RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:

She has consistently shown herself to be... Not very bright...

Stom wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

She has consistently shown herself to be... Not very bright...

she worse than not very bright tbh. The cabinet and shadow cabinet are sh*t shows of the highest order. We've seen the worst of the back benches. Between the two there may be some talented MPs, but they are being well hidden.

Banquo wrote:

Stom wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

She has consistently shown herself to be... Not very bright...

she worse than not very bright tbh. The cabinet and shadow cabinet are sh*t shows of the highest order. We've seen the worst of the back benches. Between the two there may be some talented MPs, but they are being well hidden.

I wouldn’t say she’s not very bright, though I have plenty of other criticisms of her. As an avid Remainer, it’s obviously a policy she doesn’t agree with and she’s trying to defend it. It’s a policy born from compromise within the party but Brexit is so binary that compromise can lead to illogical conclusions such as this.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Stom wrote:
She has consistently shown herself to be... Not very bright...

she worse than not very bright tbh. The cabinet and shadow cabinet are sh*t shows of the highest order. We've seen the worst of the back benches. Between the two there may be some talented MPs, but they are being well hidden.

I wouldn’t say she’s not very bright, though I have plenty of other criticisms of her. As an avid Remainer, it’s obviously a policy she doesn’t agree with and she’s trying to defend it. It’s a policy born from compromise within the party but Brexit is so binary that compromise can lead to illogical conclusions such as this.

well I would, but I have a lot worse to say about her in addition. Its also worse than an illogical conclusion, its a fundamental conflict in Labour ideology/policy between Corbyn/McDonnell (leave) and pretty much the rest of the party (remain)

Mikey Brown wrote:

as an aside there is a big growth in voters registering, esp u35's. Suspect Momentum, rightly, are mobilising strongly on the ground.

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote: she worse than not very bright tbh. The cabinet and shadow cabinet are sh*t shows of the highest order. We've seen the worst of the back benches. Between the two there may be some talented MPs, but they are being well hidden.

I wouldn’t say she’s not very bright, though I have plenty of other criticisms of her. As an avid Remainer, it’s obviously a policy she doesn’t agree with and she’s trying to defend it. It’s a policy born from compromise within the party but Brexit is so binary that compromise can lead to illogical conclusions such as this.

well I would, but I have a lot worse to say about her in addition. Its also worse than an illogical conclusion, its a fundamental conflict in Labour ideology/policy between Corbyn/McDonnell (leave) and pretty much the rest of the party (remain)

I don't think the policy is illogical, but yes, it's clearly the nuanced result of a compromise. And nuance doesn't play well in question time (nor I think, in the polls).

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: I wouldn’t say she’s not very bright, though I have plenty of other criticisms of her. As an avid Remainer, it’s obviously a policy she doesn’t agree with and she’s trying to defend it. It’s a policy born from compromise within the party but Brexit is so binary that compromise can lead to illogical conclusions such as this.

well I would, but I have a lot worse to say about her in addition. Its also worse than an illogical conclusion, its a fundamental conflict in Labour ideology/policy between Corbyn/McDonnell (leave) and pretty much the rest of the party (remain)

I don't think the policy is illogical, but yes, it's clearly the nuanced result of a compromise. And nuance doesn't play well in question time (nor I think, in the polls).

I didn't say it was an illogical conclusion. As a barrister and Shadow Foreign Secretary you'd think if it was a nuance rather than the somewhat nonsensical position of Labour on Brexit allied with her own desire to campaign for Remain she'd be able to cope. Is Labour's policy to Leave, still, or did i miss summat.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: I wouldn’t say she’s not very bright, though I have plenty of other criticisms of her. As an avid Remainer, it’s obviously a policy she doesn’t agree with and she’s trying to defend it. It’s a policy born from compromise within the party but Brexit is so binary that compromise can lead to illogical conclusions such as this.

well I would, but I have a lot worse to say about her in addition. Its also worse than an illogical conclusion, its a fundamental conflict in Labour ideology/policy between Corbyn/McDonnell (leave) and pretty much the rest of the party (remain)

I don't think the policy is illogical, but yes, it's clearly the nuanced result of a compromise. And nuance doesn't play well in question time (nor I think, in the polls).

It does if you have wit...

"this is a democracy, the people should decide. We want them to have a fair, unbiased choice between the economic disaster of no deal, a Labour led deal and remain."

Stom wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote: well I would, but I have a lot worse to say about her in addition. Its also worse than an illogical conclusion, its a fundamental conflict in Labour ideology/policy between Corbyn/McDonnell (leave) and pretty much the rest of the party (remain)

I don't think the policy is illogical, but yes, it's clearly the nuanced result of a compromise. And nuance doesn't play well in question time (nor I think, in the polls).

It does if you have wit...

"this is a democracy, the people should decide. We want them to have a fair, unbiased choice between the economic disaster of no deal, a Labour led deal and remain."

Mikey Brown wrote:

I have questioned Corbyn's political instincts in the past, but I’ll happily admit he got this one spot-on.

cashead wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

I have questioned Corbyn's political instincts in the past, but I’ll happily admit he got this one spot-on.

As above, momentum are also doing a bang on job of mobilising the u35 vote. Delaying a GE is what Labour should be doing for their own political interests.

Stom wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote: well I would, but I have a lot worse to say about her in addition. Its also worse than an illogical conclusion, its a fundamental conflict in Labour ideology/policy between Corbyn/McDonnell (leave) and pretty much the rest of the party (remain)

I don't think the policy is illogical, but yes, it's clearly the nuanced result of a compromise. And nuance doesn't play well in question time (nor I think, in the polls).

It does if you have wit...

"this is a democracy, the people should decide. We want them to have a fair, unbiased choice between the economic disaster of no deal, a Labour led deal and remain."

That is some nuance!

Mellsblue wrote:

Stom wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: I don't think the policy is illogical, but yes, it's clearly the nuanced result of a compromise. And nuance doesn't play well in question time (nor I think, in the polls).

It does if you have wit...

"this is a democracy, the people should decide. We want them to have a fair, unbiased choice between the economic disaster of no deal, a Labour led deal and remain."

That is some nuance!

Fine, not nuance, but it's an answer that's not shit, keeps labour out of the way between traditional heartlands and metropolitan areas, and is actually a positive.

Stom wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Stom wrote:
It does if you have wit...

"this is a democracy, the people should decide. We want them to have a fair, unbiased choice between the economic disaster of no deal, a Labour led deal and remain."

That is some nuance!

Fine, not nuance, but it's an answer that's not shit, keeps labour out of the way between traditional heartlands and metropolitan areas, and is actually a positive.

But she said that and Bruce countered with something along of ‘you are going to campaign against your own deal, convince the public you did you best in negotiations despite not actually wanting to leave and subsequently rubbishing your own deal in the campaign and hope the EU will negotiate in good faith knowing you’re negotiating a deal you are actually going to campaign against’. Which is a bit of an argument ender. It’s fecking bonkers, illogical and nonsensical. Even Thornberry knows it’s ridiculous. You can see it in her face.

Stom wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Stom wrote:
It does if you have wit...

"this is a democracy, the people should decide. We want them to have a fair, unbiased choice between the economic disaster of no deal, a Labour led deal and remain."

That is some nuance!

Fine, not nuance, but it's an answer that's not shit, keeps labour out of the way between traditional heartlands and metropolitan areas, and is actually a positive.

I’d assumed it was irony

Banquo wrote:

Stom wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: That is some nuance!

Fine, not nuance, but it's an answer that's not shit, keeps labour out of the way between traditional heartlands and metropolitan areas, and is actually a positive.

I’d assumed it was irony

Tbh, so did I.

cashead wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

I have questioned Corbyn's political instincts in the past, but I’ll happily admit he got this one spot-on.

Agreed. I think his advisors have got it spot on, I think Corbyn would like to go for it but the logic has finally sunk in.

Now we just need to hear second referendum mentioned as a requirement and thus could start to look sensible.

Sandydragon wrote:

cashead wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

I have questioned Corbyn's political instincts in the past, but I’ll happily admit he got this one spot-on.

Agreed. I think his advisors have got it spot on, I think Corbyn would like to go for it but the logic has finally sunk in.

Now we just need to hear second referendum mentioned as a requirement and thus could start to look sensible.

Labours policy is a second referendum. Well, I think so.

This week it might be, I can’t keep track.

To be fair, I really don’t trust Corbyn on Brexit (or much else) but I also don’t trust Johnson who is doing his best to make Corbyn look like a statesman. This isn’t how parliament should work but if it stops an action that doesn’t have legitimacy then so be it.

Sandydragon wrote:This week it might be, I can’t keep track.

To be fair, I really don’t trust Corbyn on Brexit (or much else) but I also don’t trust Johnson who is doing his best to make Corbyn look like a statesman. This isn’t how parliament should work but if it stops an action that doesn’t have legitimacy then so be it.

Corbyn and McDonnell, and likely Momentum want to leave, as did c 30% of Labour voters (but not in London) ; suspect the membership and definitely the PLP want to stay. Their official policy I believe is to Leave, under a deal negotiated by a Labour govt (and to reject ANY tory deal), but to have that 'ratified' or not, by public vote (not sure what questions though); what their campaign would be on the referendum would be is interesting, though Thornberry said her preference was to campaign to Remain- not sure if that is personal or policy.

Boris is an A-grade scumbag and I could never vote for him.

Just read that Keir Starmer was on the edge of de-selection. Jeez, that does make Labour even less attractive.

Breaking news - Scottish court of appeal has ruled prorogation unlawful - and that's before the release of communications around the decision to prorogue.

Safe to assume that this will bump up to the supreme court; but does that mean parliament is recalled pending that decision? or is it all too late to make a real difference beyond optics?


ETA: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-49661855

Only a headline at time of posting, will inevitably be editted over the next few hours (I've been buggered on that before).

Which Tyler wrote:Breaking news - Scottish court of appeal has ruled prorogation unlawful - and that's before the release of communications around the decision to prorogue.

Safe to assume that this will bump up to the supreme court; but does that mean parliament is recalled pending that decision? or is it all too late to make a real difference beyond optics?


ETA: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-49661855

Only a headline at time of posting, will inevitably be editted over the next few hours (I've been buggered on that before).

The Court of Session didn't issue an order that the prorogation should be suspended, therefore, no change until the case goes before the Supreme Court on Tuesday next week.

Boris could get in front of this by saying he's opening parliament and on his way to take questions ahead of the next court ruling. or he could dress JRM up as Judge Dredd and send him to let those nonces in Scotland know who is the law.