Professor Moriarty wrote: » Eh, no. We don't know that at all. If I'm a Labour MP looking to Corbyn to lead me into a glorious future and ensuring I keep my seat, then I'd be keeping a beady eye on the polls. I'd be wondering how my party would be doing under a leader who wasn't so unpopular.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » What about the repeated times I've pointed out that no labour leader could have opposed the referendum result.
Havockk wrote: » oscarBravo wrote: » ...can we discuss the more salient point, which is just how bad a party has to be to have only recently scraped level with a May-led Tory government? I've lost silly points before and owned them. No lost honour in that.
oscarBravo wrote: » ...can we discuss the more salient point, which is just how bad a party has to be to have only recently scraped level with a May-led Tory government?
Subcomandante Marcos wrote: » Or that nobody in the labour party would currently beat Corbyn in a leadership election, or that Corbyn is currently the Labour MP with the highest approval rating?
oscarBravo wrote: » Are you seriously trying to make the case that there is no possible way an opposition leader could have capitalised on the Tory omnishambles better than Corbyn has? Because that's a pretty extraordinary position to take.
oscarBravo wrote: » I guess that's a "no".
Havockk wrote: » How. Backing the idiotic people's vote? Huge swathes of labour voters backed brexit. A CU proposal is the sanest on the table.
oscarBravo wrote: » Jesus, you are trying to claim that. The mind boggles.
Havockk wrote: » Can't wait to hear how this new independent group is going to ride in and save everyone from brexit and a tory majority. I'm all feckin ears on that one.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » I'm hoping that The Tories will crash and burn due to the ERG's constant undermining leading to an extension of Article 50. Then I'd hope that a cross-party consensus would be achieved around a very soft Brexit or a second referendum. If it also meant the death of the Tory party then that would be a bonus.
Subcomandante Marcos wrote: » Article 50 will be extended and an agreement along the lines of Corbyn's current proposal will be achieved, but there will not be a second vote.
listermint wrote: » It won't. The UK will fall out no deal. And it will be Mays and corybns fault And their supporters will be hammered.
Havockk wrote: » Then what? Spell it out how Corbyn could have pleased everyone and prevented this particular split.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » Corbyn does fine on PMQ, but you have to watch that live. The media is not going to tell you he managed to win any number of points against the Vicar's daughter..
Havockk wrote: » What if they don't? And are emboldened even further? It's not without the realms of possibility that May was already burning the clock. She is burning down the clock to give parliament a binary choice. That's why I hope there will be a cross-party consensus when push comes to shove. Will we be back here talking about principles? We could be. The concept of 'principles' is fluid and subjective.
What if they don't? And are emboldened even further? It's not without the realms of possibility that May was already burning the clock.
Will we be back here talking about principles?
Hurrache wrote: » This is head in the sand stuff. Political commentators everywhere have been crying out that May has no opposiot32.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » 72% of Labour voters back a second referendum.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » So you are saying a new remain party ( or rejoin the EU party) is going to arise from the ashes and defeat these old parties? Can't see it.
Havockk wrote: » There was only one way the '2nd vote' was going to work. And that was via a GE. If one referendum caused this feckton of trouble, how stupid is it have another one? GE was by far the best route.