Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

prawnsambo

10000maniacs wrote: »

Anybody who thinks Boris Johnson should suspend parliament to bypass a leave vote and deliver a no-deal Brexit is an English Republican.

Politically it's still not republicanism. It's much more like dictatorship. Although, to be fair, most dictators like to call their countries "republics" and democratic while they're at it.

10000maniacs

prawnsambo wrote: »

Politically it's still not republicanism. It's much more like dictatorship. Although, to be fair, most dictators like to call their countries "republics" and democratic while they're at it.

Yeah, maybe republicanism is too good a word for what is unfolding before our eyes in England currently.

c_murph

Batrachotox wrote: »

Corbyn making a move. Finally.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-pm-block-no-deal-brexit-cross-party-general-election-a9058886.html

Good to see Jo Swinson adopt the Boris Johnson negotiation style in her response. I wonder what she thinks will happen now if she asks Corbyn to meet and discuss forming a caretaker government?

I'm no fan of Corbyn, but he will be able to bring 90%+ of Labour MPs with him, his support is essential for a caretaker government and shooting him down publicly does nobody any good, save for Boris Johnson.

More sensible approach being taken by Grieve et al, agreeing to meet and talk.

lawred2

10000maniacs wrote: »

Ill answer your question now that its not "What?" anymore.:)
I never said they were connected.
But if you carried out a poll on how many Brexiters supported environmental issues, it would be a lot less than in the Remainer camp.

Who's editing this thread? Why was my response to you deleted? But not your quote of my post ???

MrMusician18

c_murph wrote: »

Good to see Jo Swinson adopt the Boris Johnson negotiation style in her response. I wonder what she thinks will happen now if she asks Corbyn to meet and discuss forming a caretaker government?

I'm no fan of Corbyn, but he will be able to bring 90%+ of Labour MPs with him, his support is essential for a caretaker government and shooting him down publicly does nobody any good, save for Boris Johnson.

More sensible approach being taken by Grieve et al, agreeing to meet and talk.

Amateur hour from the lib Dems again.

I don't understand the seeming necessary for British politicians to paint themselves into a corner at every opportunity

20silkcut

10000maniacs wrote: »

One great thing about the Brexit mess in the UK is that it separated the Republicans from the patriots. Brewer is doing what you would expect any hate filled UK republican would do, Ridicule,vilify and troll somebody who does not share her views. Does not matter that this 16 year old girl should have a bigger say in the future of the planet, Brewer is chugging along nicely towards old age, like the vast majority of the Brexiters.

The cold reality is that the world is owned and run by people aged roughly between 40 and 80. They make most of the decisions and call the shots.
Waiting for the Greta Thornberg generation to come on stream is not an option.

prawnsambo

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Amateur hour from the lib Dems again.

I don't understand the seeming necessary for British politicians to paint themselves into a corner at every opportunity

I can sort of understand her logic. Having Corbyn heading it would probably discourage any Tory rebels from joining. Hence the proposals of the likes of Ken Clarke etc.

trellheim

Yes, anyone missing this is not understanding how polarizing Corbyn is for middle ground Tories, whenever the media can , they run a negative spin. It's not that warranted of course but when has that ever mattered.

robinph

prawnsambo wrote: »

I can sort of understand her logic. Having Corbyn heading it would probably discourage any Tory rebels from joining. Hence the proposals of the likes of Ken Clarke etc.

It needs to be someone other than Corbyn for those reasons, but also sticking Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman in as caretaker PM will mean nobody is going to be put off by them potentially sticking around for longer than was originally intended. It will be clear its for one job only and then they leave.

prawnsambo

robinph wrote: »

It needs to be someone other than Corbyn for those reasons, but also sticking Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman in as caretaker PM will mean nobody is going to be put off by them potentially sticking around for longer than was originally intended. It will be clear its for one job only and then they leave.

It's also Corbyn's ambivalence towards brexit. And of course the danger of putting the opposition leader in a position of power that he wasn't elected to. It would have all the smell of a coup about it and that would be completely counter productive to its aims.

It's not a particularly good idea anyway. Johnson wants an election, so that's what's going to happen and opposition parties would be far better off organising voting pacts.

c_murph

prawnsambo wrote: »

It's also Corbyn's ambivalence towards brexit. And of course the danger of putting the opposition leader in a position of power that he wasn't elected to. It would have all the smell of a coup about it and that would be completely counter productive to its aims.

It's not a particularly good idea anyway. Johnson wants an election, so that's what's going to happen and opposition parties would be far better off organising voting pacts.

I was assuming that Swinson would be more sensible on Brexit than Corbyn. I cannot imagine Corbyn backing someone else to lead a caretaker government ahead of him.

It's definitely not a good idea, and one that would make a lot of MPs squeamish at the prospect of sitting alongside the enemy. But the manner in which she's dismissed it out of hand makes any discussion of an alternative choice such as Ken Clarke all the more difficult.

Trying to rationalise it, she may think a caretaker government a total non-runner and not worth thinking about?
Otherwise, if it does become the primary option to stop no-deal, she will have two choices:
1) Back down from her statement and agree on Corbyn entering No. 10 for a few days.
2) Maintain her stance and precipitate no-deal. Corbyn will totally allow Brexit to happen rather than resign or be made to look so weak as to end his leadership.

Neither looks good for her. So she can only be thinking there's zero chance of it happening.

prawnsambo

c_murph wrote: »

I was assuming that Swinson would be more sensible on Brexit than Corbyn. I cannot imagine Corbyn backing someone else to lead a caretaker government ahead of him.

I think it makes him look weak. If he declared that he would join it and agree a neutral leader with the other parties, he'd look statesmanlike. He doesn't have to get all sniffy and entitled about it. It's supposed to be about saving parliament and democracy, not a pissing contest to see who's got the most 'right' to lead it.

MrMusician18

prawnsambo wrote: »

I can sort of understand her logic. Having Corbyn heading it would probably discourage any Tory rebels from joining. Hence the proposals of the likes of Ken Clarke etc.

That is fair enough, but you don't box yourself in. The way she's approached this means the proposal is dead and had made it all about Corbyn. She should have said that there were aspects of the proposal that were good and that she works work with Labour on the bits they had difficulty with. First of all, it would help flush out those who would have no problem (even if holding their noses) with Corbyn leading the temporary government and the others that would have no problem with the proposal but for Corbyn. With the numbers each way crystalized, it would be absolutely clear if Corbyn needed to stand aside to get the national Government over the line.

What Swinson had done is ensured that a number of competing plans will remain out there, dividing the remain support and ensuring that no plan opposing no deal will get majority support.

Stupidity from the lib Dems, but I wouldn't expect anything else from them.

Stop moaning ffs

Some Tory rebels agreed to meet Corbyn. This all just feels too fractured and scattershot to achieve anything.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/15/lib-dems-and-anna-soubry-reject-corbyn-caretaker-government?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1565864373

prawnsambo

MrMusician18 wrote: »

That is fair enough, but you don't box yourself in. The way she's approached this means the proposal is dead and had made it all about Corbyn. She should have said that there were aspects of the proposal that were good and that she works work with Labour on the bits they had difficulty with. First of all, it would help flush out those who would have no problem (even if holding their noses) with Corbyn leading the temporary government and the others that would have no problem with the proposal but for Corbyn. With the numbers each way crystalized, it would be absolutely clear if Corbyn needed to stand aside to get the national Government over the line.

What Swinson had done is ensured that a number of competing plans will remain out there, dividing the remain support and ensuring that no plan opposing no deal will get majority support.

Stupidity from the lib Dems, but I wouldn't expect anything else from them.

It's a box-in either way. The Tories can block anything if they're united and have the DUP with them. No surer way of stopping Tory waverers from opposing the government than putting Corbyn as the figurehead. Apart from the absolute hatred most Tories have for him (I'm not excusing this btw), he's leader of the opposition and that's just too big a bridge to cross. Corbyn's approach is clever (but very cynical). He can look like he's in favour of it without actually having to do anything. The only way to have a GNU is to make sure that you have all the opposition and some Tories to carry it. Chances of this are slimmer than a snowball's in hell.

Stop moaning ffs

The cynic in me thinks this is Corbyn finally doing something to be seen to finally take a position on it but knowing it’ll never fly. It almost mirrors Johnson’s inevitable ‘I wanted to deliver brexit but parliament blocked me’ well hear him shout in the coming campaign

serfboard

10000maniacs wrote: »

if you carried out a poll on how many Brexiters supported environmental issues, it would be a lot less than in the Remainer camp.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

You're welcome.

Quoting from that article:

The Guardian wrote:

British people backing a leave vote in the EU referendum are almost twice as likely to believe that climate change does not have a human cause, according to a new poll.

Brexiters are more likely to think the media exaggerates how settled climate science is; distrust scientists; have sympathy with creationism; oppose onshore windfarms and support fracking.

None of that is a surprise, but interesting to see it recorded.

CrabRevolution

No matter how much they disagree with Johnson, I can't see any MPs rowing in behind Corbyn when his "policy" on brexit is to steadfastly have no stance at all.

robinph

serfboard wrote: »

Quoting from that article:

None of that is a surprise, but interesting to see it recorded.

But I doubt there would have been a similar result to any survey 4 years ago, there were not 50% of the voting population denying climate change then. It's just that after three years of being told not to believe experts about anything and to argue against any previously held popular belief things have swung 180 and previously daft views are now accepted as normal.

johnnyskeleton

lawred2 wrote: »

Who's editing this thread? Why was my response to you deleted? But not your quote of my post ???

Mod note:

See previous mod notes, and please dont dispute moderstion on thread.

Headshot

I feel it was a bit of an own goal for Lib Dems today. Jo Swinson was far to harsh today and should of been more pragmatic.

I know where Jo is coming from but surely what's the harm in meeting Corbyn. It's only going to be a very temporary national unity party

PropJoe10

Headshot wrote: »

I feel it was a bit of an own goal for Lib Dems today. Jo Swinson was far to harsh today and should of been more pragmatic.

I know where Jo is coming from but surely what's the harm in meeting Corbyn. It's only going to be a very temporary national unity party

I think she's probably right, in fairness. Corbyn has consistently flip-flopped over Brexit and has basically stood for nothing for the entire process. He doesn't even have the support of a fair chunk of Labour MPs, never mind gaining support from rebel Tories.

I think there's much more likelihood of people rowing in behind the likes of Kenneth Clarke in a short term situation. Highly experienced, talks sense, and is respected across the entire House.

Professor Moriarty

PropJoe10 wrote: »

I think she's probably right, in fairness. Corbyn has consistently flip-flopped over Brexit and has basically stood for nothing for the entire process. He doesn't even have the support of a fair chunk of Labour MPs, never mind gaining support from rebel Tories.

I think there's much more likelihood of people rowing in behind the likes of Kenneth Clarke in a short term situation. Highly experienced, talks sense, and is respected across the entire House.

Clarke would indeed be the choice of most. The problem is that making Clarke interim PM would be a humiliating slap in the face for the Leader of the Opposition and, by extension, for Labour.

Water John

It's early days in this particular dance. Swinson simply stating the obvious and playing a little hardball. This may force Corbyn to give concessions in return for him getting the Temp PM position. That's one outcome.
BTW we have had situations where the leader of the largest party in a coalition was not the Taoiseach, because one of the parties objected to it.

quokula

Headshot wrote: »

I feel it was a bit of an own goal for Lib Dems today. Jo Swinson was far to harsh today and should of been more pragmatic.

I know where Jo is coming from but surely what's the harm in meeting Corbyn. It's only going to be a very temporary national unity party

They've always been more concerned with using "remain" as their election USP to try and steal votes from Labour, since their time in coalition made them poisonous on domestic policy, than actually taking any real action to stop Brexit.

PropJoe10

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Clarke would indeed be the choice of most. The problem is that making Clarke interim PM would be a humiliating slap in the face for the Leader of the Opposition and, by extension, for Labour.

I don't really see an alternative, other than Labour finally getting rid of Corbyn and getting someone in with a clear vision of what Labour should actually be standing for. Who they'd select as a new leader is anyone's guess but until that happens, they're pretty much a lame duck in my view.

In the absence of a proper Labour alternative government option, the only way I can see is for the people against No Deal in Parliament to find someone they can possibly unite behind. I can't really think of anyone that's more respected in the Commons than Clarke but as you said, it would be a hard sell especially for a Labour front bench.

quokula

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Amateur hour from the lib Dems again.

I don't understand the seeming necessary for British politicians to paint themselves into a corner at every opportunity

In fairness, being pragmatic, realistic and trying to find a compromise, as Corbyn has consistently been on Brexit, gets you crucified by both sides of the divide across the British media. So you can see why it's in the Lib Dem's interest to take a hard line stance rather than try to achieve anything positive for the country. That's what gets you into power in the UK these days.

Water John

The Lib Dems are the ones going up in the polls. Any Govn't after a GE would likely need the support of the Lib Dems. Swinson isn't going to roll over and let Corbyn tickle her belly. The Lib Dems more than anyone will remember how they got badly burned the last time in Govn't. That arose from being too close to Cameron. Keep your potential coalition partner at arms length. Differentiation is where Swinson will win seats.

robinph

quokula wrote: »

In fairness, being pragmatic, realistic and trying to find a compromise, as Corbyn has consistently been on Brexit, gets you crucified by both sides of the divide across the British media. So you can see why it's in the Lib Dem's interest to take a hard line stance rather than try to achieve anything positive for the country. That's what gets you into power in the UK these days.

Huh, when did that happen?

Corbyn has just been trying to say two different things at the same time and hoping that nobody notices. Compromising is not agreeing with everyone, that is just lying to everyone.

Compromising is being prepared to move your position slightly towards the other side and them then doing the same towards you. That is something nobody has been doing, it just happens that Corbyn is being uncompromising and sitting in the middle and disagreeing with both extremes equally.

Spanish Eyes

Maybe it could be sold on the basis of "Country before Party".

Because as it is, it appears to be Party before the people both on behalf of Labour and the Tories.

Remain really needs a decent person of integrity to lead the charge to stop this. But I wouldn't bet my house on it happening. But hope springs eternal.