What's in the news?

[Buce]

3 minutes ago, breadandcheese said:

Is the danger for Labour that some betrayed voters just won't vote? 

 

There's no getting away from the fact that Corbyn's Brexit position is one of ignoring party members and doing everything to avoid a second referendum. I would say Corbyn's policy position is just as precarious as May's.

 

Speaking as someone who supported his election as leader, I think he has become - or at the very least, is becoming - an electoral liability.

[Alf Bentley]

20 minutes ago, MattP said:

I don't think it would affect the voting that much, Labour voters hate the Tories and I don't see then switching just because of one issue, soon as Corbyn goes town to town promising things it will soon be forgotten.

 

Labour stood on a manifesto fully committed to Brexit in 2017 and it didn't do them any harm at all.

 

I have huge reservations about voting Tory at the minute, but come polling day I'll probably do it as the alternative is Diane Abbott in charge of our security services. 

 

I'm sure you (& Kopf) are right about this IF there's no early election.

 

It might well also be true of some areas in an early election: e.g. traditional Labour heartlands in North/Midlands. Indeed, it might (marginally) help the Labour vote there.

But I suspect that Labour would lose loads of votes and quite a few seats in London, the South, big cities, university towns etc.

 

How many of those young people who went around chanting "Ooh, Jeremy Corbyn!" do you think realised that he was pro-Soft Brexit? I suspect very few. There were polls before suggesting that people assumed Labour was anti-Brexit.

The narrowness of Labour's defeat in 2017 relied heavily on winning lots of votes in areas like that.

 

[breadandcheese]

2 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Speaking as someone who supported his election as leader, I think he has become - or at the very least, is becoming - an electoral liability.

That's very honest.

 

I read a good article a few weeks back by Nick Cohen discussing Corbyn's position. If you believe that a no deal Brexit will hit the country economically and disproportionately the poor, what is the difference between Corbyn and Rees-Mogg on moral grounds? The results of their actions are the same.

[Alf Bentley]

5 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Speaking as someone who supported his election as leader, I think he has become - or at the very least, is becoming - an electoral liability.

 

As a party member, at the 2015 leadership election I assumed that I'd vote for Burnham (Soft Left) ahead of Corbyn (Hard Left), Cooper (Brownite) & Kendall (Blairite). But Burnham ran such a useless campaign that I intended to vote Corbyn just to have different ideas put forward, if Labour was destined to have a bad leader. The party cocked up the admin so my vote wasn't registered, but that's by the by.

 

When Owen Smith stood against Corbyn, I voted for him. 

 

I don't regret the vote for Smith (for all his flaws) but do regret the intended vote for Corbyn - despite the credit he earned for doing much better than expected in 2017 (though still losing to a rubbish, divided govt).

[leicsmac]

Moving away from the UK for a moment:

 

https://www.apnews.com/c754faab167c43d1bb883dda1b511c54

 

Fundie in removing protections for other races and LGBT folks" policy shocker.

 

Wonder if he'll keep his bargain to erase- sorry, develop, most of the Amazon rainforest too.

[Kopfkino]

34 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I absolutely agree with this point - IF the election happens after Brexit and certainly if it doesn't happen until 2022 or whenever.

 

However, if there were to be an election BEFORE Brexit happens or is decided (not the most likely outcome, but still possible) then surely the election would be dominated by Brexit - and if Labour opposed a referendum in such an early election, I think it would be badly damaged.....probably leading to lots of Labour seats going Tory due to the split centre-left vote....and a Tory Govt with a good majority, if not a landslide.

 

I don't see that an election can happen before Brexit. Realistically, a no confidence vote has to pass by about the 21st January to get an election before Brexit. There's a possibility it could happen later with an extension of A50, but again realistically it won't be a very long extension with some of the EU27 just wanting to get on with it (namely France) and European elections. Of course A50 could be revoked and invoked again but this has its pitfalls. The government would not want to face an election having revoked A50, revoking A50 to invoke it again is clearly a violation of the ECJ's ruling, and in reality nothing will change in the next two years except for having a pissed off EU even more reluctant to help. And all the same matters hold for a second referendum. To get an election you need support from the DUP or Conservatives. Well the ERG are quite happy to not have an election and go for no deal, the hardcore remainers maybe would vote down the government once no deal becomes the clear path. So I don't think there's much scope for an election before Brexit. 

 

But even so, if there was an election before Brexit, I'm still not sure it'd make much difference. There's a huge coordination problem in people moving their votes away from Labour that it just won't happen, Labour is guaranteed enough support to make voting LD pointless in the sense the Conservatives win well. I'm sure some would move but I maintain it would still be no larger than the lost Leave voters (could go straight to the Cons so arguably more costly). And ultimately, when other policy is announced, Jeremy says Brexit is happening so lets make sure we're in charge during this period, Jeremy outlines his Nirvana to us, and knowing this government could last five years are people really going to risk a Conservative Brexit with Conservative policy for potentially another 5 years. Labour only has to say the words NHS and privatisation together and people will forget about Brexit. Turnout would be the key driver but tbh that could affect all quite equally. 

[Buce]

2 hours ago, breadandcheese said:

That's very honest.

 

I read a good article a few weeks back by Nick Cohen discussing Corbyn's position. If you believe that a no deal Brexit will hit the country economically and disproportionately the poor, what is the difference between Corbyn and Rees-Mogg on moral grounds? The results of their actions are the same.

 

I should add, though, that I don't think it is all down to Corbyn, even though I accept that he doesn't do himself any favours. The relentless smear campaign by the Tory press has clearly had an effect on the politically illiterate. Nonetheless, it is what it is, and he is politically toxic to too many of the electorate to be electable now.

[Dr The Singh]

5 hours ago, Buce said:

 

I should add, though, that I don't think it is all down to Corbyn, even though I accept that he doesn't do himself any favours. The relentless smear campaign by the Tory press has clearly had an effect on the politically illiterate. Nonetheless, it is what it is, and he is politically toxic to too many of the electorate to be electable now.

Puel Out

[RumbleFox]

This is like a story from Viz or The Onion. My brain for finding it hard to manage the levels of hypocrisy, irony and lack of self awareness. X 

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/british-army-snow-flake-poster-prompts-scots-guardsman-used-on-it-to-quit-the-forces-a4031446.html

[Guest]

On 06/01/2019 at 13:28, MattP said:

Imagine being 6 pts behind this current mob.

 

 

Imagine being well over 20% behind either of them.

[Alf Bentley]

@Buce @Kopfkino

 

Re. recent debates on Brexit tactics/outcomes, a good New Statesman article: https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/01/parliament-back-still-can-t-agree-and-no-deal-brexit-looming

 

On Labour & the "People's Vote" poll:

 

"Labourworld is all of a flutter about a new YouGov poll for the People’s Vote campaign that shows that, if Jeremy Corbyn facilitates Brexit, he will lead the Labour Party to a defeat so hard that Keir Hardie will feel it. As with all polls for the People’s Vote campaign, there is a lot to criticise about the underlying assumptions and the specific numbers are highly suspect as a result. But, as Simon Wren-Lewis explains, just because the specific numbers are faulty doesn’t change the general truth of the figures, which is that any Brexit position other than ambiguity will cost Labour votes, but that if forced to choose they are better off with a Remain one.

 

The problem is that Labour isn’t being forced to choose. They are best served by criticising May’s deal in a way that allows them to keep both groups on side, voting it down and offering very little of substance in its place, just as the Liberal Democrats, SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Greens are best served by offering Remain positions that cannot be delivered but can be used against the big two. No one is incentivised to do anything to secure parliamentary support for their preferred resolution to the Brexit crisis because everyone’s interests appear to be served through the threat of the cliff-edge – even though that outcome is only actively desired by a minority of ultra-committed Brexiteers".

[Alf Bentley]

So, who'll be tuning in for "Brexit: Uncivil War" tonight (C4, 9pm)?

 

It's a dramatisation of the Vote Leave campaign during the referendum. Sounds interesting.

 

Interesting - if very long  - Spectator article about the Leave victory here by Dominic Cummings, Vote Leave Campaign Director: https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/01/dominic-cummings-brexit-referendum-won/

 

Much as I oppose the cause, I find his arguments explaining the Leave victory quite convincing.

[Guest MattP]

39 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

So, who'll be tuning in for "Brexit: Uncivil War" tonight (C4, 9pm)?

 

It's a dramatisation of the Vote Leave campaign during the referendum. Sounds interesting.

 

Interesting - if very long  - Spectator article about the Leave victory here by Dominic Cummings, Vote Leave Campaign Director: https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/01/dominic-cummings-brexit-referendum-won/

 

Much as I oppose the cause, I find his arguments explaining the Leave victory quite convincing.

I'm looking forward to it, according to most reviews I've read they have done it pretty well. I didn't expect that as I was presuming it to be extremely biased.

[LiberalFox]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

@Buce @Kopfkino

 

Re. recent debates on Brexit tactics/outcomes, a good New Statesman article: https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/01/parliament-back-still-can-t-agree-and-no-deal-brexit-looming

 

On Labour & the "People's Vote" poll:

 

"Labourworld is all of a flutter about a new YouGov poll for the People’s Vote campaign that shows that, if Jeremy Corbyn facilitates Brexit, he will lead the Labour Party to a defeat so hard that Keir Hardie will feel it. As with all polls for the People’s Vote campaign, there is a lot to criticise about the underlying assumptions and the specific numbers are highly suspect as a result. But, as Simon Wren-Lewis explains, just because the specific numbers are faulty doesn’t change the general truth of the figures, which is that any Brexit position other than ambiguity will cost Labour votes, but that if forced to choose they are better off with a Remain one.

 

The problem is that Labour isn’t being forced to choose. They are best served by criticising May’s deal in a way that allows them to keep both groups on side, voting it down and offering very little of substance in its place, just as the Liberal Democrats, SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Greens are best served by offering Remain positions that cannot be delivered but can be used against the big two. No one is incentivised to do anything to secure parliamentary support for their preferred resolution to the Brexit crisis because everyone’s interests appear to be served through the threat of the cliff-edge – even though that outcome is only actively desired by a minority of ultra-committed Brexiteers".

 

Labour have a much higher burden of responsibility to do something than smaller parties. I also reject the criticism that Liberal Democrats are offering a Remain position that cannot be delivered. We've been calling for a people's vote since the result of the referendum and that is something that can be delivered so long as the EU would accept a withdrawal of Article 50 which they have said is probable. It is Labour that have a position that cannot be delivered - wanting a General Election despite having no power to force one. Corbyn also claims to support Brexit but would renegotiate an entirely new deal but hasn't said exactly what that deal would be and has no assurance that the EU would allow us to withdraw Article 50 just to allow this to happen. 

 

Corbyn would secretly prefer No Deal to any other option because he wants to ensure Britain isn't subject to any EU restriction on state aid. He probably thinks a chaotic No Deal and a split in the Tory party is his best chance of winning a General Election and to be fair he might be right because I think his appeal is waning. 

 

One thing is certain and that is the May deal is unpopular with both Remain and Brexit voters. 

[yorkie1999]

https://news.sky.com/story/lorry-drivers-paid-550-each-for-no-deal-brexit-rehearsal-11601201

 

Like something from world war 2! It's 2019 ffs, we could actually model simulations like this.

[LiberalFox]

Models don't generate the same amount of publicity. It looks a lot better for the government this way and it's not their money they are spending.

[Strokes]

19 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

https://news.sky.com/story/lorry-drivers-paid-550-each-for-no-deal-brexit-rehearsal-11601201

 

Like something from world war 2! It's 2019 ffs, we could actually model simulations like this.

It’s an attempted threat by the government to opponents of the deal and possibly even the EU that no deal is a real possibility. Whether it is or not, you can decide for yourselves but that is the only motivation for the stunt......Propaganda.

[Alf Bentley]

5 minutes ago, LiberalFox said:

 

Labour have a much higher burden of responsibility to do something than smaller parties. I also reject the criticism that Liberal Democrats are offering a Remain position that cannot be delivered. We've been calling for a people's vote since the result of the referendum and that is something that can be delivered so long as the EU would accept a withdrawal of Article 50 which they have said is probable. It is Labour that have a position that cannot be delivered - wanting a General Election despite having no power to force one. Corbyn also claims to support Brexit but would renegotiate an entirely new deal but hasn't said exactly what that deal would be and has no assurance that the EU would allow us to withdraw Article 50 just to allow this to happen. 

 

Corbyn would secretly prefer No Deal to any other option because he wants to ensure Britain isn't subject to any EU restriction on state aid. He probably thinks a chaotic No Deal and a split in the Tory party is his best chance of winning a General Election and to be fair he might be right because I think his appeal is waning. 

 

One thing is certain and that is the May deal is unpopular with both Remain and Brexit voters. 

 

I agree with several things you've said: Labour does have a higher burden of responsibility; Corbyn's appeal is waning; and May's deal is almost universally unpopular.

 

It's also true that a Remain position could still be delivered. But there are multiple obstacles and complications: winning a vote in parliament; getting govt to legislate for it; getting EU agreement to a delay (probable but not certain); agreeing what will be on the ballot paper; lack of time (particularly with EU elections due in May); conducting a referendum campaign when a lot of voters have entrenched opinions and/or a low level of understanding and/or zero trust in any claims made by any politicians; the potential for much greater public division, public disorder, even violence and death during the campaign....and the distinct chance that a second referendum would produce another Leave vote or even No Deal. There ain't no easy way out of this mess!

 

I'm afraid you're viewing the world through orange-tinted specs if you think the Lib Dems have anything to be proud of in the past 2-3 years (apart from their ideological purity). Despite being a Remain supporter, I think the LDs had it wrong calling for a second referendum ever since the first one - and a lot of Remainers would agree. However, you're entitled to your view....but what did the LDs achieve, calling for another vote since 2016? The campaign was very low profile, with very little support until the last 6 months or so. And who are the people who've mainly been at the forefront of that? Soubry, Umunna, Blair, Major, Lucas, Lineker......it's not as if Cable & co have been running around the country inspiring everyone! I say that with genuine disappointment - although I'm a Labour member, I've voted Lib Dem in the past and found Cable an impressive politician until he became leader. He's obviously an intelligent, likeable bloke, but the Lib Dems had a massive opportunity to lead the way, given Labour's fence-sitting - and he's come across more like a man running down the months until he collects his golden watch. Even in parliament, it's been people like Grieve and Cooper who've been doing a more effective job challenging the Tory Brexit policy.

 

You're probably right that Labour won't have the power to force a general election (not a policy I agree with, anyway) - but that's not certain. It could still happen. There's probably more chance of a 2nd referendum or some botched Brexit deal, but I'm not sure that the chances of a successful Remain outcome are better than those of an election, much as it's an outcome I'd like.

 

I think you're fundamentally wrong if you seriously believe that Corbyn wants No Deal. That's partisan bias, I'm afraid. He wants Brexit and EU restrictions on state aid are part of the reason for that - but he'd get that just by leaving the EU and the Single Market: i.e. current Labour policy for a close relationship, keeping most EU regulations, forming a customs union, staying close to the SM etc. It's not the outcome that I want, but he certainly doesn't need No Deal - and there's probably quite a good chance that the EU would agree a delay to renegotiate a new deal on that basis, not least as a Customs Union would preclude the need for the controversial backstop. I can't imagine the EU risking a chaotic No Deal instead.

 

Even if I were wrong and Corbyn were stupid enough to want No Deal, I'd be pretty sure that the party would get rid of him as leader if he tried that. He's not very bright, but he's not a complete idiot.

 

Mind you, it'll be well and truly time for Labour to get off the fence by next Tuesday, if May's deal is defeated. Constructive ambiguity was fine before but if May's deal is defeated, Labour needs to intervene decisively, whether that's a confidence vote to trigger an election (unlikely to succeed, so Plan B needed), a clear Soft Brexit alternative such as EFTA/EEA with assurances of support in parliament - or support a second referendum. They cannot just play a game of chicken with the Tories, leaving May to keep bringing her deal back or seeking some alternative Tory deal, while the clock ticks down to No Deal, uncertainty grows, public division grows, jobs and businesses are lost, social divisions grow etc.

 

 

[Alf Bentley]

33 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

https://news.sky.com/story/lorry-drivers-paid-550-each-for-no-deal-brexit-rehearsal-11601201

 

Like something from world war 2! It's 2019 ffs, we could actually model simulations like this.

 

WW2? Or Dad's Army?

[yorkie1999]

4 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

WW2? Or Dad's Army?

Your right, dads army. Comical

Edited 7 January 2019 by yorkie1999

[Dr The Singh]

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

So, who'll be tuning in for "Brexit: Uncivil War" tonight (C4, 9pm)?

 

It's a dramatisation of the Vote Leave campaign during the referendum. Sounds interesting.

 

Interesting - if very long  - Spectator article about the Leave victory here by Dominic Cummings, Vote Leave Campaign Director: https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/01/dominic-cummings-brexit-referendum-won/

 

Much as I oppose the cause, I find his arguments explaining the Leave victory quite convincing.

I'm watching it as Mattp said there would be loads of nudity on it.  Not seen any so far so, Mattp out!

[Buce]

25 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

WW2? Or Dad's Army?

 

Don’t tell him, Pike!

[Mike Oxlong]

17 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

I'm watching it as Mattp said there would be loads of nudity on it.  Not seen any so far so, Mattp out!

I thought he said a bunch of c**ts

[Dr The Singh]

18 minutes ago, Mike Oxlong said:

I thought he said a bunch of c**ts

He did, I assumed the c**nts might get fooked over on screen

[LiberalFox]

50 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I agree with several things you've said: Labour does have a higher burden of responsibility; Corbyn's appeal is waning; and May's deal is almost universally unpopular.

 

It's also true that a Remain position could still be delivered. But there are multiple obstacles and complications: winning a vote in parliament; getting govt to legislate for it; getting EU agreement to a delay (probable but not certain); agreeing what will be on the ballot paper; lack of time (particularly with EU elections due in May); conducting a referendum campaign when a lot of voters have entrenched opinions and/or a low level of understanding and/or zero trust in any claims made by any politicians; the potential for much greater public division, public disorder, even violence and death during the campaign....and the distinct chance that a second referendum would produce another Leave vote or even No Deal. There ain't no easy way out of this mess!

 

I'm afraid you're viewing the world through orange-tinted specs if you think the Lib Dems have anything to be proud of in the past 2-3 years (apart from their ideological purity). Despite being a Remain supporter, I think the LDs had it wrong calling for a second referendum ever since the first one - and a lot of Remainers would agree. However, you're entitled to your view....but what did the LDs achieve, calling for another vote since 2016? The campaign was very low profile, with very little support until the last 6 months or so. And who are the people who've mainly been at the forefront of that? Soubry, Umunna, Blair, Major, Lucas, Lineker......it's not as if Cable & co have been running around the country inspiring everyone! I say that with genuine disappointment - although I'm a Labour member, I've voted Lib Dem in the past and found Cable an impressive politician until he became leader. He's obviously an intelligent, likeable bloke, but the Lib Dems had a massive opportunity to lead the way, given Labour's fence-sitting - and he's come across more like a man running down the months until he collects his golden watch. Even in parliament, it's been people like Grieve and Cooper who've been doing a more effective job challenging the Tory Brexit policy.

 

You're probably right that Labour won't have the power to force a general election (not a policy I agree with, anyway) - but that's not certain. It could still happen. There's probably more chance of a 2nd referendum or some botched Brexit deal, but I'm not sure that the chances of a successful Remain outcome are better than those of an election, much as it's an outcome I'd like.

 

I think you're fundamentally wrong if you seriously believe that Corbyn wants No Deal. That's partisan bias, I'm afraid. He wants Brexit and EU restrictions on state aid are part of the reason for that - but he'd get that just by leaving the EU and the Single Market: i.e. current Labour policy for a close relationship, keeping most EU regulations, forming a customs union, staying close to the SM etc. It's not the outcome that I want, but he certainly doesn't need No Deal - and there's probably quite a good chance that the EU would agree a delay to renegotiate a new deal on that basis, not least as a Customs Union would preclude the need for the controversial backstop. I can't imagine the EU risking a chaotic No Deal instead.

 

Even if I were wrong and Corbyn were stupid enough to want No Deal, I'd be pretty sure that the party would get rid of him as leader if he tried that. He's not very bright, but he's not a complete idiot.

 

Mind you, it'll be well and truly time for Labour to get off the fence by next Tuesday, if May's deal is defeated. Constructive ambiguity was fine before but if May's deal is defeated, Labour needs to intervene decisively, whether that's a confidence vote to trigger an election (unlikely to succeed, so Plan B needed), a clear Soft Brexit alternative such as EFTA/EEA with assurances of support in parliament - or support a second referendum. They cannot just play a game of chicken with the Tories, leaving May to keep bringing her deal back or seeking some alternative Tory deal, while the clock ticks down to No Deal, uncertainty grows, public division grows, jobs and businesses are lost, social divisions grow etc.

 

 

I think the threat of violence is massively overblown and no different to the perceived threats of a messy Brexit. There will be protests whatever happens. 

 

You say that you support Remain but then criticise the Lib Dems for supporting the People's Vote after the first referendum. What do you think we should have done? The party policy was always that people should get a final say on an agreed deal and that to me has turned out to be the most sensible "Remain" option. We could have campaigned explicitly on the basis of wanting to immediately revoke Article 50 but realistically we were never going to get a sufficient quantity of MPs to make that policy a reality. A People's Vote is a lot more realistic, especially if any deal is unable to get a parliamentary majority. If tuition fees are anything to go by then Vince Cable prefers to work towards an objective rather than chasing popularity. I suspect he is much more active behind the scenes, a People's Vote needs cross-party support to get a majority in parliament - fronting the campaign would make it harder to draw in that support if it was seen as a Lib Dem endeavor. I don't think Vince Cable is particularly loyal to the Lib Dems as an institution. 

 

I'm proud enough of the Lib Dems being the first to support a workable remain strategy, at the time I wanted something more explicitly pro-remain but it was always the case that the policy was aimed towards the end of negotiations rather than the 2017 snap election and a lot of Remainers won't credit the Lib Dems for partisan reasons. This is the first time since Iraq that the party has been ahead of the curve on an important issue.

 

I don't think a hypothetical Corbyn led government would pursue an overt "No deal" strategy, but I think Corbyn is quite happy to let the Conservative party take the blame for Brexit. If May's deal is rejected as expected then it's important Corbyn does something coherent and not another stupid publicity stunt like the no confidence vote on just Theresa May (which wouldn't have meant anything even with a majority).