If the argument used for REF2 was this is the final deal, it's the best we can do, do you want to accept it or not? Then you are not disrespecting or cheating anyone by asking the question again, you are simply asking for confirmation of the deal.
However its impossible to work out what needs to be on the other side of May's Deal and that I think makes any referendum impossible - as there are people who clearly don't know enough or care enough about the consequences of No Deal for anyone sane to keep it on the agenda.
I disagree with para 1. Parliament trashing the Deal and then asking the people, "It's terrible, are you sure you wouldn't rather Remain?" is highly disrespectful to the original referendum.
But I agree with para 2. No formulation in any case works.
Either way, detail or big picture, REF2 stinks.
I can never see the word "respect" these days without a. mentally adding the word "innit" and b. thinking of G Galloway, but leaving that aside why would you respect an abstract thing like a referendum result, rather than the people behind it, and why would trusting them to be able to change their minds when the facts change not be respecting them?
what "facts" are these?
The fact that brexit has turned out to be the biggest national clusterfuck since at least Suez (unless you'd like to name another candidate?) which was not generally foreseen as a likely outcome at the time of the referendum. That fact.
Most MPs have almost always been incompetent. We knew that back then.
So it was never a bright idea to think they could successfully navigate such a dramatic change to our political and economic circumstances then, was it?
Not many political actions are universally judged good with hindsight and you might well think that "remaining" could, judged on the same base, have the potential to be an even greater clusterfuck. The EU doesn't look like a very jolly place at the moment, does it.
If the argument used for REF2 was this is the final deal, it's the best we can do, do you want to accept it or not? Then you are not disrespecting or cheating anyone by asking the question again, you are simply asking for confirmation of the deal.
However its impossible to work out what needs to be on the other side of May's Deal and that I think makes any referendum impossible - as there are people who clearly don't know enough or care enough about the consequences of No Deal for anyone sane to keep it on the agenda.
I disagree with para 1. Parliament trashing the Deal and then asking the people, "It's terrible, are you sure you wouldn't rather Remain?" is highly disrespectful to the original referendum.
But I agree with para 2. No formulation in any case works.
Either way, detail or big picture, REF2 stinks.
I can never see the word "respect" these days without a. mentally adding the word "innit" and b. thinking of G Galloway, but leaving that aside why would you respect an abstract thing like a referendum result, rather than the people behind it, and why would trusting them to be able to change their minds when the facts change not be respecting them?
what "facts" are these?
The fact that brexit has turned out to be the biggest national clusterfuck since at least Suez t.
Brexit - record employment, growing economy, falling deficit, but a few lefty luvvies fretting on twitter.
vs
Winter of discontent : widespread strikes, rubbish in the steets, bodies unburied, IMF loans, double digit inflation.
If the argument used for REF2 was this is the final deal, it's the best we can do, do you want to accept it or not? Then you are not disrespecting or cheating anyone by asking the question again, you are simply asking for confirmation of the deal.
However its impossible to work out what needs to be on the other side of May's Deal and that I think makes any referendum impossible - as there are people who clearly don't know enough or care enough about the consequences of No Deal for anyone sane to keep it on the agenda.
I disagree with para 1. Parliament trashing the Deal and then asking the people, "It's terrible, are you sure you wouldn't rather Remain?" is highly disrespectful to the original referendum.
But I agree with para 2. No formulation in any case works.
Either way, detail or big picture, REF2 stinks.
I can never see the word "respect" these days without a. mentally adding the word "innit" and b. thinking of G Galloway, but leaving that aside why would you respect an abstract thing like a referendum result, rather than the people behind it, and why would trusting them to be able to change their minds when the facts change not be respecting them?
what "facts" are these?
The fact that brexit has turned out to be the biggest national clusterfuck since at least Suez t.
Brexit - record employment, growing economy, falling deficit, but a few lefty luvvies fretting on twitter.
vs
Winter of discontent : widespread strikes, rubbish in the steets, bodies unburied, IMF loans, double digit inflation.
If the argument used for REF2 was this is the final deal, it's the best we can do, do you want to accept it or not? Then you are not disrespecting or cheating anyone by asking the question again, you are simply asking for confirmation of the deal.
However its impossible to work out what needs to be on the other side of May's Deal and that I think makes any referendum impossible - as there are people who clearly don't know enough or care enough about the consequences of No Deal for anyone sane to keep it on the agenda.
I disagree with para 1. Parliament trashing the Deal and then asking the people, "It's terrible, are you sure you wouldn't rather Remain?" is highly disrespectful to the original referendum.
But I agree with para 2. No formulation in any case works.
Either way, detail or big picture, REF2 stinks.
I can never see the word "respect" these days without a. mentally adding the word "innit" and b. thinking of G Galloway, but leaving that aside why would you respect an abstract thing like a referendum result, rather than the people behind it, and why would trusting them to be able to change their minds when the facts change not be respecting them?
what "facts" are these?
The fact that brexit has turned out to be the biggest national clusterfuck since at least Suez (unless you'd like to name another candidate?) which was not generally foreseen as a likely outcome at the time of the referendum. That fact.
Most MPs have almost always been incompetent. We knew that back then.
So it was never a bright idea to think they could successfully navigate such a dramatic change to our political and economic circumstances then, was it?
Not many political actions are universally judged good with hindsight and you might well think that "remaining" could, judged on the same base, have the potential to be an even greater clusterfuck. The EU doesn't look like a very jolly place at the moment, does it.
If the argument used for REF2 was this is the final deal, it's the best we can do, do you want to accept it or not? Then you are not disrespecting or cheating anyone by asking the question again, you are simply asking for confirmation of the deal.
However its impossible to work out what needs to be on the other side of May's Deal and that I think makes any referendum impossible - as there are people who clearly don't know enough or care enough about the consequences of No Deal for anyone sane to keep it on the agenda.
I disagree with para 1. Parliament trashing the Deal and then asking the people, "It's terrible, are you sure you wouldn't rather Remain?" is highly disrespectful to the original referendum.
But I agree with para 2. No formulation in any case works.
Either way, detail or big picture, REF2 stinks.
I can never see the word "respect" these days without a. mentally adding the word "innit" and b. thinking of G Galloway, but leaving that aside why would you respect an abstract thing like a referendum result, rather than the people behind it, and why would trusting them to be able to change their minds when the facts change not be respecting them?
what "facts" are these?
The fact that brexit has turned out to be the biggest national clusterfuck since at least Suez t.
Brexit - record employment, growing economy, falling deficit, but a few lefty luvvies fretting on twitter.
vs
Winter of discontent : widespread strikes, rubbish in the steets, bodies unburied, IMF loans, double digit inflation.
If the argument used for REF2 was this is the final deal, it's the best we can do, do you want to accept it or not? Then you are not disrespecting or cheating anyone by asking the question again, you are simply asking for confirmation of the deal.
However its impossible to work out what needs to be on the other side of May's Deal and that I think makes any referendum impossible - as there are people who clearly don't know enough or care enough about the consequences of No Deal for anyone sane to keep it on the agenda.
I disagree with para 1. Parliament trashing the Deal and then asking the people, "It's terrible, are you sure you wouldn't rather Remain?" is highly disrespectful to the original referendum.
But I agree with para 2. No formulation in any case works.
Either way, detail or big picture, REF2 stinks.
I can never see the word "respect" these days without a. mentally adding the word "innit" and b. thinking of G Galloway, but leaving that aside why would you respect an abstract thing like a referendum result, rather than the people behind it, and why would trusting them to be able to change their minds when the facts change not be respecting them?
what "facts" are these?
The fact that brexit has turned out to be the biggest national clusterfuck since at least Suez (unless you'd like to name another candidate?) which was not generally foreseen as a likely outcome at the time of the referendum. That fact.
Most MPs have almost always been incompetent. We knew that back then.
So it was never a bright idea to think they could successfully navigate such a dramatic change to our political and economic circumstances then, was it?
Not many political actions are universally judged good with hindsight and you might well think that "remaining" could, judged on the same base, have the potential to be an even greater clusterfuck. The EU doesn't look like a very jolly place at the moment, does it.
Mr. Slackbladder, Starmer and Cooper are the ones that probably matter most. Well, them and Watson, but Watson's in a uniquely tricky position.
Could Starmer really go, even if he really wanted to, just as Brexit comes to the cliff edge?
Watson would be a DefCon 5 event. And would make unions start to consider their positioning.
Watson can't go. If he does, his replacement as Deputy Leader gets voted on, which means a Corbynite (and God help them, possibly Chris Williamson). He is uniquely situated in that his defection would actually cause severe irreparable harm to the Party. He must be acutely aware of that fact and the implied responsibility it places on him to stay, so my guess is he'll only leave if at least another hundred go first.
Doesn’t that cut both ways? If he leaves, another hundred would be forced to follow.
Probably; there was a tweet posted earlier that suggested he was holding back the dam.
I guess it's also possible he knows he has a lot of pull - could be he fancies leading the new party and knows he could make it into a serious force. We shall see.
I guess he's calculating which group he wants to end up leading. He's in a reasonable position if Lab kick Corbyn out before the party implodes, but I'm not sure what the conditions for that are. If JC's going to stay and/or the party's going to implode, he'd be a decent bet for the new lot (ie Indy Lab rather than TIG, I'd imagine)
If the argument used for REF2 was this is the final deal, it's the best we can do, do you want to accept it or not? Then you are not disrespecting or cheating anyone by asking the question again, you are simply asking for confirmation of the deal.
However its impossible to work out what needs to be on the other side of May's Deal and that I think makes any referendum impossible - as there are people who clearly don't know enough or care enough about the consequences of No Deal for anyone sane to keep it on the agenda.
I disagree with para 1. Parliament trashing the Deal and then asking the people, "It's terrible, are you sure you wouldn't rather Remain?" is highly disrespectful to the original referendum.
But I agree with para 2. No formulation in any case works.
Either way, detail or big picture, REF2 stinks.
I can never see the word "respect" these days without a. mentally adding the word "innit" and b. thinking of G Galloway, but leaving that aside why would you respect an abstract thing like a referendum result, rather than the people behind it, and why would trusting them to be able to change their minds when the facts change not be respecting them?
what "facts" are these?
The fact that brexit has turned out to be the biggest national clusterfuck since at least Suez t.
Brexit - record employment, growing economy, falling deficit, but a few lefty luvvies fretting on twitter.
vs
Winter of discontent : widespread strikes, rubbish in the steets, bodies unburied, IMF loans, double digit inflation.
Not even close.
did Brexit happen while I was boiling the kettle?
Ishmael said "turned out".
His tense not mine..
He should have said "even trying to do Brexit...."
If Kyle goes then a stampede would follow . His amendment being supported by the Labour front bench is the last chance for Corbyn to avoid a huge exodus .
Kermode and Mayo might be irritating at times but at least they can be entertaining and Kermode has seen a lot of films. Edith Bowman and Clarisse Loughrey are not only dismal critics but I'm starting to doubt that they've even seen the films they're critiquing.
I agree with Roger (for the first time ever, I think).
I'm glad I'm not in the situation of having anything public to declare about any family, but to my mind, it cannot be right to censor references that in other circumstances would be valid and in the public interest to make. I believe the same about criticism of the State of Israel. There is no doubt that a lot of such criticism is motivated by anti semitism, but surely no country (or organisation, or individual, or family if the family's decisions have wide reaching effects) can or should be immune from scrutiny. Apart from anything else, it is very unfair to the supposed beneficiaries of such censorship, as it has the potential to put them in an invidious position.
Coincidentally, I went to Streatham Hill this afternoon to do the 1617 train via Tulse Hill eastbound (last year there was a morning train Tulse Hill to Streatham Hill westbound).
Comments
vs
Winter of discontent : widespread strikes, rubbish in the steets, bodies unburied, IMF loans, double digit inflation.
Not even close.
His tense not mine..
I am beginning to wonder...
Why would he jump now? Unless the whole arrangement is off.
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2019/02/22/week-in-review-may-s-very-quiet-admission-of-her-total-failu
Sounds like speculation.
https://twitter.com/leicesterliz/status/1098956345905164289
Honestly, how much longer can his young followers fall for this crap. He's Lexit to his fingertips.
That said, I do agree that Corbyn's fate may depend on which way he jumps.
Ironically, the split could help him. If he jumps to, and gets, a second referendum that may assist him significantly.
From her RTs it is clear she isn't a happy bunny. Yet she says she has "no intention" of jumping. Politician speak for still thinking about it.