I am currently in the US. This Trump/Ukraine story is totally dominating the airwaves. Johnson has very deliberately chosen to stand as close as possible to the US President. That may turn out to be yet another very poor decision.
57% of US voters oppose impeaching the President today, only 37% in favour
Nothing disgraceful about saying the best way to respect Jo Cox is to unite the country and deliver Brexit
Think long and hard about what your defending.
Your pro-Conservative Party zealotry and poll mangling is amusing but this is contemptible.
There is nothing contemptible about defending the will of the people and I will never apologise for doing so
Like your leader, your view of the “will of the people” is narrow, subjective and self-serving. So utterly convinced of your own righteousness, you have developed myths of betrayal that you use to justify your own actions that cross the line.
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
Where is the ohhhhhhh jeremy corbyn bounce? The PM has just lost a high profile court case and labour have been revealing their amazing new policies...and the only one to benefit is the liberal non-democrats.
It's like a bouncing baby. They don't actually leave the ground.
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
I assume this means he will resign before having to do it, and recommend that Corbyn takes over as PM to extend.
Nothing disgraceful about saying the best way to respect Jo Cox is to unite the country and deliver Brexit
Think long and hard about what your defending.
Your pro-Conservative Party zealotry and poll mangling is amusing but this is contemptible.
There is nothing contemptible about defending the will of the people and I will never apologise for doing so
Like your leader, your view of the “will of the people” is narrow, subjective and self-serving. So utterly convinced of your own righteousness, you have developed myths of betrayal that you use to justify your own actions that cross the line.
We had a referendum on leaving the EU, 52% voted to leave, that was the will of the people. No further discussion needed
That would be why the Tories have dropped two points and Labour has stayed the same, I suppose.
Propaganda has to have some basic plausibility to be effective.
LibDems would have expected to lose a conference bounce from the previous week. So if they’ve gone up they’ve taken points that would otherwise gone to Labour to stay still, and taken additional votes off the Tories.
You're using logic and reason again, aren't you...
(Parenthetically, how the hell did you ever fit into the Conservative Party? Or was there a time when they weren't all...how can I put this politely...so intense?)
This is an interesting question, which is why I've resurrected it from the previous thread. It goes to the heart of what has happened to the Conservative Party over the past few months.
If you look at Labour, it's pretty clear that the party going bonkers has been caused by a take-over by an unholy alliance of unreconstructed 1960s Trotskyists like Corbyn and McDonell, whom everyone had forgotten about, rotting as they were harmlessly on the backbenches, and new entryists many of whom were chucked out of the party by Kinnock, or who are too young for that but have been campaigning against Labour for years, or who are just naive student-activist types. I don't get the impression that formerly sensible Labour activists have gone bonkers.
In the case of the Conservatives, there's a bit of that kind of effect - resurrection of forgotten dinosaurs and Kippers joining the party - but what staggered me was that people I have known in the party for years, and who were perfectly sensible and balanced albeit perhaps not enamoured of the EU, have been radicalised over a few months. Indeed we have a few good examples of this radicalisation amongst PBers. It has been an astonishingly rapid phenomenon. I realised that I'd probably have to leave the party early in the year, when at an association AGM there was a motion proposed and passed (with just a handful of dissenters, and only me speaking against) supporting a no-deal crash out and characterising Theresa May's deal as 'not true Brexit'. As I pointed out, it was completely absurd to say that leaving the CAP, leaving the CFP, leaving the political structures, getting rid definitively of Ever Closer Union, leaving the Customs Union, leaving the Single Market, removing the direct jurisdiction of the ECJ in UK law, etc etc was 'not Brexit', but people I knew well who previously had been quite moderate and balanced were all in favour of this nonsense.
I think that future political scientists and psychologists specialising in the madness of crowds will have a field day trying to understand this rapid transition from sanity to hysteria. But it was clear to me then that my days in the party were numbered.
Nothing disgraceful about saying the best way to respect Jo Cox is to unite the country and deliver Brexit
Think long and hard about what your defending.
Your pro-Conservative Party zealotry and poll mangling is amusing but this is contemptible.
There is nothing contemptible about defending the will of the people and I will never apologise for doing so
Like your leader, your view of the “will of the people” is narrow, subjective and self-serving. So utterly convinced of your own righteousness, you have developed myths of betrayal that you use to justify your own actions that cross the line.
We had a referendum on leaving the EU, 52% voted to leave, that was the will of the people. No further discussion needed
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
Lib Dems getting ever closer to that tipping point where they become the Opposition, and hoover up Labour votes. If the collapse happens it will happen with astonishing speed, like the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Still think the lib dems should have stuck to second referendum policy rather than sod the referendum result.
Confession: brexit is now such a nightmare, a small but significant part of me wants the Lib Dems to sweep to an incredible but overwhelming victory, consigning Corbyn to history, and revoking Brexit. Then they can quietly govern us for 20 years with tediously sensible centrist policies with a slightly green tinge. I don’t care. Just make it all GO AWAY.
I know this is a fevered day dream. I know that Revoke risks serious civil strife. But that’s what I fear: serious civil strife. Both sides are equally guilty. Both sides are whipping it up.
Dear sweet Jo Swinson, with your mild Scottish vowels. Save us.
That is exactly what crossed my mind yesterday. Exactly to a tee. And I’ve never voted Lib Dem in my life.
Nothing disgraceful about saying the best way to respect Jo Cox is to unite the country and deliver Brexit
Think long and hard about what your defending.
Your pro-Conservative Party zealotry and poll mangling is amusing but this is contemptible.
There is nothing contemptible about defending the will of the people and I will never apologise for doing so
Like your leader, your view of the “will of the people” is narrow, subjective and self-serving. So utterly convinced of your own righteousness, you have developed myths of betrayal that you use to justify your own actions that cross the line.
We had a referendum on leaving the EU, 52% voted to leave, that was the will of the people. No further discussion needed
52% of people all voted for their unicorn version of leave (from insanely hard No Deal Brexit to a carefully managed escape to the EEA)..
52% of people did not vote for a No Deal Brexit which is what Boris is pushing for.
I am currently in the US. This Trump/Ukraine story is totally dominating the airwaves. Johnson has very deliberately chosen to stand as close as possible to the US President. That may turn out to be yet another very poor decision.
57% of US voters oppose impeaching the President today, only 37% in favour
Come to think of it, yes they'd be wise to pick KLOBUCHAR.
But also Cory Booker, if he can make it through to the next debate. Biden's alliance is moderates and black voters, if that suddenly becomes available it wouldn't hurt to be black as well as moderate(-ish).
If you go off the betting, Andrew Yang is going to break out soon for sure - but he won't get the nomination.
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
I think even Dominic Raab said this morning that they would comply with the Benn Act
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
I think even Dominic Raab said this morning that they would comply with the Benn Act
That would be why the Tories have dropped two points and Labour has stayed the same, I suppose.
Propaganda has to have some basic plausibility to be effective.
LibDems would have expected to lose a conference bounce from the previous week. So if they’ve gone up they’ve taken points that would otherwise gone to Labour to stay still, and taken additional votes off the Tories.
If the desire to believe is so strong as to produce reasoning like that, who am I to argue?
I heard Jess Phillips earlier today. She's very good. I hope they gave her a pop at Boris this evening. She was asked who she'd support as a temporary PM if Corbyn was unacceptable? "Well I'll give it a go if no one else wants it.She said Actually I'd love to do it.!" The only person I've heard who makes a Birmingham accent sing
Nothing disgraceful about saying the best way to respect Jo Cox is to unite the country and deliver Brexit
Think long and hard about what your defending.
Your pro-Conservative Party zealotry and poll mangling is amusing but this is contemptible.
There is nothing contemptible about defending the will of the people and I will never apologise for doing so
Like your leader, your view of the “will of the people” is narrow, subjective and self-serving. So utterly convinced of your own righteousness, you have developed myths of betrayal that you use to justify your own actions that cross the line.
We had a referendum on leaving the EU, 52% voted to leave, that was the will of the people. No further discussion needed
But you voted Remain. Why didn't you support Leave back in 2016?
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
Read it again. The Surrender Bill asks him to do that. What he does then is up to him. Resign?
I am currently in the US. This Trump/Ukraine story is totally dominating the airwaves. Johnson has very deliberately chosen to stand as close as possible to the US President. That may turn out to be yet another very poor decision.
57% of US voters oppose impeaching the President today, only 37% in favour
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
I think even Dominic Raab said this morning that they would comply with the Benn Act
After all, it was the Benn Act that finally got BoZo taling to the EU28.
There are lots of Tory women MPs, such as my own MP Nus Ghani, who were close to Jo Cox, and who themselves face very nasty threats as a result of the increased polarisation and viciousness of politics. Boris has made a major misstep, and has revealed himself as at best irresponsible.
Nothing disgraceful about saying the best way to respect Jo Cox is to unite the country and deliver Brexit
Think long and hard about what your defending.
Your pro-Conservative Party zealotry and poll mangling is amusing but this is contemptible.
There is nothing contemptible about defending the will of the people and I will never apologise for doing so
Like your leader, your view of the “will of the people” is narrow, subjective and self-serving. So utterly convinced of your own righteousness, you have developed myths of betrayal that you use to justify your own actions that cross the line.
We had a referendum on leaving the EU, 52% voted to leave, that was the will of the people. No further discussion needed
Of course there is a discussion needed. Not least because your leader voted down the negotiated Brexit deal.
Nothing disgraceful about saying the best way to respect Jo Cox is to unite the country and deliver Brexit
Think long and hard about what your defending.
Your pro-Conservative Party zealotry and poll mangling is amusing but this is contemptible.
There is nothing contemptible about defending the will of the people and I will never apologise for doing so
Like your leader, your view of the “will of the people” is narrow, subjective and self-serving. So utterly convinced of your own righteousness, you have developed myths of betrayal that you use to justify your own actions that cross the line.
We had a referendum on leaving the EU, 52% voted to leave, that was the will of the people. No further discussion needed
52% of people all voted for their unicorn version of leave (from insanely hard No Deal Brexit to a carefully managed escape to the EEA)..
52% of people did not vote for a No Deal Brexit which is what Boris is pushing for.
49% of voters back No Deal Brexit with Survation tonight if a deal is not agreed by 31st October, only 43% of voters back further extension
Nothing disgraceful about saying the best way to respect Jo Cox is to unite the country and deliver Brexit
But everything he is doing and saying is deliberately polarising the country in his self interest. ‘The surrender bill’ etc that’s the point.
It is a 'surrender bill' Boris was simply stating the facts, even if diehard Remainers dislike it, tough
It’s a surrender bill only if your imagination believes we bully the EU into a deal favourable to us by threatening No Deal. That premise is just loopy 😆
Boris (and Mercer and others) want to be a little bit careful that tonight doesn’t put legs on a “Tories are anti-women” meme - however overblown it might be.
There are a lot of voters who haven’t uttered a word about Brexit but would generally give BJ the benefit of the doubt for getting on with it, promising gold bars for every nurse and hanging off a zipwire. Basically, very soft support... a fair chunk of it from women.
It would only take a friendly young LD or (right sort of) Lab candidate to knock on the door for some of those to switch.
You're using logic and reason again, aren't you...
(Parenthetically, how the hell did you ever fit into the Conservative Party? Or was there a time when they weren't all...how can I put this politely...so intense?)
This is an interesting question, which is why I've resurrected it from the previous thread. It goes to the heart of what has happened to the Conservative Party over the past few months.
If you look at Labour, it's pretty clear that the party going bonkers has been caused by a take-over by an unholy alliance of unreconstructed 1960s Trotskyists like Corbyn and McDonell, whom everyone had forgotten about, rotting as they were harmlessly on the backbenches, and new entryists many of whom were chucked out of the party by Kinnock, or who are too young for that but have been campaigning against Labour for years, or who are just naive student-activist types. I don't get the impression that formerly sensible Labour activists have gone bonkers.
In the case of the Conservatives, there's a bit of that kind of effect - resurrection of forgotten dinosaurs and Kippers joining the party - but what staggered me was that people I have known in the party for years, and who were perfectly sensible and balanced albeit perhaps not enamoured of the EU, have been radicalised over a few months. Indeed we have a few good examples of this radicalisation amongst PBers. It has been an astonishingly rapid phenomenon. I realised that I'd probably have to leave the party early in the year, when at an association AGM there was a motion proposed and passed (with just a handful of dissenters, and only me speaking against) supporting a no-deal crash out and characterising Theresa May's deal as 'not true Brexit'. As I pointed out, it was completely absurd to say that leaving the CAP, leaving the CFP, leaving the political structures, getting rid definitively of Ever Closer Union, leaving the Customs Union, leaving the Single Market, removing the direct jurisdiction of the ECJ in UK law, etc etc was 'not Brexit', but people I knew well who previously had been quite moderate and balanced were all in favour of this nonsense.
I think that future political scientists and psychologists specialising in the madness of crowds will have a field day trying to understand this rapid transition from sanity to hysteria. But it was clear to me then that my days in the party were numbered.
Those who have shifted from Remain to No Deal baffle me.
Nothing disgraceful about saying the best way to respect Jo Cox is to unite the country and deliver Brexit
Think long and hard about what your defending.
Your pro-Conservative Party zealotry and poll mangling is amusing but this is contemptible.
There is nothing contemptible about defending the will of the people and I will never apologise for doing so
Like your leader, your view of the “will of the people” is narrow, subjective and self-serving. So utterly convinced of your own righteousness, you have developed myths of betrayal that you use to justify your own actions that cross the line.
We had a referendum on leaving the EU, 52% voted to leave, that was the will of the people. No further discussion needed
52% of people all voted for their unicorn version of leave (from insanely hard No Deal Brexit to a carefully managed escape to the EEA)..
52% of people did not vote for a No Deal Brexit which is what Boris is pushing for.
49% of voters back No Deal Brexit with Survation tonight if a deal is not agreed by 31st October, only 43% of voters back further extension
There are lots of Tory women MPs, such as my own MP Nus Ghani, who were close to Jo Cox, and who themselves face very nasty threats as a result of the increased polarisation and viciousness of politics. Boris has made a major misstep, and has revealed himself as at best irresponsible.
Lib Dems getting ever closer to that tipping point where they become the Opposition, and hoover up Labour votes. If the collapse happens it will happen with astonishing speed, like the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Still think the lib dems should have stuck to second referendum policy rather than sod the referendum result.
Confession: brexit is now such a nightmare, a small but significant part of me wants the Lib Dems to sweep to an incredible but overwhelming victory, consigning Corbyn to history, and revoking Brexit. Then they can quietly govern us for 20 years with tediously sensible centrist policies with a slightly green tinge. I don’t care. Just make it all GO AWAY.
I know this is a fevered day dream. I know that Revoke risks serious civil strife. But that’s what I fear: serious civil strife. Both sides are equally guilty. Both sides are whipping it up.
Dear sweet Jo Swinson, with your mild Scottish vowels. Save us.
If I thought this represented a lasting sentiment, I’d say welcome.
As we discussed quite some time ago, the LibDems’ best card is: Brexit - just make it stop (or go away).
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
No the law as set out in the Surrender Bill requires the post of PM to do that. It does not require Johnson as an individual to do so. I still contend his most likely move will be to resign as PM the day before he would be required to break the law but remain as leader of the Tory party.
Let some other idiot MP surrender to the EU and then go into the GE promising we will leave once he has control of Parliament again.
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
No the law as set out in the Surrender Bill requires the post of PM to do that. It does not require Johnson as an individual to do so. I still contend his most likely move will be to resign as PM the day before he would be required to break the law but remain as leader of the Tory party.
Let some other idiot MP surrender to the EU and then go into the GE promising we will leave once he has control of Parliament again.
He's never had control of parliament, and God forbid he ever does.
I am currently in the US. This Trump/Ukraine story is totally dominating the airwaves. Johnson has very deliberately chosen to stand as close as possible to the US President. That may turn out to be yet another very poor decision.
57% of US voters oppose impeaching the President today, only 37% in favour
If labour had a respectable leader and they hadnt spent the past week announcing marxist open border policies they would surely be 20 points ahead in the polls.
Lib Dems getting ever closer to that tipping point where they become the Opposition, and hoover up Labour votes. If the collapse happens it will happen with astonishing speed, like the fall of the Berlin Wall.
They are hoovering up Tory votes at the moment.
Perhaps Boris Johnson's impression of a less competent cross between Trump and Bolsonaro isn't the best vote-winner.
If there are TV debates for the next GE then they are a huge opportunity for Swinson
Boris can only resign rather than comply with the Benn Act if a majority of Tory MPs are prepared to follow him into opposition. Because if they are not they can just send the Chairman of the '22 Committee to the Palace in a Taxi and say " send for X rather than Mr Corbyn " and that's that. Will the Conservative Parliamentary Party really not only leave office by choice but make Jeremy Corbyn PM ? Even if they think it's just for 6 weeks ?
There are lots of Tory women MPs, such as my own MP Nus Ghani, who were close to Jo Cox, and who themselves face very nasty threats as a result of the increased polarisation and viciousness of politics. Boris has made a major misstep, and has revealed himself as at best irresponsible.
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
No the law as set out in the Surrender Bill requires the post of PM to do that. It does not require Johnson as an individual to do so. I still contend his most likely move will be to resign as PM the day before he would be required to break the law but remain as leader of the Tory party.
Let some other idiot MP surrender to the EU and then go into the GE promising we will leave once he has control of Parliament again.
That means resigning the day after the European Council summit. It’s very hard for that not to look like a humiliation for him, no matter how hard they try to spin it.
There are lots of Tory women MPs, such as my own MP Nus Ghani, who were close to Jo Cox, and who themselves face very nasty threats as a result of the increased polarisation and viciousness of politics. Boris has made a major misstep, and has revealed himself as at best irresponsible.
Let’s be brutally honest here, there are MPs - parties even - now espousing Revoke.
Revoke literally says, to 17.4m people: your vote means nothing, you don’t get a say, you’re not worthy of a role in our democracy. It means, in effect, the end of democracy.
How will people react to that? With violence, of course, as that is how people have always reacted, through history, when they are told by the state that they have no say, their role is just to toil, and pay taxes, and do what they are told by their betters.
That is why the Lib Dem policy is so deeply irresponsible. Even if - see below - I yearn for the clarity of their position. I also know that it is explosively risky.
It seems odd to say that such a mild mannered party as the Lib Dems are risking civil strife. But they are.
Nothing disgraceful about saying the best way to respect Jo Cox is to unite the country and deliver Brexit
Think long and hard about what your defending.
Your pro-Conservative Party zealotry and poll mangling is amusing but this is contemptible.
There is nothing contemptible about defending the will of the people and I will never apologise for doing so
Like your leader, your view of the “will of the people” is narrow, subjective and self-serving. So utterly convinced of your own righteousness, you have developed myths of betrayal that you use to justify your own actions that cross the line.
We had a referendum on leaving the EU, 52% voted to leave, that was the will of the people. No further discussion needed
Of course there is a discussion needed. Not least because your leader voted down the negotiated Brexit deal.
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
No the law as set out in the Surrender Bill requires the post of PM to do that. It does not require Johnson as an individual to do so. I still contend his most likely move will be to resign as PM the day before he would be required to break the law but remain as leader of the Tory party.
Let some other idiot MP surrender to the EU and then go into the GE promising we will leave once he has control of Parliament again.
How does Boris resign if no one wants the job of PM? He will have to give it to another Tory Cabinet minister who will then carry the can..
There are lots of Tory women MPs, such as my own MP Nus Ghani, who were close to Jo Cox, and who themselves face very nasty threats as a result of the increased polarisation and viciousness of politics. Boris has made a major misstep, and has revealed himself as at best irresponsible.
He has revealed his true self.
I fear so. I had thought Boris was unsuitable to be PM because he was deeply unserious and flaky, but it's looking as though that might have been over-charitable.
I wonder if a major advantage for the LibDems is that they have so few MPs at the moment. Very little people available for rent a quote, very little chance of the message being put out by their leadership being contradicted within ten minutes. And when I reckon a large percentage of the population would welcome the idea of an election where all current MPs are barred from standing, this hardly harms them at all.
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
No the law as set out in the Surrender Bill requires the post of PM to do that. It does not require Johnson as an individual to do so. I still contend his most likely move will be to resign as PM the day before he would be required to break the law but remain as leader of the Tory party.
Let some other idiot MP surrender to the EU and then go into the GE promising we will leave once he has control of Parliament again.
That means resigning the day after the European Council summit. It’s very hard for that not to look like a humiliation for him, no matter how hard they try to spin it.
True. He may go earlier but I do believe he will go.
There are lots of Tory women MPs, such as my own MP Nus Ghani, who were close to Jo Cox, and who themselves face very nasty threats as a result of the increased polarisation and viciousness of politics. Boris has made a major misstep, and has revealed himself as at best irresponsible.
Let’s be brutally honest here, there are MPs - parties even - now espousing Revoke.
Revoke literally says, to 17.4m people: your vote means nothing, you don’t get a say, you’re not worthy of a role in our democracy. It means, in effect, the end of democracy.
How will people react to that? With violence, of course, as that is how people have always reacted, through history, when they are told by the state that they have no say, their role is just to toil, and pay taxes, and do what they are told by their betters.
That is why the Lib Dem policy is so deeply irresponsible. Even if - see below - I yearn for the clarity of their position. I also know that it is explosively risky.
It seems odd to say that such a mild mannered party as the Lib Dems are risking civil strife. But they are.
Mind you Chuka would make a great Marie Antoinette
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
No the law as set out in the Surrender Bill requires the post of PM to do that. It does not require Johnson as an individual to do so. I still contend his most likely move will be to resign as PM the day before he would be required to break the law but remain as leader of the Tory party.
Let some other idiot MP surrender to the EU and then go into the GE promising we will leave once he has control of Parliament again.
That means resigning the day after the European Council summit. It’s very hard for that not to look like a humiliation for him, no matter how hard they try to spin it.
No humiliation, if the EU will not agree to remove the backstop 49% of voters back No Deal with Survation tonight, only 43% back further extension, the people would be behind Boris
That would be why the Tories have dropped two points and Labour has stayed the same, I suppose.
Propaganda has to have some basic plausibility to be effective.
But labour’s brexit policy, clearly not as black and white and catchy as do or die or revoke and go into civil war, is a boring and reasonable slow burner “soft brexit or remain decided by confirmatory ref”. It’s designed for the rigours of a GE campaign not a conference bounce.
It will stand up better in the long run than No Deal and Revoke because the fact is there is no magic bullet to quickly end this black dog hanging over the UK, the only way to overcome such division and comeback together again is pain in compromise, and painstaking hard work over a long length of time.
Not a doubt in my mind it’s the magic bullet peddlers who end up losing.
Boris can only resign rather than comply with the Benn Act if a majority of Tory MPs are prepared to follow him into opposition. Because if they are not they can just send the Chairman of the '22 Committee to the Palace in a Taxi and say " send for X rather than Mr Corbyn " and that's that. Will the Conservative Parliamentary Party really not only leave office by choice but make Jeremy Corbyn PM ? Even if they think it's just for 6 weeks ?
No he can resign and then if any Tory MP tries to extendvthey will be throwing away their career. Most of those willing to do that are already out of the party.
If labour had a respectable leader and they hadnt spent the past week announcing marxist open border policies they would surely be 20 points ahead in the polls.
No they wouldn't, on tonight's Survation Labour and LDs combined are on 46%, Tories and Brexit Party combined on 43%
Lib Dems getting ever closer to that tipping point where they become the Opposition, and hoover up Labour votes. If the collapse happens it will happen with astonishing speed, like the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Still think the lib dems should have stuck to second referendum policy rather than sod the referendum result.
Confession: brexit is now such a nightmare, a small but significant part of me wants the Lib Dems to sweep to an incredible but overwhelming victory, consigning Corbyn to history, and revoking Brexit. Then they can quietly govern us for 20 years with tediously sensible centrist policies with a slightly green tinge. I don’t care. Just make it all GO AWAY.
I know this is a fevered day dream. I know that Revoke risks serious civil strife. But that’s what I fear: serious civil strife. Both sides are equally guilty. Both sides are whipping it up.
Dear sweet Jo Swinson, with your mild Scottish vowels. Save us.
If I thought this represented a lasting sentiment, I’d say welcome.
As we discussed quite some time ago, the LibDems’ best card is: Brexit - just make it stop (or go away).
I said a small part of me is thinking this. For emotional reasons. Make it go away.
The larger logical part of me thinks their Revoke policy is absurdly dangerous and inflammatory.
Nothing disgraceful about saying the best way to respect Jo Cox is to unite the country and deliver Brexit
Think long and hard about what your defending.
Your pro-Conservative Party zealotry and poll mangling is amusing but this is contemptible.
There is nothing contemptible about defending the will of the people and I will never apologise for doing so
Like your leader, your view of the “will of the people” is narrow, subjective and self-serving. So utterly convinced of your own righteousness, you have developed myths of betrayal that you use to justify your own actions that cross the line.
We had a referendum on leaving the EU, 52% voted to leave, that was the will of the people. No further discussion needed
52% of people all voted for their unicorn version of leave (from insanely hard No Deal Brexit to a carefully managed escape to the EEA)..
52% of people did not vote for a No Deal Brexit which is what Boris is pushing for.
49% of voters back No Deal Brexit with Survation tonight if a deal is not agreed by 31st October, only 43% of voters back further extension
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
No the law as set out in the Surrender Bill requires the post of PM to do that. It does not require Johnson as an individual to do so. I still contend his most likely move will be to resign as PM the day before he would be required to break the law but remain as leader of the Tory party.
Let some other idiot MP surrender to the EU and then go into the GE promising we will leave once he has control of Parliament again.
That means resigning the day after the European Council summit. It’s very hard for that not to look like a humiliation for him, no matter how hard they try to spin it.
No humiliation, if the EU will not agree to remove the backstop 49% of voters back No Deal with Survation tonight, only 43% back further extension, the people would be behind Boris
No, Corbyn minority govt with C&S from the LibDems and SNP.
On paper yes. In reality no. On those numbers Lib Dem’s won’t go anywhere near Corbyn. Lib Dem’s on the ascendancy aren’t going to tie their colours in anyway to either Labour or Tories.
Why would they taint their increasing brand in any way? They’ll spend most of their time opposing Marxist crap. For what benefit?
Revoke literally says, to 17.4m people: your vote means nothing, you don’t get a say, you’re not worthy of a role in our democracy. It means, in effect, the end of democracy.
How will people react to that? With violence, of course, as that is how people have always reacted, through history, when they are told by the state that they have no say, their role is just to toil, and pay taxes, and do what they are told by their betters.
I'm not sure I know the answer but say instead of just revoking you had a referendum, but it's boycotted by one side, and the other side gets maybe half the turnout of last time because the opposition hasn't showed up. Is that any better?
All that bringing parliament back achieved was making everyone more angry than they were before.
We have learnt this.
Earlier today the Attorney-General stated that the government would comply with the law.
This evening the Prime Minister said, in response to a question, that he would not.
Either the PM will have to change his mind or the A-G will have to resign.
We are in a very dangerous place when the PM stands up in Parliament and says he will not comply with the law.
He didn’t say any such thing. He said he wouldn’t ask for an extension. The Surrender Act makes provisos for exactly this, within the law.
He was specifically asked: “If he doesn't get a deal through this House, or a no-deal through this House, by 19 October, will he seek an extension from the EU to 31 January?”
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
No the law as set out in the Surrender Bill requires the post of PM to do that. It does not require Johnson as an individual to do so. I still contend his most likely move will be to resign as PM the day before he would be required to break the law but remain as leader of the Tory party.
Let some other idiot MP surrender to the EU and then go into the GE promising we will leave once he has control of Parliament again.
He's never had control of parliament, and God forbid he ever does.
He had no effective majority. That will probably change after an election so long as he has not extended. I wish it were not him but there is a very clear route for him to majority.
Boris (and Mercer and others) want to be a little bit careful that tonight doesn’t put legs on a “Tories are anti-women” meme - however overblown it might be.
There are a lot of voters who haven’t uttered a word about Brexit but would generally give BJ the benefit of the doubt for getting on with it, promising gold bars for every nurse and hanging off a zipwire. Basically, very soft support... a fair chunk of it from women.
It would only take a friendly young LD or (right sort of) Lab candidate to knock on the door for some of those to switch.
And no MPs being murdered before the General Election. If any are they'll be a hugely polarising national debate about what Johnson said today. It's an extraordinary gamble given Johnson is well aware of the current threat environment.
Nothing disgraceful about saying the best way to respect Jo Cox is to unite the country and deliver Brexit
Think long and hard about what your defending.
Your pro-Conservative Party zealotry and poll mangling is amusing but this is contemptible.
There is nothing contemptible about defending the will of the people and I will never apologise for doing so
Like your leader, your view of the “will of the people” is narrow, subjective and self-serving. So utterly convinced of your own righteousness, you have developed myths of betrayal that you use to justify your own actions that cross the line.
We had a referendum on leaving the EU, 52% voted to leave, that was the will of the people. No further discussion needed
52% of people all voted for their unicorn version of leave (from insanely hard No Deal Brexit to a carefully managed escape to the EEA)..
52% of people did not vote for a No Deal Brexit which is what Boris is pushing for.
49% of voters back No Deal Brexit with Survation tonight if a deal is not agreed by 31st October, only 43% of voters back further extension
Trump himself may survive but his cabinet allies could be in serious diffs.
Bear in mind the electoral numbers are against Trump getting a second term, he is weakening amongst key voting groups that got him in first time.
Of course the Democrats may pursue ideological purity and dent their chances because, if they do, there is every chance of a credible middle 3rd runner and the evidence is that will stuff the democrats more.
Whither James Mattis who was asked to run against Trump in 16 by a group of republicans and turned it down.
There are lots of Tory women MPs, such as my own MP Nus Ghani, who were close to Jo Cox, and who themselves face very nasty threats as a result of the increased polarisation and viciousness of politics. Boris has made a major misstep, and has revealed himself as at best irresponsible.
There are lots of Tory women MPs, such as my own MP Nus Ghani, who were close to Jo Cox, and who themselves face very nasty threats as a result of the increased polarisation and viciousness of politics. Boris has made a major misstep, and has revealed himself as at best irresponsible.
Let’s be brutally honest here, there are MPs - parties even - now espousing Revoke.
Revoke literally says, to 17.4m people: your vote means nothing, you don’t get a say, you’re not worthy of a role in our democracy. It means, in effect, the end of democracy.
How will people react to that? With violence, of course, as that is how people have always reacted, through history, when they are told by the state that they have no say, their role is just to toil, and pay taxes, and do what they are told by their betters.
That is why the Lib Dem policy is so deeply irresponsible. Even if - see below - I yearn for the clarity of their position. I also know that it is explosively risky.
It seems odd to say that such a mild mannered party as the Lib Dems are risking civil strife. But they are.
I tend to agree. The LibDems shouldn't have gone for that policy. I'm not even sure that it's sensible in narrow party-political terms; they could have gone for the Remain/Revoke vote whilst still leaving open the idea that it might need a referendum to confirm it.
Nonetheless they are at least not totally bonkers, which is streets ahead of the alternatives open to English voters.
Comments
https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3641
Please don't bother even to tell us from now on. We'll just take it as read.
Con 30%
Lab 24%
LD 21%
BRX 14%
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_King_(diplomat)
Absolutely rotten to the core with Remainerism. Like a kind of psychospiritual fungus. Of course he hates Boris. Safely ignored.
He replied “No.”
The law requires him to do just that.
It's like a bouncing baby. They don't actually leave the ground.
If you look at Labour, it's pretty clear that the party going bonkers has been caused by a take-over by an unholy alliance of unreconstructed 1960s Trotskyists like Corbyn and McDonell, whom everyone had forgotten about, rotting as they were harmlessly on the backbenches, and new entryists many of whom were chucked out of the party by Kinnock, or who are too young for that but have been campaigning against Labour for years, or who are just naive student-activist types. I don't get the impression that formerly sensible Labour activists have gone bonkers.
In the case of the Conservatives, there's a bit of that kind of effect - resurrection of forgotten dinosaurs and Kippers joining the party - but what staggered me was that people I have known in the party for years, and who were perfectly sensible and balanced albeit perhaps not enamoured of the EU, have been radicalised over a few months. Indeed we have a few good examples of this radicalisation amongst PBers. It has been an astonishingly rapid phenomenon. I realised that I'd probably have to leave the party early in the year, when at an association AGM there was a motion proposed and passed (with just a handful of dissenters, and only me speaking against) supporting a no-deal crash out and characterising Theresa May's deal as 'not true Brexit'. As I pointed out, it was completely absurd to say that leaving the CAP, leaving the CFP, leaving the political structures, getting rid definitively of Ever Closer Union, leaving the Customs Union, leaving the Single Market, removing the direct jurisdiction of the ECJ in UK law, etc etc was 'not Brexit', but people I knew well who previously had been quite moderate and balanced were all in favour of this nonsense.
I think that future political scientists and psychologists specialising in the madness of crowds will have a field day trying to understand this rapid transition from sanity to hysteria. But it was clear to me then that my days in the party were numbered.
Is there no part of you that feels any kind of shame when you make comments like these?
52% of people did not vote for a No Deal Brexit which is what Boris is pushing for.
That''s going to *drumroll* Hillary Clinton !
And he might not be the only one...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Agx5H6H3Gtg
The Lords are unelected.
#justsayin'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7504983/Most-British-voters-want-snap-poll-think-Establishment-determined-block-Brexit.html
There are a lot of voters who haven’t uttered a word about Brexit but would generally give BJ the benefit of the doubt for getting on with it, promising gold bars for every nurse and hanging off a zipwire. Basically, very soft support... a fair chunk of it from women.
It would only take a friendly young LD or (right sort of) Lab candidate to knock on the door for some of those to switch.
I took part
I said Tory
I don't back no deal
https://twitter.com/jwoodcockmp/status/1176964158106943489?s=21
As we discussed quite some time ago, the LibDems’ best card is: Brexit - just make it stop (or go away).
Let some other idiot MP surrender to the EU and then go into the GE promising we will leave once he has control of Parliament again.
As I predicted.
Interesting that Survation still has BXP so high, unlike many others.
Revoke literally says, to 17.4m people: your vote means nothing, you don’t get a say, you’re not worthy of a role in our democracy. It means, in effect, the end of democracy.
How will people react to that? With violence, of course, as that is how people have always reacted, through history, when they are told by the state that they have no say, their role is just to toil, and pay taxes, and do what they are told by their betters.
That is why the Lib Dem policy is so deeply irresponsible. Even if - see below - I yearn for the clarity of their position. I also know that it is explosively risky.
It seems odd to say that such a mild mannered party as the Lib Dems are risking civil strife. But they are.
He either works there or in the CCHQ.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7504983/Most-British-voters-want-snap-poll-think-Establishment-determined-block-Brexit.html
It will stand up better in the long run than No Deal and Revoke because the fact is there is no magic bullet to quickly end this black dog hanging over the UK, the only way to overcome such division and comeback together again is pain in compromise, and painstaking hard work over a long length of time.
Not a doubt in my mind it’s the magic bullet peddlers who end up losing.
The Big Outrage Bus was so full today it went past me without even stopping.
These clowns needs just to pass Brexit so everyone can get on with their lives.
The larger logical part of me thinks their Revoke policy is absurdly dangerous and inflammatory.
Why would they taint their increasing brand in any way? They’ll spend most of their time opposing Marxist crap. For what benefit?
The media might love all this chaos and drama but things are now getting out of hand.
Trump himself may survive but his cabinet allies could be in serious diffs.
Bear in mind the electoral numbers are against Trump getting a second term, he is weakening amongst key voting groups that got him in first time.
Of course the Democrats may pursue ideological purity and dent their chances because, if they do, there is every chance of a credible middle 3rd runner and the evidence is that will stuff the democrats more.
Whither James Mattis who was asked to run against Trump in 16 by a group of republicans and turned it down.
Nonetheless they are at least not totally bonkers, which is streets ahead of the alternatives open to English voters.