: »

Yes the timing is important.
When did Ian Austin resign?

Resigned from labour last february.

FrancieBrady

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Austin resigns his seat and gives an interview urging Labour supporters to vote for a populist right wing PM and a right wing Tory party. Wonder how the Labour members and activists in his constituency, who campaigned for him through four elections, are feeling today.

Your answer may be in this tweet. It is more likely to rouse real Labour people to the cause. leaders can be changed, but you can't be endorsing the Tories and claim to have credibility. Had he urged people to spoil votes or vote for a Lib Dem even, it may have had some purchase. Counterproductive it is likely to be.


https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1192347967509925888?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1192347967509925888&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boards.ie%2Fvbulletin%2Fshowthread.php%3Ft%3D2058025860%26page%3D53

hotmail.com

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Austin resigns his seat and gives an interview urging Labour supporters to vote for a populist right wing PM and a right wing Tory party. Wonder how the Labour members and activists in his constituency, who campaigned for him through four elections, are feeling today.

Isn't every party populist?

Letwin_Larry

Deleted User wrote: »

True, but unless the Tories "sit on it" for a couple of weeks, the shock factor will have diminished by polling day.

fair enough, but it remains to be seen if they can contain this or will it spread.

this election is so unpredictable, the parties are so fractured god only knows what other issue or topic will inevitably crop up.
we thought a week was along time in politics, but 5 weeks looks like an age when you consider the last 2 days.

Joe_ Public

"Lets rekindle our ambition to build the worlds first supersonic airline," says savid javid launching tory spending plans.

Wow, that is some statement to be making in this climate conscious age. Opposition should not be missing that.

Letwin_Larry

i have to admit his style is very clear, concise and very effective.

"confiscate! confiscate! confiscate! stealing private investments"
"a Merry Chriistmas or a winter of discontent"

quokula

If you want to know what kind of Labour MP Ian Austin was, here's some snippets:

Attacking Corbyn for criticising the Iraq invasion

Making false claims about Palestinians and the holocaust

Demonising Immigrants

Calling on Labour to support an EU In-Out referendum, back in 2013

Bannasidhe

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

i merely mentioned the pira as i expect corbyn will get his association with them thrown in his face, during the Brexit election campaign.

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

again show me where i said it would be damaging to corbyn's electoral campaign. i didn't.
and tbh i couldn't care less if it does or it doesn't.

i think you are debating with yourself.

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

well yes any association with that bunch of murdering rabble is hardly going to boost his electoral chances. do you really need me to explain that to you? if you lie down with a pig, there's a good chance you'll stink to high heaven when you get up to leave.

but for the record here is where i actually agreed with Joe_Public that the impact on the election may well be minimal.
?

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

incredible stuff.
i was expecting corbyn to receive some flack about his past 'er "associations", but even the corbynistas must have been blind-sided by this.

.

You are beginning to look a bit obsessed with just mentioning Corbyn's alleged 'associations' at every possible opportunity while simultaneously refusing to address what these 'associations' actually are because you claim you are merely mentioning them and couldn't care less.

How many times have you now 'merely mentioned' this thing you 'couldn't care less' about? I've just quoted 5 'merely mentioned'.

Perhaps it's time to provided some substance to your attempts to get mud to stick - you can begin with this channel 4 factcheck from 2017 you refused to discuss as you were 'merely mentioning': https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-corbyn-on-northern-ireland

And when you have done that perhaps you would provide some evidence to back up this piece of mud you have flung "ISIS headchoppers etc." - or did you merely mention that too and couldn't care less?

Enzokk

Joe_ Public wrote: »

"Lets rekindle our ambition to build the worlds first supersonic airline," says savid javid launching tory spending plans.

Wow, that is some statement to be making in this climate conscious age. Opposition should not be missing that.

Who is going to build it as well? Airbus isn't a UK company and the UK government doesn't have an aviation arm capable of building aircraft, so is he suggesting a private UK company does it? Or a military contractor? What rubbish is he talking about? That makes very little sense, then again this is a new age of politics where facts doesn't matter.

Take the Ian Austin news, he left Labour in 2019 and he had problems even with Ed Miliband and his leadership, but him talking against Labour is a problem somehow according to the printed press?

Just to show how facts will be in short supply.

General election 2019: Boris Johnson's campaign claims fact-checked

I will highlight one area that is ridiculous,

3. New hospitals
Mr Johnson also talked about "40 new hospitals".

So far, though, the money has been provided for only substantial upgrades to six - a £2.7bn investment.

Another 34 hospitals have been given access to a share of £100m to draw up plans for the future.

This is lying, how does he think there will be 40 new hospitals with a £2.8b budget? One hospital in Dublin will cost around £1.7b and he thinks people should believe there will be 40 new hospitals for only a billion more, give or take a few million pound? But people will eat it up and vote for this liar, and if the UK crashes out and it harms their lives, should we feel sorry for them?

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Usually, like many others here, I can understand why political manouveres are made, but I cannot fathom a reason why they opted to phrase the bus as, "Jo Swinson's Liberal Democrats"?

For comparative purposes, imagine if the Brexit Party's bus read, "Nigel Farage's Brexit Party" - we would all unite in cringe, then disgust at the ego on show.

It seems bizarre. Really bizarre.

Despite following UK politics for years having lived there I can't name any of the other Lib Dem front bench. I looked them up and the only ones that were familiar were the former leaders and three rebels elected as other party members.

It looks a bit off but if she is the only name in the news it makes sense to link to her directly.
650 nobodies standing all over the country aren't going to have the same recognition.
The Tories and Labour don't have the same problem as their front bench and even some backbenchers are in the news and on the various chat shows all the time.
SNP is similar in national politics but as their vote is focused they don't have to appeal across 650 constituencies, they have plenty of local coverage.

Professor Moriarty

hotmail.com wrote: »

Isn't every party populist?

In ways, yes. No more than every party lies. But every definition has gradations. In the true definition of 'populist' not every politician is populist. In that vein, there is an interesting article here about the populism of Johnson and Trump. In particular, it focuses on the psychology of Johnson's populism and why it's so successful.

Joe_ Public

Enzokk wrote: »

Who is going to build it as well? Airbus isn't a UK company and the UK government doesn't have an aviation arm capable of building aircraft, so is he suggesting a private UK company does it? Or a military contractor? What rubbish is he talking about? That makes very little sense, then again this is a new age of politics where facts doesn't matter.

Take the Ian Austin news, he left Labour in 2019 and he had problems even with Ed Miliband and his leadership, but him talking against Labour is a problem somehow according to the printed press?

Just to show how facts will be in short supply.

General election 2019: Boris Johnson's campaign claims fact-checked

I will highlight one area that is ridiculous,



This is lying, how does he think there will be 40 new hospitals with a £2.8b budget? One hospital in Dublin will cost around £1.7b and he thinks people should believe there will be 40 new hospitals for only a billion more, give or take a few million pound? But people will eat it up and vote for this liar, and if the UK crashes out and it harms their lives, should we feel sorry for them?

Agree 100% on everything there.

Javid sounded to me like he came up with that off top of his head. Its just utterly stupid, even if you could afford it, to think you could build a supersonic airline and hope to meet even the most liberal of emissions targets. Just garbage.

On hospitals, my understanding of "new' is actually new, greenfield site, like the childrens hospital here for example. What they are pledging is upgrading, not building, and its 6 not 40. The 34 are some fantasy pledge down the road when they may or may not be in gov.

A lot of shoddy reporting on ian austin today, conflating it with watson when the only connection between them is the former using the latter as a weapon against corbyn. Austin hasn't resigned today because he wasn't an mp or even a labour member, so he had nothing to resign from!

Enzokk

Some more fact checking of Johnson's spending pledges,

https://twitter.com/ImIncorrigible/status/1192364792054534144?s=20

So the pledges are £34b for the NHS and £14b for schools, but scratch at the surface and all is not what it seems.

The £34b NHS pledge seems to be the same £20b or so May pledged before, its just Johnson is putting it in cash terms whereas May used the figure above inflation. So the same pledge as May, no new money for the NHS from Johnson.

As for the schools, well if you count the pledges for each year for 3 years and add them together you get the £14b figure, also cash terms ignoring inflation. The real figure seems to be £4b only for schools.

robinph

Deleted User wrote: »

Despite following UK politics for years having lived there I can't name any of the other Lib Dem front bench.

Well their front bench is basically their entire set of MP's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_Liberal_Democrat_MPs_(2017%E2%80%932019)

Have to feel sorry for Stephen Lloyd who's the only LibDem MP voted in as a LibDem MP in 2017 that doesn't get a "shadow" job title.

Professor Moriarty

Enzokk wrote: »

Who is going to build it as well? Airbus isn't a UK company and the UK government doesn't have an aviation arm capable of building aircraft, so is he suggesting a private UK company does it? Or a military contractor? What rubbish is he talking about? That makes very little sense, then again this is a new age of politics where facts doesn't matter.

Take the Ian Austin news, he left Labour in 2019 and he had problems even with Ed Miliband and his leadership, but him talking against Labour is a problem somehow according to the printed press?

Just to show how facts will be in short supply.

General election 2019: Boris Johnson's campaign claims fact-checked

I will highlight one area that is ridiculous,



This is lying, how does he think there will be 40 new hospitals with a £2.8b budget? One hospital in Dublin will cost around £1.7b and he thinks people should believe there will be 40 new hospitals for only a billion more, give or take a few million pound? But people will eat it up and vote for this liar, and if the UK crashes out and it harms their lives, should we feel sorry for them?

No more than Johnson's pledge that they will be adding "20,000 more police officers". Of course, Johnson neglects to mention that, under the Tories, since 2010 police numbers were reduced by 22,000. But people will, of course, lap up The Telegraph/Express/Mail headlines. As the well worn phrase goes, in a democracy people get the leaders they deserve.

Enzokk

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Agree 100% on everything there.

Javid sounded to me like he came up with that off top of his head. Its just utterly stupid, even if you could afford it, to think you could build a supersonic airline and hope to meet even the most liberal of emissions targets. Just garbage.

On hospitals, my understanding of "new' is actually new, greenfield site, like the childrens hospital here for example. What they are pledging is upgrading, not building, and its 6 not 40. The 34 are some fantasy pledge down the road when they may or may not be in gov.

A lot of shoddy reporting on ian austin today, conflating it with watson when the only connection between them is the former using the latter as a weapon against corbyn. Austin hasn't resigned today because he wasn't an mp or even a labour member, so he had nothing to resign from!

I hope that with this fact checking you would get more forensic questioning of Tory politicians on the facts they are proclaiming. I agree most of it makes no sense at all.

I just remembered that even if the UK is able to build an aircraft on their own, who is going to certify it safe to fly? They want out of the EU and its regulations, including EASA who does the certification and sets the standards. So they will start adding EASA rules and have no say or representation at EASA? Tkaing back control indeed.

I agree with the hospitals, when he talks of new hospital I also think brand new fresh smelling builds, not just a new plug in a ward and call in new. This is the type of rubbish people are eating up and posters here seem to prove it in the last few days. There is £2.7b allocated for those 6 hospital upgrades, but only £100m for the rest of the 34, so even if you squint at the "new" name for upgrades, how do they propose that works?

I hear Labour will pledge £150b for schools, hospitals and housing on top of the existing spending plans. That is how you spend on infrastructure, not the band aid Tory pledges. Who will pay for the extra £150b though is another matter, but at least it is a plan to stop the rot.

General election 2019: Labour to promise billions for public services

Labour has promised an "irreversible shift" of power and investment to working people outside the south-east of England, if they win the election.

John McDonnell will pledge £150bn for schools, hospitals and housing on top of existing spending plans to be paid for through borrowing.

Javid will lay out their plans later, so let the games begin of using statistics to fool the voters.

Professor Moriarty

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Agree 100% on everything there.

Javid sounded to me like he came up with that off top of his head. Its just utterly stupid, even if you could afford it, to think you could build a supersonic airline and hope to meet even the most liberal of emissions targets. Just garbage.

On hospitals, my understanding of "new' is actually new, greenfield site, like the childrens hospital here for example. What they are pledging is upgrading, not building, and its 6 not 40. The 34 are some fantasy pledge down the road when they may or may not be in gov.

A lot of shoddy reporting on ian austin today, conflating it with watson when the only connection between them is the former using the latter as a weapon against corbyn. Austin hasn't resigned today because he wasn't an mp or even a labour member, so he had nothing to resign from!

On Austin, his family has a Jewish background and much of his anger towards Corbyn was Corbyn's (real or perceived) antisemitism and (real or perceived) watery reaction to antisemitism within Labour.

quokula

robinph wrote: »

Well their front bench is basically their entire set of MP's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_Liberal_Democrat_MPs_(2017%E2%80%932019)

Have to feel sorry for Stephen Lloyd who's the only LibDem MP voted in as a LibDem MP in 2017 that doesn't get a "shadow" job title.

Norman Lamb is too (he has a title in that list on a committee, which is a cross party thing rather than a Lib Dem front bench role)

Both of them were punished for having a more pragmatic stance on Brexit and advocating making a pro-remain case while still listening to the other 52% rather than try to exploit and deepen the rifts in the country for electoral gain.

Lamb particularly saddens me as he was a leadership candidate against Tim Farron just a few years ago, and I voted for him when I was a member of the party and they were still all about Liberal values. I wonder what the party would look like now if he had won and they hadn't ended up losing the next election badly due to their new homophobic leader, transitioning via Vince Cable (who I respect but h'd gotten too old to lead and was ineffective) to a right wing leader content to put MPs who were elected as Tories on her front bench and to make cynical voter grabs from other progressive parties.