Another febrile day of transference and projection on all sides. Earlier this evening we were told a deal was being hammered out. TM makes a brief trip....nowt. All predictions are ultimately futile and pointless till something actually happens...or doesn't. 888 hours to Brexit.
Let's wait until it gets to 666 before we panic.
2019-03-02 05:00 is your panic hour.
That's the devil of a time to have a panic. Why couldn't it be noon?
Ian Murray is one to watch. Edinburgh South is an interesting constituency, very Remain and full of affluent types voting tactically to keep out the SNP. He might fancy a shot at holding it for TIG in a snap GE.
There was polling done in the last couple of year specifically for Edinburgh South asking if you would back Murray if he stood for an independent "Stop Brexit" coalition.
Ian Murray is one to watch. Edinburgh South is an interesting constituency, very Remain and full of affluent types voting tactically to keep out the SNP. He might fancy a shot at holding it for TIG in a snap GE.
I wouldn't rule out John Woodcock. Also Ruth Smeeth.
Pedant's revolt: Woodcook currently sits as an Independent already...
That's a different sort of independent. He can still move to the TIGs.
ah, but he can't "defect from Labour" as per the tweet.
Owen Jones really needs to make his mind up. These people are either red Tories who have no place in the Labour Party or he’s cool with co-existing with the moderates. All this moaning from him is just nauseating. Corbyn will no doubt not be too fussed by the departures as it means that the Labour left consolidate their control over the party. More moderates go, the more Labour will look to replace them with Momentum backed candidates.
A Labour split is logical, not just because of Corbyn but that I don’t think the Labour left and the moderates can live together period under one tent. After 1983, the left was essentially shut down within the party, and the exact same is happening to the modernisers now. The last thirty years has shown the two factions need to go their separate ways.
Maybe these things go in cycles inside parties, just as politics goes in cycles in terms of who Governs and who opposes. Indeed, Britain's engagement with Europe tends to go in cycles as well. I am afraid to say it will probably never be resolved until we have committed to Europe and cannot reverse our way out i.e. member of the Euro and full political union. Not that I support either of those developments but I do think Brexit is the wrong choice to make.
"The enablers of antisemitism are as big a problem as the antisemites, and they are more numerous. It is time the enablers were exposed. I have exposed one: Kevin Maguire—an enabler of racism."
Hypothetically If I wanted to lie about someone and smear someone but was too cowardly to take the consequences then doing so in parliament as an MP but not repeating myself outside parliament would be the approach I would take.
I won't be holding my breath on this one...
What is it that bothers you about John Mann's speech?
Edit: Just to make clear you are not an enabler of racism (AFAIK)
Would you have a problem if John Mann called you an enabler of racism?
But did it in a cowardly way that meant he wouldn't face consequences.
A question I've asked multiple people but haven't got an answer yet... do you think John will repeat his accusations without protection or is he too cowardly?
I don't like the idea that libel/slander laws can be used to intimidate people from speaking out.
I'm sure I would not like to be called an enabler of racism, but it would make no difference to me whether this was said in Parliament or elsewhere as it wouldn't occur to me to take someone to court for it.
I'd be desperate to convince them that they were mistaken though. I wonder whether Kevin Maguire is interested in trying to convince John Mann that he is mistaken?
Nothing I have seen when McGuire does the paper reviews would lead me to think he was an enabler or what he normally publishes. Indeed, watching the clip from parliament puzzles me as to what he has meant to have done that is so offensive. I doubt McGuire would have done what he is accused of doing and he is probably mortified that he is being discussed about in this way. The media often misreport second hand news and if Mann was not a Eurosceptic it would not surprise me if he was next to defect!
I don't remember clearly who he is, so I didn't intend my comment to imply a judgement on the issue raised - just that it's the substance of what was said that should be more important than where it was said.
It feels like Jezziah is trying to avoid the issue by talking about a process issue instead.
"The enablers of antisemitism are as big a problem as the antisemites, and they are more numerous. It is time the enablers were exposed. I have exposed one: Kevin Maguire—an enabler of racism."
Hypothetically If I wanted to lie about someone and smear someone but was too cowardly to take the consequences then doing so in parliament as an MP but not repeating myself outside parliament would be the approach I would take.
I won't be holding my breath on this one...
What is it that bothers you about John Mann's speech?
Edit: Just to make clear you are not an enabler of racism (AFAIK)
Would you have a problem if John Mann called you an enabler of racism?
But did it in a cowardly way that meant he wouldn't face consequences.
A question I've asked multiple people but haven't got an answer yet... do you think John will repeat his accusations without protection or is he too cowardly?
I don't like the idea that libel/slander laws can be used to intimidate people from speaking out.
I'm sure I would not like to be called an enabler of racism, but it would make no difference to me whether this was said in Parliament or elsewhere as it wouldn't occur to me to take someone to court for it.
I'd be desperate to convince them that they were mistaken though. I wonder whether Kevin Maguire is interested in trying to convince John Mann that he is mistaken?
If you thought they were a political opponent doing so for cynical reasons?
I don't care for suing people particularly, I don't insult easily. But if Mann said I was an enabler of racism I'd drag the lying bastard through the courts and sue his ass.
I don't like the idea on intimidating people from speaking out but my problem is I think that is exactly what Mann is doing here. He is trying to taking down a political enemy and he is using the cover of the house of commons.
I don't think Mann is interesting in changing his mind, if Kevin were to change his political opinions and support Mann political positions that would probably do the trick. Not sure it is worth selling out his soul to appease a bully though.
In a markedly different response to the Labour leadership over its defectors, No10 and Cabinet ministers held the door firmly open to the three MPs’ return to the Tory fold one day.
Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said: “These are extremely talented people, and I hope one day we can invite them back into the Conservative family”.
Leading Brexiteers also refused to condemn them, with former Tory boss Iain Duncan Smith also calling for the three’s return one day, dubbing the Tories “a broad church which is tolerant and decent”.
The conciliatory gestures and comments from the PM down slapped away then....."ah sweet the air from all my burning bridges".....
Think Con's going to have to call an election for the Summer - Will leave Chuka and Heidi out in the cold standing as independents in their constituency's with no real time to formulate a campaign or policy agenda.
Once we are past March 29 I think a GE is the only way forward for the tories , and puts a quick end to the independent group before it has any chance to develop
Owen Jones is saying almost exactly the same thing about the media that Tony Benn was saying about it with regard to the SDP in the early 80s. Benn was obsessed with the idea that the media and the BBC were mouthpieces for the Alliance, (especially Peter Snow of Newsnight IIRC).
"The enablers of antisemitism are as big a problem as the antisemites, and they are more numerous. It is time the enablers were exposed. I have exposed one: Kevin Maguire—an enabler of racism."
Hypothetically If I wanted to lie about someone and smear someone but was too cowardly to take the consequences then doing so in parliament as an MP but not repeating myself outside parliament would be the approach I would take.
I won't be holding my breath on this one...
What is it that bothers you about John Mann's speech?
Edit: Just to make clear you are not an enabler of racism (AFAIK)
Would you have a problem if John Mann called you an enabler of racism?
But did it in a cowardly way that meant he wouldn't face consequences.
A question I've asked multiple people but haven't got an answer yet... do you think John will repeat his accusations without protection or is he too cowardly?
I don't like the idea that libel/slander laws can be used to intimidate people from speaking out.
I'm sure I would not like to be called an enabler of racism, but it would make no difference to me whether this was said in Parliament or elsewhere as it wouldn't occur to me to take someone to court for it.
I'd be desperate to convince them that they were mistaken though. I wonder whether Kevin Maguire is interested in trying to convince John Mann that he is mistaken?
If you thought they were a political opponent doing so for cynical reasons?
So now Labour's supporters are their own political opponents?
The conciliatory gestures and comments from the PM down slapped away then....."ah sweet the air from all my burning bridges".....
Think Con's going to have to call an election for the Summer - Will leave Chuka and Heidi out in the cold standing as independents in their constituency's with no real time to formulate a campaign or policy agenda.
Once we are past March 29 I think a GE is the only way forward for the tories , and puts a quick end to the independent group before it has any chance to develop
The group is already up to 14% in the latest poll, that is more than the LDs got in the last 2 general elections
"The enablers of antisemitism are as big a problem as the antisemites, and they are more numerous. It is time the enablers were exposed. I have exposed one: Kevin Maguire—an enabler of racism."
Hypothetically If I wanted to lie about someone and smear someone but was too cowardly to take the consequences then doing so in parliament as an MP but not repeating myself outside parliament would be the approach I would take.
I won't be holding my breath on this one...
What is it that bothers you about John Mann's speech?
Edit: Just to make clear you are not an enabler of racism (AFAIK)
Would you have a problem if John Mann called you an enabler of racism?
But did it in a cowardly way that meant he wouldn't face consequences.
A question I've asked multiple people but haven't got an answer yet... do you think John will repeat his accusations without protection or is he too cowardly?
I don't like the idea that libel/slander laws can be used to intimidate people from speaking out.
I'm sure I would not like to be called an enabler of racism, but it would make no difference to me whether this was said in Parliament or elsewhere as it wouldn't occur to me to take someone to court for it.
I'd be desperate to convince them that they were mistaken though. I wonder whether Kevin Maguire is interested in trying to convince John Mann that he is mistaken?
If you thought they were a political opponent doing so for cynical reasons?
I don't care for suing people particularly, I don't insult easily. But if Mann said I was an enabler of racism I'd drag the lying bastard through the courts and sue his ass.
I don't like the idea on intimidating people from speaking out but my problem is I think that is exactly what Mann is doing here. He is trying to taking down a political enemy and he is using the cover of the house of commons.
I don't think Mann is interesting in changing his mind, if Kevin were to change his political opinions and support Mann political positions that would probably do the trick. Not sure it is worth selling out his soul to appease a bully though.
Right, so why not trust to the truth of the matter prevailing, rather than harping on about using the court system to shut people up?
Went to a New Statesman Brexit and the left event this evening. Came away feeling rather sad. So, this evening left me sad. In their different ways, Paul Mason and Stella Creasy described an engaged and engaging Labour party that would be well worth being a part of. But then I remembered the anti-Semitic Morning Star Brexiteers are in charge and knew it could never be.
I presume he would support another vote if opinion were to shift again, because we conduct everything by opinion poll.
And his support for a second referendum is contingent on him expecting to win it I see, since he only backs it because he thinks the public has changed its mind. If they hadn't he would still not vote for Brexit but he'd not want to test it.
I truly hope he does not get away with enhancing his reputation in all this. He's bright, but unscrupulous and dishonest in his intentions, yet because many want to remain (and reluctantly I'd agree it is our best option now) they pretend he is some paragon of virtue, when he is the Rees Mogg of the remainers.
I found Leslie’s comments re leadership and membership interesting. How does this group intend to elect a leader? Only MPs voting? Or are looking to the public? If it’s the latter they haven’t learned their lesson from last time....
A Labour split is logical, not just because of Corbyn but that I don’t think the Labour left and the moderates can live together period under one tent. After 1983, the left was essentially shut down within the party, and the exact same is happening to the modernisers now. The last thirty years has shown the two factions need to go their separate ways.
I've thought this for a long time, and quit the party myself when I saw the writing on the wall. The problem is that many people in the labour party are hopelessly tribal, and are in denial about the situation. This will go on until they either submit to the hard left, or are forced out.
What is it that bothers you about John Mann's speech?
Edit: Just to make clear you are not an enabler of racism (AFAIK)
Would you have a problem if John Mann called you an enabler of racism?
But did it in a cowardly way that meant he wouldn't face consequences.
A question I've asked multiple people but haven't got an answer yet... do you think John will repeat his accusations without protection or is he too cowardly?
I don't like the idea that libel/slander laws can be used to intimidate people from speaking out.
I'm sure I would not like to be called an enabler of racism, but it would make no difference to me whether this was said in Parliament or elsewhere as it wouldn't occur to me to take someone to court for it.
I'd be desperate to convince them that they were mistaken though. I wonder whether Kevin Maguire is interested in trying to convince John Mann that he is mistaken?
Nothing I have seen when McGuire does the paper reviews would lead me to think he was an enabler or what he normally publishes. Indeed, watching the clip from parliament puzzles me as to what he has meant to have done that is so offensive. I doubt McGuire would have done what he is accused of doing and he is probably mortified that he is being discussed about in this way. The media often misreport second hand news and if Mann was not a Eurosceptic it would not surprise me if he was next to defect!
I don't remember clearly who he is, so I didn't intend my comment to imply a judgement on the issue raised - just that it's the substance of what was said that should be more important than where it was said.
It feels like Jezziah is trying to avoid the issue by talking about a process issue instead.
Basically Kevin committed the mortal crime of disagreeing with John Mann, this makes him an enabler of racism.
Racism is when you disagree with John Mann FWIW, at least it can be when John Mann is making speeches in parliament and has protections from any consequences his words might have.
I appreciate them slaking our thirst for more defections like this, though it will prove a big disappointment when the drip feed of MPs leaving stops. after having got used to a regular announcement of them.
I'm hoping for a LD defection. Doesn't make much sense, given the Tiggers' one and only policy the LDs already back, but I'd like everyone shaken up by this. I'd hope for one from the SNP too, but I'd heard no SNP MP has ever even gone against the whip, so that seems unlikely.
Owen Jones really needs to make his mind up. These people are either red Tories who have no place in the Labour Party or he’s cool with co-existing with the moderates. All this moaning from him is just nauseating. Corbyn will no doubt not be too fussed by the departures as it means that the Labour left consolidate their control over the party. More moderates go, the more Labour will look to replace them with Momentum backed candidates.
The problem is the anti-Semitic Stalinist left - the Morning Star Brexiteers in and around the leader’s office. The rest of the left can co-exist, even if it doesn’t always get along. I’d share a party with Paul Mason. I couldn’t share one with Seamus Milne, Andrew Murray or Derek Hatton.
What is it that bothers you about John Mann's speech?
Edit: Just to make clear you are not an enabler of racism (AFAIK)
Would you have a problem if John Mann called you an enabler of racism?
But did it in a cowardly way that meant he wouldn't face consequences.
A question I've asked multiple people but haven't got an answer yet... do you think John will repeat his accusations without protection or is he too cowardly?
I don't like the idea that libel/slander laws can be used to intimidate people from speaking out.
I'm sure I would not like to be called an enabler of racism, but it would make no difference to me whether this was said in Parliament or elsewhere as it wouldn't occur to me to take someone to court for it.
I'd be desperate to convince them that they were mistaken though. I wonder whether Kevin Maguire is interested in trying to convince John Mann that he is mistaken?
Nothing I have seen when McGuire does the paper reviews would lead me to think he was an enabler or what he normally publishes. Indeed, watching the clip from parliament puzzles me as to what he has meant to have done that is so offensive. I doubt McGuire would have done what he is accused of doing and he is probably mortified that he is being discussed about in this way. The media often misreport second hand news and if Mann was not a Eurosceptic it would not surprise me if he was next to defect!
I don't remember clearly who he is, so I didn't intend my comment to imply a judgement on the issue raised - just that it's the substance of what was said that should be more important than where it was said.
It feels like Jezziah is trying to avoid the issue by talking about a process issue instead.
Basically Kevin committed the mortal crime of disagreeing with John Mann, this makes him an enabler of racism.
Racism is when you disagree with John Mann FWIW, at least it can be when John Mann is making speeches in parliament and has protections from any consequences his words might have.
Thanks. That's a lot more persuasive to me then nonsense about whether an MP will repeat statements outside the Commons.
Went to a New Statesman Brexit and the left event this evening. Came away feeling rather sad. So, this evening left me sad. In their different ways, Paul Mason and Stella Creasy described an engaged and engaging Labour party that would be well worth being a part of. But then I remembered the anti-Semitic Morning Star Brexiteers are in charge and knew it could never be.
I do wonder how long it will be before Mason falls out with the Jezza show. He seems thoughtful, imaginative and at least interested in mapping the future of economics and politics, rather than running a 1970s reenactment society with a large dash of anti-semitism.
What is it that bothers you about John Mann's speech?
Edit: Just to make clear you are not an enabler of racism (AFAIK)
Would you have a problem if John Mann called you an enabler of racism?
But did it in a cowardly way that meant he wouldn't face consequences.
A question I've asked multiple people but haven't got an answer yet... do you think John will repeat his accusations without protection or is he too cowardly?
I don't like the idea that libel/slander laws can be used to intimidate people from speaking out.
I'm sure I would not like to be called an enabler of racism, but it would make no difference to me whether this was said in Parliament or elsewhere as it wouldn't occur to me to take someone to court for it.
I'd be desperate to convince them that they were mistaken though. I wonder whether Kevin Maguire is interested in trying to convince John Mann that he is mistaken?
If you thought they were a political opponent doing so for cynical reasons?
I don't care for suing people particularly, I don't insult easily. But if Mann said I was an enabler of racism I'd drag the lying bastard through the courts and sue his ass.
I don't like the idea on intimidating people from speaking out but my problem is I think that is exactly what Mann is doing here. He is trying to taking down a political enemy and he is using the cover of the house of commons.
I don't think Mann is interesting in changing his mind, if Kevin were to change his political opinions and support Mann political positions that would probably do the trick. Not sure it is worth selling out his soul to appease a bully though.
Right, so why not trust to the truth of the matter prevailing, rather than harping on about using the court system to shut people up?
Sorry but where do you draw the line?
If a group of people were running around my town convincing everyone I was a paedophile should I just be hoping 'the truth outs'?
I don't mind some random idiot on the street calling me any type of name really but if a public figure wanted to make a false accusation like racism against me I would sue their lying ass and prove I am innocent of the false charges.
How is this truth supposed to out exactly?
Some people will see what Mann said and believe it without discover the truth.
I'm hoping for a LD defection. Doesn't make much sense, given the Tiggers' one and only policy the LDs already back, but I'd like everyone shaken up by this. I'd hope for one from the SNP too, but I'd heard no SNP MP has ever even gone against the whip, so that seems unlikely.
The Tiggers could morph into an English civic nationalist pro-EU party, so I hope no Scottish MPs join.
Obviously I do not operate at such exalted levels, but I find when drafting something that when the higher ups get all twitchy and obsessed about very precise wording in attempt to forestall problems, it at best doesn't prevent those problems and at worst causes new ones.
Don't tell me. Cameron had an idea but devoted insufficient resources to it, got serious too late, and failed in his objective. Not like he's ever done that before...
Oh FFS Tusk, I'd have hoped as an at least occasional grown up you'd know that fucking around to no purpose is pointless. If both sides think no deal is so bad that further can kicking is preferred, its also preferred for one or the other to just bloody capitulate already.
The conciliatory gestures and comments from the PM down slapped away then....."ah sweet the air from all my burning bridges".....
Think Con's going to have to call an election for the Summer - Will leave Chuka and Heidi out in the cold standing as independents in their constituency's with no real time to formulate a campaign or policy agenda.
Once we are past March 29 I think a GE is the only way forward for the tories , and puts a quick end to the independent group before it has any chance to develop
The group is already up to 14% in the latest poll, that is more than the LDs got in the last 2 general elections
The group won’t be mps if we have a swift GE this summer. Cutting off the head quickly before it develops
Good riddance in the case of Austin, any hopes he takes the cowardly little John Mann as well or is that too much to hope for?
I don't understand this attitude at all. I don't agree with everything that Soubry says but I'd rather have her in the tent than not.
Plenty of Tories would disagree though, it's not surprising some in Labour take such an attitude.
On the question of media coverage for the new group, well it is very exciting indeed, you really do not see this thing very often, so of course there will be breathless coverage.
Plus it is only partly to do with Brexit and actually has things happen rather than can kicking and votes that don't mean anything, so lets hope for more!
Owen Jones really needs to make his mind up. These people are either red Tories who have no place in the Labour Party or he’s cool with co-existing with the moderates. All this moaning from him is just nauseating. Corbyn will no doubt not be too fussed by the departures as it means that the Labour left consolidate their control over the party. More moderates go, the more Labour will look to replace them with Momentum backed candidates.
I don't know if Owen is internally consistent or not.
He may share my view of glad to see the back of some of them, like Chris Leslie, and will use any excuse to attack them (much like they have with the left) and the betrayal theme is a useful one.
Which is a consistent viewpoint, although I try to actually be 'externally' consistent on here so personally I don't criticise their actual leaving.
That is incredible. What a performance from Roy, Root and to a lesser extent Morgan.
Morgan's knock was key. As the run rate started to go up he pressed the accelerator and ended the game as a contest. This really is a fabulous England one day team, we should treasure it.
Won't happen of course, events have moved beyond it, but I wonder what would happen if, say, Corbyn stood down as leader and was replaced by someone more to the moderates' liking. Would the Labour Tiggers return home, or having made the break are they gone forever?
Don't tell me. Cameron had an idea but devoted insufficient resources to it, got serious too late, and failed in his objective. Not like he's ever done that before...
The trio went out of their way to praise his leadership of the Tories whilst they denigrated the current PM. He may have achieved one objective in not having his bad decision to have the referendum in the first place be the focus of their ire. I would say though that the current PMs inept capacity to execute a decision on where the country goes next has certainly made things worse - she is simply unable to meet the challenges of being PM. Some of us thought she was completely unsuited to the role as PM but as usual the sycophants and party machine faithful's claimed we misjudged her....
Went to a New Statesman Brexit and the left event this evening. Came away feeling rather sad. So, this evening left me sad. In their different ways, Paul Mason and Stella Creasy described an engaged and engaging Labour party that would be well worth being a part of. But then I remembered the anti-Semitic Morning Star Brexiteers are in charge and knew it could never be.
I do wonder how long it will be before Mason falls out with the Jezza show. He seems thoughtful, imaginative and at least interested in mapping the future of economics and politics, rather than running a 1970s reenactment society with a large dash of anti-semitism.
He was excellent this evening. Very scathing of what he described as Morning Star Stalinists and very clear in his frustration at the Labour leaderships Brexit positioning. Thecstar was Stella Creasy, though. She made mincemeat of the Lexiteer Grace Blakeley.
That is incredible. What a performance from Roy, Root and to a lesser extent Morgan.
Morgan's knock was key. As the run rate started to go up he pressed the accelerator and ended the game as a contest. This really is a fabulous England one day team, we should treasure it.
We are very, very good. But, we need to prove ourselves on the big stage - at this summer’s World Cup.
Went to a New Statesman Brexit and the left event this evening. Came away feeling rather sad. So, this evening left me sad. In their different ways, Paul Mason and Stella Creasy described an engaged and engaging Labour party that would be well worth being a part of. But then I remembered the anti-Semitic Morning Star Brexiteers are in charge and knew it could never be.
I do wonder how long it will be before Mason falls out with the Jezza show. He seems thoughtful, imaginative and at least interested in mapping the future of economics and politics, rather than running a 1970s reenactment society with a large dash of anti-semitism.
He was excellent this evening. Very scathing of what he described as Morning Star Stalinists and very clear in his frustration at the Labour leaderships Brexit positioning. Thecstar was Stella Creasy, though. She made mincemeat of the Lexiteer Grace Blakeley.
Mason has repeatedly said Jezza should reach out and put talented, hard working soft left MPs like Yvette in his Cabinet.
On the TIGgers, I agree with those who feel that May will get her deal through. As long as No Deal is the alternative then she will win a vote, and may even get some concessions to ease the passage.
I'd go one step further and suggest that the TIGgers already expect this to happen, and their strategy is to supplant Labour as the major opposition with the primary aim of rejoining.
I'd also agree with those who see a general election as likely. The conservatives have the chance to capitalise on labour in disarray, and the TIGgers not yet organised, and the anti-tory vote split. They can't not seek to take advantage. When this happens, and whether May is leader, are more difficult questions to answer.
Won't happen of course, events have moved beyond it, but I wonder what would happen if, say, Corbyn stood down as leader and was replaced by someone more to the moderates' liking. Would the Labour Tiggers return home, or having made the break are they gone forever?
Could see mass suicides amongst the Cult should Jezza stand down.
Comments
It feels like Jezziah is trying to avoid the issue by talking about a process issue instead.
I don't care for suing people particularly, I don't insult easily. But if Mann said I was an enabler of racism I'd drag the lying bastard through the courts and sue his ass.
I don't like the idea on intimidating people from speaking out but my problem is I think that is exactly what Mann is doing here. He is trying to taking down a political enemy and he is using the cover of the house of commons.
I don't think Mann is interesting in changing his mind, if Kevin were to change his political opinions and support Mann political positions that would probably do the trick. Not sure it is worth selling out his soul to appease a bully though.
Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said: “These are extremely talented people, and I hope one day we can invite them back into the Conservative family”.
Leading Brexiteers also refused to condemn them, with former Tory boss Iain Duncan Smith also calling for the three’s return one day, dubbing the Tories “a broad church which is tolerant and decent”.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8473872/tories-breaking-point-mps-defect-independent-group
I am somewhat fed up with Grieve. He tries to present a cool, calm, rational image - but he is as fixed and unyielding as anyone in this process.
This for example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XgoUwFq0RA
Hardliners on all sides are not helping anyone.
This isn't going to end well.
Or should that be +2 ?
And his support for a second referendum is contingent on him expecting to win it I see, since he only backs it because he thinks the public has changed its mind. If they hadn't he would still not vote for Brexit but he'd not want to test it.
I truly hope he does not get away with enhancing his reputation in all this. He's bright, but unscrupulous and dishonest in his intentions, yet because many want to remain (and reluctantly I'd agree it is our best option now) they pretend he is some paragon of virtue, when he is the Rees Mogg of the remainers.
Taken Labour off his Twitter profile just now.
Just says MP now.
Official announcement tomorrow.
Ian Murray Friday
https://twitter.com/nick_gutteridge/status/1098305888895598592
Basically Kevin committed the mortal crime of disagreeing with John Mann, this makes him an enabler of racism.
Racism is when you disagree with John Mann FWIW, at least it can be when John Mann is making speeches in parliament and has protections from any consequences his words might have.
This has been an extraordinary chase by England. I didn't give them even one chance in five at the changeover.
Edit - and yet the curse of @DavidL strikes again!
It was her Spanish.
(Sorry, only on PB)
I'm hoping for a LD defection. Doesn't make much sense, given the Tiggers' one and only policy the LDs already back, but I'd like everyone shaken up by this. I'd hope for one from the SNP too, but I'd heard no SNP MP has ever even gone against the whip, so that seems unlikely.
Its political coverage is only beaten in shitness by its forays into meteorology.
If a group of people were running around my town convincing everyone I was a paedophile should I just be hoping 'the truth outs'?
I don't mind some random idiot on the street calling me any type of name really but if a public figure wanted to make a false accusation like racism against me I would sue their lying ass and prove I am innocent of the false charges.
How is this truth supposed to out exactly?
Some people will see what Mann said and believe it without discover the truth.
That is incredible. What a performance from Roy, Root and to a lesser extent Morgan.
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1098349354757308416
Skinner: 'I thought you were taking Marquand with you?'
It only took 15 years to get over that split...
Voting for the Deal is a vote against No Deal.
But Grieve did not vote for the Deal.
https://twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1098273417588023296
On the question of media coverage for the new group, well it is very exciting indeed, you really do not see this thing very often, so of course there will be breathless coverage.
Plus it is only partly to do with Brexit and actually has things happen rather than can kicking and votes that don't mean anything, so lets hope for more!
He may share my view of glad to see the back of some of them, like Chris Leslie, and will use any excuse to attack them (much like they have with the left) and the betrayal theme is a useful one.
Which is a consistent viewpoint, although I try to actually be 'externally' consistent on here so personally I don't criticise their actual leaving.
Do I detect a certain amount of fear that the anointed one is in trouble?
Ignored of course.
I'd go one step further and suggest that the TIGgers already expect this to happen, and their strategy is to supplant Labour as the major opposition with the primary aim of rejoining.
I'd also agree with those who see a general election as likely. The conservatives have the chance to capitalise on labour in disarray, and the TIGgers not yet organised, and the anti-tory vote split. They can't not seek to take advantage. When this happens, and whether May is leader, are more difficult questions to answer.