Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

LuckyLloyd

liamtech wrote: »

Ok well look it is complicated and TBH people will have differing views - my own view on these issues would be as follows

Corbyn will now support a referendum, Yet he is not supporting the peoples Vote Movement - WHY? Because a peoples vote is saying STOP BREXIT NOW - 2nd REF - The peoples vote is proceeding on the basis that the majority will be for remain now that they have seen the debacle

Jeremy Corbyn's 2nd Referendum is a choice between remain, and HIS DEAL (as yet non-existant) - now it is still a second referendum which i think is positive. But the idea is pure and simple. It will take 6 months MINIMUM to secure a Corbyn Brexit deal (assuming the EU wish to negotiate it, which granted it being soft they may well do) - but Corbyn will get massive amount of media coverage during this time where he will implicitly sell his deal, as the Sensible Soft Socialist Brexit. Then he comes back, sits on a fence, and lets the country have at it - the people will know by that time that he is for this deal, as he is the one who negotiated and AGREED IT! Its a second Ref on HIS TERMS

Now given that the labour party in government would undoubtedly be in coalition with SNP, LIB DEM, GREEN, PLAID, all of these parties would actively campaign AGAINST a Corbyn deal - which would increase strain on an already barely stable coalition (before anyone suggests im ruling out a Labour majority situation, let me be fair and balance, and Rule it out explicitly - they will not get a majority, and would be incredibly lucky to get to the point of having a working coalition to command a majority)

The point is Corbyn will not stop brexit, he will transform it into a socialist brexit, but still a Brexit - and an unstable coalition like that outlined above could easily collapse before the deal was negotiated - or worse still after it had been agreed - which would allow the tories back in - and we would be back to where we are now, but with the Caviat that the Tories could genuinely claim that their opposition had got their chance and failed - put simple this would be disastrous

What happens if the Corbyn Rainbow coalition collapses midway through the second round? And the Tories get back in?

What happens when the SNP get their second ref, and Corbyn will fight against them - coalition intact?

What happens when Corbyn is going on about how great a Leftwing Brexit is, and the Lib Dems in government with him, see the polls shift in favor of that brexit?

and What happens when half the Labor party urge remain in Corbyns referendum - how will momentum behave - how will lansman behave - ? because Corbyn might sit on the fence but with a wink and a nod (not to mention Corbyn working for 6 months on this) they will know - the leader wants this to pass

On your second point, yes i do give credit to Corbyn for gaining in the 2017 election and denying a conservative majority - no question - but you cannot merely credit corbyn for defeating Mays and Boris's -

On the contrary, there was bravery and genuine 'Country before Party' patriotism from members of the Tory Party, that effectively crippled both May and Boris - it was very admirable

I feel like im gonna end every post on Brexit with the same tired but relevant phrase from now on - so il end by saying

Its complicated

You use very strong negative adjectives on Corbyn when your actual position as explained above is that you simply disagree with his approach and dislike that he hasn’t rowed in behind a specific group on the issue.

Corbyn will redraw red lines so that will absolutely open things up for further negotiation. He’ll also commit to new transition period dates. And then he’ll put whatever is received in a new deal to the people versus remain. Given the difficulties Labour have on Brexit and considering the genuine deep divisions in the country I think it’s a very sensible approach. But whether you agree with it or not, it isn’t hapless, fanciful, unclear, etc - it’s a simple straightforward position that would lead to a better outcome for the people of Britain.

Flat out revoking or rerunning 2016 with parameters that do not respect the desire to leave of 40%+ of the electorate is a frankly dangerous position on the issue. Might win a few more votes, but it is far from credible.

Joe_ Public

liamtech wrote: »

Ok well i dont think they are lying - i believe this policy of renegotiate and then a referendum is what Labour are about.

As to your first point. If you subscribe to the idea of Brexit (Any Brexit, soft, hard, no deal) being negative to some degree, then a peoples vote ASAP is the way to go. And polling has shown that the appetite is there for a second ref, and for a remain victory. Brexit has been weakened to a large degree over the last few years, and now would be the moment when it could be cancelled, provided the polls are correct this time (obviously it is to a certain degree unpredictable, but if leave won, after all this, i think most of us would sigh and move on)

By running on Renegotiate FIRST, Referendum SECOND manifesto, which is looking like Labours policy, Corbyn is going to reduce the negativity around brexit - he is effectively saying 'No - Brexit CAN BE POSITIVE if im running the country' - 'If Its Jeremy's Brexit it will be great'

If you want to believe this - fine. honestly im not criticizing your right to chose and have an opinion. But if you are a remainer who believes ANY BREXIT WILL BE BAD, you cannot wholeheartedly endorse JC, or this Labour Parties election plan/manifesto

So while yes, brexit will be alive after the election, it would only be so until the second referendum - If Labour were on board for an immediate Referendum, in the shortest available time, then they and all the Non Tory TBP groups could spend that time highlighting how negative brexit is.

Instead Corbyn through renegotiating is implicitly perfuming Brexit with shroud of legitimacy, and positivity. And he will get to do this throughout his renegotiation, which could be 6 months. And when he supposedly sits on the fence during his Referendum, he will split the Labour vote, with Eurosceptic LP MP's being able to sell Jeremys deal as being great for Britain.

Its so difficult to wrap my head round why he is doing this, but i said yesterday its a case of JC's Principles over-riding pragmatism. and it is damaging Labours credibility - and their chance of gaining seats in this election will suffer

Last point is fair. They are suffering electorally because many voters just want labour to be an out and out remain party which, of course, corbyn is never going to be, no matter how much we wish it. Although there are some signs the key northern battleground seats might not desert them - that would put kiss of death om on any tory majority. So maybe corbyn strategy might yet not be a write off, far too soon to tell.

But if I'm reading this right, here's what i think is being suggested here. Labour continue with its PV policy - because we understand revoke is a cynical election ploy - but they reassure voters that they wont be facilitating any credible leave option so the whole thing will be weighted in favour of remain. Indeed why not go whole hog and put 2 leave options against remain and ensure victory, as many remainers want?

I think he should have fudged it more, like lib dems are doing - their 2017 position is exactly same as labours now - but he's tried to deal with it in a reasoned, quite sensible manner and, yes, they are paying for it, it seems.

LuckyLloyd

Lads you can’t play it in such a way where the deck is stacked against Leave. The cat is truly out of the bag, we have negotiated withdrawal texts. Trying to play it in such a way that risks disenfranchising people or is perceived as doing so is not an option.

ArmaniJeanss

Can't really follow Nige's press conference at the moment.
But from what I can see he is caving in and not going to stand candidates in every constituency.

hotmail.com

Farage says the party won't stand in all 600 seats as earlier promised.

Injuryprone

So farage is only going to split the Tory vote in labour held seats?

LeinsterDub

hotmail.com wrote: »

Farage says the party won't stand in all 600 seats as earlier promised.

Farage says the Brexit party will not stand against the Tories in the 317 seats they won in 2017.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/nov/11/general-election-parties-vie-for-veterans-votes-as-keith-vaz-quits-politics-live

I wonder if those who paid 100 pound to stand will get a refund now?

hotmail.com

It seems a Tory majority is heavily likely and that Britain will leave the EU in January.

It will be interesting to see how this affects voting intentions in the North.

Joe_ Public

Good news for tories but with the caveat that he is merely affirming Johnson as a hard brexit, likely no deal pm. That bit might not necessarily play so well with all voters.

robinph

Injuryprone wrote: »

So farage is only going to split the Tory vote in labour held seats?

Probably means that Farage cancels himself out overall. If it was to be more cleverly targeted in the seats he was aiming at then I'd be more concerned with the effect he might have.

LeinsterDub

hotmail.com wrote: »

It seems a Tory majority is heavily likely and that Britain will leave the EU in January.

It will be interesting to see how this affects voting intentions in the North.

How do you reckon? Current predictions suggest the SNP take Scotland or nearly all of it . Lib dems pick up seats and the leave vote has now been split in Labour seats . Where do you see the Tory getting the numbers?

Shelga

So what was the point of Farage saying he was going to stand Brexit Party candidates in every constituency? That was only a few days ago.

And yet he criticises Johnson for flip-flopping on the most important issue of the day. These people are incapable of self-reflection or humility. Can’t stand them.

Quin_Dub

hotmail.com wrote: »

Farage says the party won't stand in all 600 seats as earlier promised.

I don't believe they ever actually had 600 candidates to stand anyway.. It was bluff and bluster.

He didn't get the "deal" he was trying to con the others into so he had to back down.

Leroy42

Shelga wrote: »

So what was the point of Farage saying he was going to stand Brexit Party candidates in every constituency? That was only a few days ago.

And yet he criticises Johnson for flip-flopping on the most important issue of the day. These people are incapable of self-reflection or humility. Can’t stand them.

The point? To be a talking piece. He needs to keep talking to stay relevant.

He is given an inordinately disroportionate amount of media coverage given the support. And now, by their own choice, they a 1 item niche party.

No need to have them on any panels etc

LeinsterDub

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I don't believe they ever actually had 600 candidates to stand anyway.. It was bluff and bluster.

He didn't get the "deal" he was trying to con the others into so he had to back down.

They have 3000 people who paid 100 pound to stand

Rjd2

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I don't believe they ever actually had 600 candidates to stand anyway.. It was bluff and bluster.

He didn't get the "deal" he was trying to con the others into so he had to back down.

Ignore what his supporters online might say or even his biggest critics, he has not been paid off its more tragic than that. His party was been squeezed , Brexit and Tory major donars were getting the hump and he was a laughing stock for many as both sides were calling him a useful idiot for remain.

This is a face saving policy, don't let anyone friend or foe of him to say otherwise.

Quin_Dub

LeinsterDub wrote: »

They have 3000 people who paid 100 pound to stand

£100 to "stand" or was it just a donation - How many of those would actually put their name on the list.

Only a fraction of that number had actually declared and put their names forward at constituency level.

ArmaniJeanss

10 days ago.

Valentino Abundant Thug wrote: »

TBP appear to be handing Labour a massive head start in all this.
Just days ago JC's crowd were about 10/1 to win most seats, today it's about half the value due to significant overnight shortening:

Labour had been drifting anyway since the above, but this mornings events have seen a huge change, with Labour (most seats) now out to 10/1 general with 12s available at some lesser-known firms.
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-uk-general-election/most-seats
It's possible that this may be a 'darkest moment is before the dawn' situation, with the campaign really yet to kick in, debates to come, a handful of polls suggesting the gap isn't unsurmountable and plenty of time for Boris to mess up.

liamtech

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

You use very strong negative adjectives on Corbyn when your actual position as explained above is that you simply disagree with his approach and dislike that he hasn’t rowed in behind a specific group on the issue.

Corbyn will redraw red lines so that will absolutely open things up for further negotiation. He’ll also commit to new transition period dates. And then he’ll put whatever is received in a new deal to the people versus remain. Given the difficulties Labour have on Brexit and considering the genuine deep divisions in the country I think it’s a very sensible approach. But whether you agree with it or not, it isn’t hapless, fanciful, unclear, etc - it’s a simple straightforward position that would lead to a better outcome for the people of Britain.

Flat out revoking or rerunning 2016 with parameters that do not respect the desire to leave of 40%+ of the electorate is a frankly dangerous position on the issue. Might win a few more votes, but it is far from credible.

Ok well to address your first point - I do describe JC in negative terms, i freely admit that. It was not long ago that i would have been far more pro JC and the UK Labour party. Unfortunately the Labour party, with him as leader, have blundered about the place and made mistake after mistake

• His policy on when to have an election was frankly embarrassing. He spent the last year screaming that Labour is ready for and will win an election. Then he is offered one scheduled for Mid October - he doesnt want it as it may lead to a No Deal. Ok fair enough i got that. Then they legislate to avoid no deal, legally forcing who ever was PM the week before the 31st to request an extension. No still dont want an election no deal remains possible.. Ok assume he is correct here. Then Boris gets a deal, and subsequently requests an extension. Jeremy still turned down an election.. he had the labour party abstain from triggering an election, and it took the other opposition parties to effectively strong arm him into accepting said election
• What ever about BoJo's personal popularity during the period in office, he, and brexit went through their weakest period in the run up to October - Had Jeremy been pragmatic during this period and supported the peoples vote - he would have united the parties opposition, and added momentum to remain. Opposition parties may well have even persuaded the 20+ former Tories to roll in behind him, caretaker PM, GVT of national unity - call a referendum - and keep the tories caged and humiliated until after the ref - Did he do this? NOPE - he just dithered on and on about his 'five pillars' of his socialist Brexit which he will negotiate - Honestly im enjoying this discussion, and i remain civil, and i welcome everyone who wants to stand up for Corbyn and attack my criticism of him - but it is like you have all forgotten JC's ineptitude of the Pre election period- as if the fact we have an election means we roll in behind JC no matter what

But whether you agree with it or not, it isn’t hapless, fanciful, unclear, etc - it’s a simple straightforward position that would lead to a better outcome for the people of Britain. from above quotation

Without being personal at all, i find this to be a ludicrous proposition.

• Mays brexit is bad, BoJos brexit is bad, but JC's Brexit will be great
• Vote labour and JC will spend 6 months negotiating a socialist brexit, which he will implicitly endorse, and then stand by and watch as his entire party splits along Leave/Remain Lines
• What happens if he gets his deal, the referendum passes it, and then JC loses a subsequent election - and the Tories are back??? You think they will respect his socialist brexit??? they wont change it? even if it meant no deal, they would happily collapse a Corbyn Brexit Agreement

You honestly contend that it’s a simple straightforward position??

Given the difficulties Labour have on Brexit - do you honestly contend that Corbyn is not at least partly responsible for these difficulties?? Or do you think that scoring the EU 'SIX and a Half outta TEN' before the referendum - Actually helped Remain?????

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Last point is fair. They are suffering electorally because many voters just want labour to be an out and out remain party which, of course, corbyn is never going to be, no matter how much we wish it. Although there are some signs the key northern battleground seats might not desert them - that would put kiss of death om on any tory majority. So maybe corbyn strategy might yet not be a write off, far too soon to tell.

But if I'm reading this right, here's what i think is being suggested here. Labour continue with its PV policy - because we understand revoke is a cynical election ploy - but they reassure voters that they wont be facilitating any credible leave option so the whole thing will be weighted in favour of remain. Indeed why not go whole hog and put 2 leave options against remain and ensure victory, as many remainers want?

I think he should have fudged it more, like lib dems are doing - their 2017 position is exactly same as labours now - but he's tried to deal with it in a reasoned, quite sensible manner and, yes, they are paying for it, it seems.

To address your first point which i highlighted - yes it is a valid point to make. Jeremy's principles wouldn't let him endorse a remain platform - So why then didnt he step aside? WHY not take the position, that it is NOT that labour urging remain is NOT CREDIBLE - but it is that JC LEADING A REMAIN LABOUR is IMPOSSIBLE? - before anyone attacks this point let me point out two examples - Tim Farron, lib dem leader - resigned because he realized there was a conflict between his faith and his politics; as an atheist i disagree profoundly with Farron but as someone who is interested in and engaged with politics, i commend him. and lest we not forget David Cameron - profoundly disagree with him, and his politics, and the disaster of calling the ref in the first place - But at least he had the grace to realize that he would be in deep conflict, to pursue a policy which he himself had campaigned against--

Second point - Labours Referendum is not the same as the peoples vote referendum - by the time it takes place 6+ months will have passed where much of the negativity around brexit will have been removed, and indeed JC will have argued publicly that his Brexit is good -in that scenario the public attitude may have changed by then - JC will perfume brexit as being a positive - it isnt

As too having a referendum with 3 options on the ballot (remain, leave deal, leave no deal) it is precisely for the reason that it splits the leave camp in two that it would not work, or be accepted. If there is to be a three way question, it needs to ballot papers

Leave v Remain

if leave wins

Leave Deal v Leave No Deal

Finally im not a fan at all of the Lib Dems under Swinson, and i think revoke and move on would settle nothing. there would be a clear mandate for a second ref, by the leave side, and the tories would give it to them as soon as they could. I will say however, that to suggest Lib Dem 2017 is roughly the same as Labour 2019, that is a bit of a stretch. similar, but didnt involve more delays, a socialist renegotiation of brexit (by an ardent partly-closeted brexiteer) - and then finally a referendum

Complicated as always, happy to discuss respectfully

LeinsterDub

Quin_Dub wrote: »

£100 to "stand" or was it just a donation - How many of those would actually put their name on the list.

Only a fraction of that number had actually declared and put their names forward at constituency level.

To stand.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/06/06/brexit-party-has-3000-applications-wannabe-mps-wanting-fight/

So again 3000 wanting to stand

briany

Once Farage stands down his candidates in Conservative areas, that has to be it surely. Easy majority for the Cons?

LeinsterDub

briany wrote: »

Once Farage stands down his candidates in Conservative areas, that has to be it surely. Easy majority for the Cons?

How they currently "have" 317 seats , they are expecting to lose all or nearly all their seats in Scotland, Lib-Green-Ply will pick up some seats. Where are they picking 25 + seats considering the leave vote is now split?

Rjd2

briany wrote: »

Once Farage stands down his candidates in Conservative areas, that has to be it surely. Easy majority for the Cons?

4/7 on Betfair at the moment.

Tory majority obvious favorite but still things to fear for Boris.

Scotland wipeout

London wipeout

and he needs to win a lot of seats which are not tory strongholds .

The tv debates also could go wrong, Corbyn for all his flaws is a solid tv performer.

The left parties after today may finally get their act together and work with each other

However today has been a really good day for Boris for sure.

liamtech

briany wrote: »

Once Farage stands down his candidates in Conservative areas, that has to be it surely. Easy majority for the Cons?

Its a strange situation.

In one way Farage is being a proper pragmatist - he is not standing against Tory incumbents, which means they are relatively safe for those

He also spoke relatively positively about BJ's deal - TBP seem to be rolling in behind the deal as being not the hardest, but better then any possibility of a a second ref - from their POV

however it could work well for Labour though - if you think about it he is going to split the Leave Tory Vote in Labour seats - and in SNP and Lib Dem seats - presumably Plaid too although did he mention them specifically?

Joe_ Public

liamtech wrote: »

To address your first point which i highlighted - yes it is a valid point to make. Jeremy's principles wouldn't let him endorse a remain platform - So why then didnt he step aside? WHY not take the position, that it is NOT that labour urging remain is NOT CREDIBLE - but it is that JC LEADING A REMAIN LABOUR is IMPOSSIBLE? - before anyone attacks this point let me point out two examples - Tim Farron, lib dem leader - resigned because he realized there was a conflict between his faith and his politics; as an atheist i disagree profoundly with Farron but as someone who is interested in and engaged with politics, i commend him. and lest we not forget David Cameron - profoundly disagree with him, and his politics, and the disaster of calling the ref in the first place - But at least he had the grace to realize that he would be in deep conflict, to pursue a policy which he himself had campaigned against--

Second point - Labours Referendum is not the same as the peoples vote referendum - by the time it takes place 6+ months will have passed where much of the negativity around brexit will have been removed, and indeed JC will have argued publicly that his Brexit is good -in that scenario the public attitude may have changed by then - JC will perfume brexit as being a positive - it isnt

As too having a referendum with 3 options on the ballot (remain, leave deal, leave no deal) it is precisely for the reason that it splits the leave camp in two that it would not work, or be accepted. If there is to be a three way question, it needs to ballot papers

Leave v Remain

if leave wins

Leave Deal v Leave No Deal

Finally im not a fan at all of the Lib Dems under Swinson, and i think revoke and move on would settle nothing. there would be a clear mandate for a second ref, by the leave side, and the tories would give it to them as soon as they could. I will say however, that to suggest Lib Dem 2017 is roughly the same as Labour 2019, that is a bit of a stretch. similar, but didnt involve more delays, a socialist renegotiation of brexit (by an ardent partly-closeted brexiteer) - and then finally a referendum

Complicated as always, happy to discuss respectfully

Why should corbyn resign? Membership like him and are behind him. Endorsed him at conference recently. Farron resigned after a poor election performance, perhaps corbyn will too.

Just to post again, lib dem position 2017:

"Liberal Democrats believe the British people should have the final say. That’s why, when the terms of our future relationship with the EU have been negotiated, we will put that deal to a vote of the British people in a referendum, with the alternative option of staying in the EU on the ballot paper. We continue to believe that there is no deal as good for the UK outside the EU as the one it already has as a member. Every vote for the Liberal Democrats in this election is a vote to give the final say to the British people."

So all fair and good, but what deal do they propose to put in that referendum? Lib dem pm, in theory, how do they organise that vote? Lets forget revoke because they wont get away with that. At least labour are dealing with that tricky question, others just fudge it because there are no easy answers.

jm08

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

If Russian tanks roll into baltics tomorrow and US and UK and Turkey ignore their NATO commitments, which is no longer in realm of impossibility as it was few years ago, then NATO and EU are finnished as there be nothing to stop them rolling all way to English channel in days.

What he gains is fataly undermining the only institutions that can put a check on his ambitions.

Even if Putin has no plans invade more of Europe he gains the fact that his enemies are too busy with internal issues leaving him to tsar over his people. What he is afraid the most is being sodomised like Gaddaffi was.

Does Russia have the capability to roll anywhere? How would it finance it? Russia is very dependent on sales of gas to EU countries (particularly Germany) to keep itself afloat. Even if they did, the UK would prefer to keep Russia as far away as possible from the cliff of Dover.

liamtech

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Why should corbyn resign? Membership like him and are behind him. Endorsed him at conference recently. Farron resigned after a poor election performance, perhaps corbyn will too.

Just to post again, lib dem position 2017:

"Liberal Democrats believe the British people should have the final say. That’s why, when the terms of our future relationship with the EU have been negotiated, we will put that deal to a vote of the British people in a referendum, with the alternative option of staying in the EU on the ballot paper. We continue to believe that there is no deal as good for the UK outside the EU as the one it already has as a member. Every vote for the Liberal Democrats in this election is a vote to give the final say to the British people."

So all fair and good, but what deal do they propose to put in that referendum? Lib dem pm, in theory, how do they organise that vote? Lets forget revoke because they wont get away with that. At least labour are dealing with that tricky question, others just fudge it because there are no easy answers.

Why should corbyn resign? Membership like him and are behind him. Endorsed him at conference recently. Farron resigned after a poor election performance, perhaps corbyn will too.

He is incapable of leading a remain labour - when that is arguably what the country needs. He is at least partially responsible for the divisions in Labour over brexit - and by divisions i am referring to both the Parliamentary party AND the electorate

It is NOT that a REMAIN LABOUR PARTY is not credible - it is that HE IS NOT CREDIBLE to LEAD SUCH A PARTY

Therefore i maintain that he had the option to stand aside - he chose to remain based on a swell of labour membership and corbyniestas -

He is not a pragmatic person - he is a principled campaigner - i would still import him to ireland to teach our labour party who to be ACTUAL LEFTIES! but the moment he strays into his rampant euroscepticism he would rightly lose the audience - in my opinion

EDIT - i forgot to address your point on the Lib Dem manifesto - Yea i see your point but i think that its open to interpretation - Lib dem urging a 'sensible brexit' deal then a ref - in my view is different to JC LABOUR urging a 'socialist brexit' deal then a ref

Rjd2

liamtech wrote: »

Its a strange situation.

In one way Farage is being a proper pragmatist - he is not standing against Tory incumbents, which means they are relatively safe for those

He also spoke relatively positively about BJ's deal - TBP seem to be rolling in behind the deal as being not the hardest, but better then any possibility of a a second ref - from their POV

Its not been great Negotiating though has it?

Nigel ...Unless you promise us a hard brexit and form an alliance with us we will run MPS everywhere over to you...

Boris...No on all that Nigel.

Nigel. Ok fair enough we won't run MPS everywhere.

hotmail.com

LeinsterDub wrote: »

How do you reckon? Current predictions suggest the SNP take Scotland or nearly all of it . Lib dems pick up seats and the leave vote has now been split in Labour seats . Where do you see the Tory getting the numbers?

The 317 seats they won in 2017 are pretty much a certainty now. They will win Labour seats based on the current polling.

Lib Dems will be lucky to make small gains by the end of this. The first past the post system discriminates against them. Plus their leader isn't exactly a vote winner.

Joe_ Public

liamtech wrote: »

Why should corbyn resign? Membership like him and are behind him. Endorsed him at conference recently. Farron resigned after a poor election performance, perhaps corbyn will too.

He is incapable of leading a remain labour - when that is arguably what the country needs. He is at least partially responsible for the divisions in Labour over brexit - and by divisions i am referring to both the Parliamentary party AND the electorate

It is NOT that a REMAIN LABOUR PARTY is not credible - it is that HE IS NOT CREDIBLE to LEAD SUCH A PARTY

Therefore i maintain that he had the option to stand aside - he chose to remain based on a swell of labour membership and corbyniestas -

He is not a pragmatic person - he is a principled campaigner - i would still import him to ireland to teach our labour party who to be ACTUAL LEFTIES! but the moment he strays into his rampant euroscepticism he would rightly lose the audience - in my opinion

Thats fair enough. Youre entitled to that view and probably not alone. However, while corbyns historic eurosceptism is well documented, the fact he is supporting a PV and insisting on maintaining close alignment with the EU kind of makes a mockery of using words like "rampant" i think. Seems ott to me.

Blaming corbyn for the leave vote in labour areas also seems unfair to me. Over 70% of labour voters voted remain, even in leave voting labour constituencies they voted majority remain. You dont have to give corbyn credit for that, but to suggest its his fault other voters didnt vote remain seems harsh i would say.

Six labour mps went against him in the recent big hoc votes, in the circumstances i dont think that's too bad. They stayed mostly with him around the time they were passing the no deal legislation too. There is division but not as much as is being portrayed i think. Might not even lose as many of those leave seats as predicted, though bp standing down wont help.