General Election December, 2019 (U.K.)

Strazdas

liamtech wrote: »

Boris has lost tonight - in a massive way

Which answers why he wont take part in the Channel4 debate on Sunday

Winners tonight for me - Sturgeon and Corbyn - if you had to push me for one i would have to say Sturgeon. She just edged it in my view

Damaged - Swinson - shockingly inarticulate and not at all convincing

Complete Loss - Johnson - im typing this at 8:48 - and he is losing 6-0 in football terms - a laughing stock

Agree on all those - Corbyn & Sturgeon excellent, Swinson lightweight / weak, Johnson waffling and bumbling

A Dub in Glasgo

Aegir wrote: »

Bruce took several questions at once was my point.

That makes sense now - all the others answered theirs (from what I can remember) and I would expect the chair to keep them to it. Bruce is allowing Johnson to ramble (it is difficult to pin him down)

DoctorEdgeWild

I actually thought Johnson would be good at this but it's fairly painful to watch. I thought he'd ignore the questions but fill the room with rhetoric and bluster until his time was up.

Joe_ Public

The hospitals thing is so emblematic of the shambles that johnson is. In his first sentence he mentions the figure 20. Then its 6, then it's 40. Is it building or upgrading Are they actually new at all or just renovating existing sites? Talks about clarity in relation to other parties, but everything he says is just a jumble of figures, vague ambitions and total sheer bluster.

Edit: then he says "40 new hospitals and 20 upgrades." That's 60, isn't it? Dont believe a word of it, a single word.

Strazdas

DoctorEdgeWild wrote: »

I actually thought Johnson would be good at this but it's fairly painful to watch. I thought he'd ignore the questions but fill the room with rhetoric and bluster until his time was up.

Audience hammering home the point about years of Tory austerity and how they are completely untrustworthy as a party

A Dub in Glasgo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

If Johnson won't debate, these things should get pulled

This is what I said a while ago... I thought the format actually worked tonight

A Dub in Glasgo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

That makes sense now - all the others answered theirs (from what I can remember) and I would expect the chair to keep them to it. Bruce is allowing Johnson to ramble (it is difficult to pin him down)

Different ball game for Johnson though. The other three are answering questions on what they would do, so are effectively just backing up their own manifesto. Johnson is answering questions on what has happened and the past performance of the government.

A Dub in Glasgo

Aegir wrote: »

Johnson is answering questions on what has happened and the past performance of the government.

Swinson got a kicking on previous preformance

Harry Palmr

not sure why anyone would be surprised by Johnson's poor turn. He is not a good speaker in a formal setting and when he has to field incoming questions. He is good when he has the room with him and no pressure to be accurate or concise. Basically you'd hire him for an after dinner gig but nothing else.

Sam Russell

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Swinson got a kicking on previous preformance

She is not a leader, more like a lead balloon.

A Dub in Glasgo

BBC interviewer on BBC News channel misrepresenting what Sturgeon said tonight. Sturgeon clearly siad she is not looking for a coalition, she will be looking to support Labour on some policies in return for the legal ability for the Scottish Parliament to hold an independence referendum

Edit - got the BBC interviewer name wrong

Capt'n Midnight

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Why is it his "we have more people in work than ever before" is never followed with the obvious "we also have more in-work poverty than ever before and more working people than ever before accessing food banks"?

Population has gone up about 5% since the Conservatives came to power.

So more workers. But more unemployed.

And less police.

Even if they can get the 20,000 they'll still be a few hundred less than before. And that's not counting the population growth to now. Or the additional growth until the new plod start plodding.

Strazdas

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Iain Watson on BBC News channel misrepresenting what Sturgeon said tonight. Sturgeon clearly siad she is not looking for a coalition, she will be looking to support Labour on some policies in return for the legal ability for the Scottish Parliament to hold an independence referendum

Yes, she explicitly said she didn't want to be in a coalition government.

J Mysterio

Tory ministers Raab and Schapps squaring up to each other here after debate, live on tv. Most unusual.

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1197990184815669248

Rjd2

J Mysterio wrote: »

Tory ministers Raab and Schapps squaring up to each other here after debate, live on tv. Most unusual.

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1197990184815669248

Its Andy Mc Donald of Labour is it not?

Each side will spin it in their favor, but that just looks like 2 aggressive blokes squaring up and doing **** all. Probably for the best for Mc Donald, Raab is a tank tbf. (by politician standards)

hometruths

J Mysterio wrote: »

Tory ministers Raab and Schapps squaring up to each other here after debate, live on tv. Most unusual.

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1197990184815669248

Always get the impression Dominic Raab is only a cold latte away from an assault charge.

FrancieBrady

J Mysterio wrote: »

Tory ministers Raab and Schapps squaring up to each other here after debate, live on tv. Most unusual.

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1197990184815669248

'Shadow' would mean he is Labour, would it not?

Joe_ Public

Rjd2 wrote: »

Its Andy Mc Donald of Labour is it not?

Each side will spin it in their favor, but that just looks like 2 aggressive blokes squaring up and doing **** all. Probably for the best for Mc Donald, Raab is a tank tbf. (by politician standards)

McDonald usually comes across as a pretty blunt character to be fair. Didnt see interview but looks as if he allowed himself to get wound up by some typical raab attacks on labour. Dont blame him in a way but its not a good look for any politician.

Aidric

It had its faults but on balance it was the best debate so far. A lot of that was down to the audience who weren't willing to suffer fools gladly.

Swinson was not only inarticulate but also robotic to boot. Her game is up. Johnson was his usual blundering self.

For all the criticism of Corbyn he has consistently been human in all these debates. His policies may not garner broad appeal but they are consistent with his broad principles. The audience bought in to that I felt.

Sturgeon is a polished performer but she is campaigning on a narrow agenda. Her message plays well to a Scottish audience but this is a UK election. Despite that I think she acquitted herself adequately. A particular power move was inviting that audience member who spoke about drug addiction to contact her afterwards for input on policy going forward. This is the type of empathy which is evident in the SNP and Labour pitches so far.

The Conservatives and LD's by comparison are just sounding like career politicians.

hotmail.com

It will be interesting to see if Lib Dem voters switch to Labour or Tory in the coming days.

liamtech

hotmail.com wrote: »

It will be interesting to see if Lib Dem voters switch to Labour or Tory in the coming days.

If they were Lib Dem - they were probably remain leaning so - probably more labour in my mind - if they switch

quokula

So I’m away and missed the debates. Had a read on here and the almost universal conclusion is that Corbyn and Sturgeon were great and Swinson and Johnson were terrible.

Switched over to the guardian which had a sum up of different journalists verdict and everyone saying how happy the conservatives will be with how that went and how Corbyn played right into their hands.

Again, I haven’t seen it, but based on past performance I’m guessing this is another example of the UK media arguing black is white and night is day. And the public will probably go along with it too.

At least there was consistent agreement that Swinson was terrible though.

Joe_ Public

Not alleging bias but from watching bbc news earlier followed by newsnight, you'd swear corbyn did nothing but wrestle with audience questions on brexit and antisemitism. Andy McDonald on newsnight wasnt asked about anything else. Two reports on the news claimed both johnson and corbyn segments were evidence of lack of public trust in party leaders, as if both of them performed equally badly. Just didnt chime at all with what I'd witnessed earlier.

At least the newsnight panel restored the balance by pointing out that corbyn had done well, the tory guy on it even resisting trashing his brexit position which was interesting.

Edit: just looking on twitter i quickly realise i am far from alone in that view. It was pretty obvious really in fairness.

https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1198001123682062336?s=20

liamtech

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Not alleging bias but from watching bbc news earlier followed by newsnight, you'd swear corbyn did nothing but wrestle with audience questions on brexit and antisemitism. Andy McDonald on newsnight wasnt asked about anything else. Two reports on the news claimed both johnson and corbyn segments were evidence of lack of public trust in party leaders, as if both of them performed equally badly. Just didnt chime at all with what I'd witnessed earlier.

At least the newsnight panel restored the balance by pointing out that corbyn had done well, the tory guy on it even resisting trashing his brexit position which was interesting.

this

Boris is depending on this. The media are clearly biased -

Its not 'Negotiating a new deal and remaining neutral so as to not inhibit my ability to carry out the will of the people'

its - 'HE doesnt know what he wants'

---

Its not 'this is divisive and i am trying to bring us together'

its - 'he is gonna drag this out'

---

Its not 'He is welcoming an Investigation, because Labour has nothing to hide'

its - 'He doesnt care because he is an Antisemite'

and i have been critical of Corbyn and i stand by my opinion - but the media hate him, and misrepresent him

and its wrong

Joe_ Public

liamtech wrote: »

this

Boris is depending on this. The media are clearly biased -

Its not 'Negotiating a new deal and remaining neutral so as to not inhibit my ability to carry out the will of the people'

its - 'HE doesnt know what he wants'

---

Its not 'this is divisive and i am trying to bring us together'

its - 'he is gonna drag this out'

---

Its not 'He is welcoming an Investigation, because Labour has nothing to hide'

its - 'He doesnt care because he is an Antisemite'

and i have been critical of Corbyn and i stand by my opinion - but the media hate him, and misrepresent him

and its wrong

Yeah. When i suggested it wasnt bias in my above post, i was just really being diplomatic about it. At the very least its lazy or sloppy journalism and wouldnt at all surprise me if it was more than that.

sid waddell

quokula wrote: »

So I’m away and missed the debates. Had a read on here and the almost universal conclusion is that Corbyn and Sturgeon were great and Swinson and Johnson were terrible.

Switched over to the guardian which had a sum up of different journalists verdict and everyone saying how happy the conservatives will be with how that went and how Corbyn played right into their hands.

Again, I haven’t seen it, but based on past performance I’m guessing this is another example of the UK media arguing black is white and night is day. And the public will probably go along with it too.

At least there was consistent agreement that Swinson was terrible though.

It absolutely is.

I watched the whole of Corbyn and Johnson's sections.

Corbyn was solid, fluent, sincere and human. He's performing in a similar manner to how he did in 2017. He wasn't spectacular, he was good.

The first 15 minutes of Johnson was a complete car crash. The whole 30, he was a bumbling mess, unprepared, arrogant, again tried to bring everything back to Brexit. I think the fact that the room was not made up of his crowd who would laugh along with his buffoonery unsettled him. He doesn't like when he has to face anybody who isn't on his side.

He's a very poor campaigner and the perception that he's a good one is a complete myth. He was awful in the Tory leadership debates and that has continued into this campaign.

There's something really strange going on with the media reactions to these debates. It's almost like "don't believe your eyes and ears".

Loughborough University nailed this with their study of media ccampaign coverage. The pro-Tory media is not a myth, its sober reality.

Conservative journalists, especially in print, tend to be rabid attack dogs who go to bat for "their team". Liberal or centrist or soft Labour type journalists seem to bend over backwards not to appear biased. So they nearly end up praising the Tories and Johnson.

There are few enough journalists who will actually go to bat for Corbyn or Labour, a lot less than will go to bat for the Tories.

Lewis Goodall is one of the few reporters with a major outlet who I'd actually have some time for in how he calls things, he seems pretty straight down the line and says what he sees instead of bending over backwards to go with some sort of official narrative.

It may be wishful thinking but I do think Labour will start to see a bit of a surge now. It'll mainly be from the Lib Dems, not the Tories though and I doubt it will be on the same scale as 2017. I still think the Tories will get a majority.

Theresa May, robotic as she was, displayed a vulnerability and a human weakness in her character that Johnson is not perceived to have.

It doesn't matter what country, the public tend to love somebody who is perceived as "strong and charismatic".

That these so called "strong and charismatic" types almost always turn out to be lazy bluffers and charlatans is irrelevant. Their support tends to be cult like.

liamtech

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Yeah. When i suggested it wasnt bias in my above post, i was just really being diplomatic about it. At the very least its lazy or sloppy journalism and wouldnt at all surprise me if it was more than that.

Of course i should have been clearer - i think you and I are singing from the same hymn sheet entirely - completely agree with your sentiments -

Even as writing this its 11:50 and they have gone on and on about Jeremy's Fence Sitting -

Jeremy Corbyn and Sturgeon won tonight's Question time -

BBC show highlights of people laughing at him

and a random South African shouting that he is a misogynist - and this is real by the way thats the news

If Monty Python had made a film in the 70s about this as a hypothetical scenario - they would have been laughed out of the studio for being too 'outta the box unrealistic'

Joe_ Public

liamtech wrote: »

Of course i should have been clearer - i think you and I are singing from the same hymn sheet entirely - completely agree with your sentiments -

Even as writing this its 11:50 and they have gone on and on about Jeremy's Fence Sitting -

Jeremy Corbyn and Sturgeon won tonight's Question time -

BBC show highlights of people laughing at him

and a random South African shouting that he is a misogynist - and this is real by the way thats the news

If Monty Python had made a film in the 70s about this as a hypothetical scenario - they would have been laughed out of the studio for being too 'outta the box unrealistic'

Yes, according to bbc tonight the only highlights for jeremy corbyn were facing a grilling on brexit (on which he came through reasonably well i thought) and a very tough question on antisemitism which, to be fair, is a legitimate line of inquisition against him. But nothing else? They even had a roomful of 20 people in norwich, not one of whom they could find to say a good word about corbyn. One of them even claimed none of the party leaders offered anything for young people, despite labour pledging free tuition fees, relief of student debt and tough action on climate change.

Just a really odd experience when you watch the news and you wonder whether you have been living in a parallel universe!

Joe_ Public

Talking about labours tax proposals earlier i came across this tweet and immediately thought it had, just had to be a wind up until i learned this woman is actually a tory party employee and worked on the vote leave campaign so every chance she does actually believe this:

https://twitter.com/TheaDickinson/status/1197525830173364224?s=20

sid waddell

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Talking about labours tax proposals earlier i came across this tweet and immediately thought it had, just had to be a wind up until i learned this woman is actually a tory party employee and worked on the vote leave campaign so every chance she does actually believe this:

https://twitter.com/TheaDickinson/status/1197525830173364224?s=20

Oh My God

That has be satire, it just has to be - but a quick look through the account seems to indicate it's real alright...

markodaly

Does anyone think that Corbyn's fence-sitting will be good for labor?

Boris is bad, but Corbyn keeps missing open goals because he himself is just not a leader.

liamtech

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Just a really odd experience when you watch the news and you wonder whether you have been living in a parallel universe!

Philip K Dick couldn't write a story this bizarre

its beyond man in the high castle at this stage

And when you look at northern Ireland, in terms of the election, its like the mainland UK . on steroids

to living in interesting times i guess - raising a glass

Joe_ Public

sid waddell wrote: »

Oh My God

That has be satire, it just has to be - but a quick look through the account seems to indicate it's real alright...

Its real enough alright. They have simply made the colossally stupid assumption that labour intends to raise over 80bn from the tax on high income earners alone and thus arrived at some comically distorted figures. Pity this wasnt passed onto the pm for last nights debate!

Edit: just noticed the source of the original tweet is the cato institute - right wing US think tank funded by trump loving koch family and with links to tory ERG group. So very likely another very deliberate attempt to smear labour and thick tory consultant just takes it as gospel.

dublinman1990

If you are watching the TV coverage for the GE on the 12th of December from the BBC; I heard from some people online from a TV presentation forum that it may not be held at Elstree Studios for that night going on into Friday. The BBC will have their live studio coverage of the GE held within the BBC News studios at Broadcasting House in London. The BBC will have it in the same studio which had their recent coverage of the European Elections. The reason that it's not held at Elstree this year is because ITV are planning to pre-record a Christmas special from there with Michael Ball & Alfie Boe called Ball & Boe: A Very Merry Christmas on the night after the election results. The link that I put up there is an application form for free tickets for the Christmas special. It will have it's doors open at Elstree Studios from 6:30pm.

About the QT election debate that was on BBC One earlier. I didn't see it at all. I ended up watching a RTÉ News report about the debate on the Nine O'Clock news. It appeared to me with no surprise that Johnson & Swinson were the poorest performers of that election debate. I know QT is shown as a repeat on the later part of Sunday nights on BBC Two so I hope that it will be there to allow me watch it with more detail about what they were saying when they're out on the campaign trail.

SaintLeibowitz

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Its real enough alright. They have simply made the colossally stupid assumption that labour intends to raise over 80bn from the tax on high income earners alone and thus arrived at some comically distorted figures. Pity this wasnt passed onto the pm for last nights debate!

Edit: just noticed the source of the original tweet is the cato institute - right wing US think tank funded by trump loving koch family and with links to tory ERG group. So very likely another very deliberate attempt to smear labour and thick tory consultant just takes it as gospel.

The cato industry are best ignored. They openly favor authoritarian regimes over democratic ones which implement their free market mayhem.

Mr.Nice Guy

Caught up with the debates last night. My goodness, Swinson was dreadful. Was she really the best the Lib Dems could come up with for leader? She seemed almost apologetic for her party's position and was like a deer in the headlights. Thought Corbyn and Sturgeon did well. Johnson struggled at times, though like in the ITV debate he is making sure to hammer home the Brexit point at every opportunity. If Brexit is in voter's minds when they vote that might prove to be a successful strategy, despite his unconvincing performance on other domestic issues.

seligehgit

Aidric wrote: »

It had its faults but on balance it was the best debate so far. A lot of that was down to the audience who weren't willing to suffer fools gladly.

Swinson was not only inarticulate but also robotic to boot. Her game is up. Johnson was his usual blundering self.

For all the criticism of Corbyn he has consistently been human in all these debates. His policies may not garner broad appeal but they are consistent with his broad principles. The audience bought in to that I felt.

Sturgeon is a polished performer but she is campaigning on a narrow agenda. Her message plays well to a Scottish audience but this is a UK election. Despite that I think she acquitted herself adequately. A particular power move was inviting that audience member who spoke about drug addiction to contact her afterwards for input on policy going forward. This is the type of empathy which is evident in the SNP and Labour pitches so far.

The Conservatives and LD's by comparison are just sounding like career politicians.

IMO Nicola Sturgeon won the debate hands down.An incredibly impressive performer.

Jeremy Corbyn impressed with his sincerity in spite of the fact I would not agree with aspects of his socialism/nationalisation program.He struggled to adequately address the youtube video relating to an anti semitism incident,ditto taking a stance on Morales on twitter.

I believe the Labour vote will suffer with his now confirmation that he'll take a neutral stance on any referendum on a new deal/remain vote.Boris and the Tories will hammer home this message.IMO he's entitled to do same but he'll be projected to be weak in not taking a stance either way.

Jo Swinson was a car crash.Widely criticised in the aftermath of Clegg's hand in the coalition decision on tuition fees,rubber stamping austerity measures.Flip flopping on fracking and trying to railroad remain through with a revoking of article 50 as opposed to a second referendum.Corbyn is her best option for achieving her remain objective.Painfully obvious after 3 years of division that all comers agree only a second referendum without any misinformation will allow a semblance of healing.Not her revoking article 50,the idea of a second referendum is may be more palatable and democratic to brexiteers.

Boris Johnson was his wonderful waffling self,truly awful.Fiona Bruce let him off the hook re the investigation,I could not recall a single insightful comment.Lots of promises of largesse,something for everybody in the audience.

https://www.politico.eu/europe-poll-of-polls/united-kingdom/

Kermit.de.frog

I'm in little doubt the Tories are headed for their overall majority and we will finally have certainty on the withdrawal agreement.

Corbyn is dithering and indecisive on Brexit. Him somehow being elected would only lead to more chaos. He is a leaver at heart.

Truth is between this and his little red book he is unelectable as PM.

0gac3yjefb5sv7

I'd imagine Brexit won't happen now at all, as with Jeremy as PM, 2nd referendum which will be a huge win for the remain campaign...

beggars_bush

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I'm in little doubt the Tories are headed for their overall majority and we will finally have certainty on the withdrawal agreement.

Corbyn is dithering and indecisive on Brexit. Him somehow being elected would only lead to more chaos. He is a leaver at heart.

Truth is between this and his little red book he is unelectable as PM.

If the Tories get a majority then I'm just giving up on the UK
How thick can an electorate be.
10 years of austerity on the general population and cutbacks on services yet the Tories blame Labour and try to paint Corbyn as some sort of Marxist who will attack people's wealth

Kermit.de.frog

Pheonix10 wrote: »

I'd imagine Brexit won't happen now at all, as with Jeremy as PM, 2nd referendum which will be a huge win for the remain campaign...

Tory overall majority. Brexit in January. Withdrawal Agreement ratified. No going back.

This is how it looks like based on the evidence.

Not saying there could be a surprise but a 2nd ref and Tory majority is remainer wishful thinking at it's worst. It's not going to happen.

As I said the UK is not to be walked over like an Ireland or a Netherlands. They won't have their vote overturned. As no sovereign country should.

A Corbyn govt is not viable or credible anyway.

Remainers would be better off placing the blame at his dithering feet.

Leroy42

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I'm in little doubt the Tories are headed for their overall majority and we will finally have certainty on the withdrawal agreement.

Corbyn is dithering and indecisive on Brexit. Him somehow being elected would only lead to more chaos. He is a leaver at heart.

Truth is between this and his little red book he is unelectable as PM.

Well, when you put it like that!

Dithering and indecisive? You may recall that Johnson, and the majority of the cabinet, voted numerous times against the WA until they finally decided that all their previous objections were mo longer a worry. The failure to have delivered on the will of the people sits solely on the shoulders of the Tory party.

More chaos on Brexit? Three PMs, massive and historic losses in the HoC, slating of the HoL, judiciary, the media, other parties. All to end up in a worse position than they started out with.

Little red book? Johnson is withholding an entire report on the funding of, in particular, the Tory party by Russians.

And let's review performance shall we. One of the main cries of Brexit was that people were fed up with being left behind and so willing to roll the dice to force change. That and disbelieving experts. What we have now is the Tory party telling everyone that whilst things are bad, change could be a risk. And now we must listen to the experts who tell us that Labour policy is ruinous.

0gac3yjefb5sv7

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Tory overall majority. Brexit in January. Withdrawal Agreement ratified. No going back.

This is how it looks like based on the evidence.

Not saying there could be a surprise but a 2nd ref and Tory majority is remainer wishful thinking at it's worst. It's not going to happen.

As I said the UK is not to be walked over like an Ireland or a Netherlands. They won't have their vote overturned. As no sovereign country should.

A Corbyn govt is not viable or credible anyway.

Remainers would be better off placing the blame at his dithering feet.

A second referendum isn't unconstitutional. Again, the majority have their say. Which is the way it should be.

Leroy42

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Tory overall majority. Brexit in January. Withdrawal Agreement ratified. No going back.

This is how it looks like based on the evidence.

Not saying there could be a surprise but a 2nd ref and Tory majority is remainer wishful thinking at it's worst. It's not going to happen.

As I said the UK is not to be walked over like an Ireland or a Netherlands. They won't have their vote overturned. As no sovereign country should.

A Corbyn govt is not viable or credible anyway.

Remainers would be better off placing the blame at his dithering feet.

You do realise he has not been in government, I mean, you do understand how the HoC works don't you?

The complete and abject failure of Brexit, summed up by the fact that not one Tory or BP candidate is talking about the benefits only about how people are fed up with it, and if course the fact that Johnson has refused to publish any government report on the effects of his deal, this is all on the Tories, and a large portion lies directly with Johnson himself.

He turned his back on the WA early in the year resulting in 2 extensions and they left things too late to secure his promised leaving date.

So unconvinced of his own plan, he wouldn't even let the HoC review and debate it. Instead preferring to break his own promise to the country to not extend in order to run an election, one he said that nobody wanted.

But yeah, its Corbyn's fault!

Kermit.de.frog

But ultimately Labour are suffering because they colluded against the majority wish of the British people to leave the EU. Many of which are in the traditional Labour heartlands.

They got re elected on the basis they would implement the result of the referendum - they lied.

There was always going to be chaos with majority remainer MPs against the expressed will of the electorate.

Colluding to overturn a referendum you get away with in Ireland, France, Netherlands...countries that have very little 'sovereignty' left.

I never believed this would work in the UK for a second. I am being proved 100% right.

This is why the Tories will get their majority.

sid waddell

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

As I said the UK is not to be walked over like an Ireland or a Netherlands. They won't have their vote overturned. As no sovereign country should.

The UK is already being walked over by Russia, it'll be walked over by everybody else under a Johnson Brexit.

And that means the actual people of the UK are and will continue to be walked over, not the wealthy insiders who promoted Brexit, who will all be absolutely fine.

Kermit.de.frog

sid waddell wrote: »

The UK is already being walked over by Russia, it'll be walked over by everybody else under a Johnson Brexit.

And that means the actual people of the UK are and will continue to be walked over, not the wealthy insiders who promoted Brexit, who will all be absolutely fine.

That's not our business. They had a referendum. They voted to leave.

Labour and gone tory rebels used all sorts of parliament schenadigans to overturn that.

You can be in denial but that is why they are suffering in the polls.

At least after this election we will be hearing far less about 'the will of parliament'.

sid waddell

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

That's not our business. They had a referendum. They voted to leave.

Labour and gone tory rebels used all sorts of parliament schenadigans to overturn that.

You can be in denial but that is why they are suffering in the polls.

At least after this election we will be hearing far less about 'the will of parliament'.

Well it's interesting that you didn't deny the point about Russia walking all over the UK.

It's also interesting to see that you don't seem care about the integrity of referendums or elections.

A bit like the Tories themselves, who don't seem to care about it, in fact they seem to actively encourage it.

Hostile state interference by itself should be reason enough to re-run the referendum with wide ranging measures to prevent such interference happening again.

But those much needed wide ranging measures against hostile interference sure aren't going to come under the Tories.

Leroy42

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

But ultimately Labour are suffering because they colluded against the majority wish of the British people to leave the EU. Many of which are in the traditional Labour heartlands.

They got re elected on the basis they would implement the result of the referendum - they lied.

There was always going to be chaos with majority remainer MPs against the expressed will of the electorate.

Colluding to overturn a referendum you get away with in Ireland, France, Netherlands...countries that have very little 'sovereignty' left.

I never believed this would work in the UK for a second. I am being proved 100% right.

This is why the Tories will get their majority.

Again, and I hate to labour the point, but it is because of Johnson and his ilk in the Tory party that the UK have not left.

Tory were given the mandate by the public to carry out Brexit in the 2017 election. They failed to deliver on their manifesto promise.

Labour were rejected by the public and thus there manifesto position dies.

You appear to completely misunderstand where power was based.

Joe_ Public

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

But ultimately Labour are suffering because they colluded against the majority wish of the British people to leave the EU. Many of which are in the traditional Labour heartlands.

They got re elected on the basis they would implement the result of the referendum - they lied.

There was always going to be chaos with majority remainer MPs against the expressed will of the electorate.

Colluding to overturn a referendum you get away with in Ireland, France, Netherlands...countries that have very little 'sovereignty' left.

I never believed this would work in the UK for a second. I am being proved 100% right.

This is why the Tories will get their majority.

What you write bears a fundamental misunderstanding of the basic duties of an mp which have been understood since around the time of edmund burke to be:

"Their primary responsibility is to act in the national interest. They must also act in the interests of their constituents where this does not override their primary responsibility. Finally, if they belong to a political party, they may act in the interests of that party, subordinate to the other two responsibilities."

Mps are elected to represent their constituencies, not as delegates for them. If they believe that in supporting a brexit deal they will weaken or threaten the union in any way, then it is their duty to oppose it. Their primary responsibility was never to promise to uphold the 2016 vote and then permit any deal to pass whatsoever. However you or other brexiteers might wish to present it.