politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The party whose leader has the worst LOTO ratings on record re

SeanT said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Just catching up the thread and not much harmony around, sadly

The debate is as polarised and heated as ever with no compromise in sight

But compromise there has to be and we need a whole load of mps to grow up

Saying that is easy, but I do wish the anger and unnecessary attacks could be dialled down even a little as no one wins

Makes you wonder what on Earth we will all be discussing once it’s done and dusted.

"done and dusted"????? You think this will ever be *done and dusted*? It's Scottish indyref times 1000. It is going to dominate politics for a decade, maybe two, especially if it is No Deal Brexit.

Yeah, I did smirk a bit when I typed that. Hah!

RobD said:

Makes you wonder what on Earth we will all be discussing once it’s done and dusted.

The right way for potential PMs to eat a bacon roll, perhaps? Remember those innocent days?

Are there Conservatives who admit they'd actually feel better if EdM and EdB were running things, rather than TM and PH (not to forget Andrea Jenkyn, of course), even if EdM was a sloppy eater and EdB was a bit fat?

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Just catching up the thread and not much harmony around, sadly

The debate is as polarised and heated as ever with no compromise in sight

But compromise there has to be and we need a whole load of mps to grow up

Saying that is easy, but I do wish the anger and unnecessary attacks could be dialled down even a little as no one wins in such a confrontational situation

MPs have reached a compromise. Its the EU that aren't willing to compromise an inch. If there's no deal, we can quite reasonably blame them.

The EU wanted a Northern Ireland backstop. The UK wanted a UK-wide one. The EU compromised. Obviously, we will blame the foreigners for a mess entirely of our making and that will make a few xenophobes feel good for a while. But it will not solve a thing. A move designed to keep the Tories together whatever the cost to the country is unlikely to be forgotten or forgiven.

No no, he means the kind of compromise where the EU break their red lines and give us everything want, and we don't budge an inch

rcs1000 said:

I came,

I saw the discussion,

I left...

I thought I’d stumbled into Guido by mistake

SeanT said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SeanT said:

What amazes me is the number of people who are blithely unaware of what is facing us, potentially, in less than seven weeks. Or if they are aware, they are presuming Oh someone will sort it out.

No one is there to sort it out. I don't think planes will fall out of the sky, but there could be a chain reaction of very very nasty shocking political/economic crises, one on top of the other, as consequences multiply into catastrophes. It could be Lehmans but worse.

OK, time for the gym and some soothing endorphins. Then maybe a gallon of gin.

Or it could be like the dot-com-bubble bursting. Lots of hype and then life goes on.

It really isn't like the dot com bubble. Trust me. It is the unravelling overnight - the brutal severing, even - of 45 years of economic, political, social, cultural, educational, and governmental integration. Of course we should never have let this integration get so deep, and we should have asked the people when to stop, and we would have stopped some time ago, and Brexit would never have been a word, let alone a thing.

But thanks to two generations of lying europhiles we are now DEEPLY enmeshed in the EU system, and chopping us out of it, in one fell swoop, is going to HURT. We just have to hope the hurt is relatively temporary.

But if we're going to do it, then we may as well do it swiftly and in full, like ripping off a bandage. And I don't think it will hurt that much (and hope I'm right). There's no point dragging this out for decades and still being enmeshed and going through all this upset for nothing. Either stay, or go, but let us make up our bloody mind and do one!

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Just catching up the thread and not much harmony around, sadly

The debate is as polarised and heated as ever with no compromise in sight

But compromise there has to be and we need a whole load of mps to grow up

Saying that is easy, but I do wish the anger and unnecessary attacks could be dialled down even a little as no one wins in such a confrontational situation

MPs have reached a compromise. Its the EU that aren't willing to compromise an inch. If there's no deal, we can quite reasonably blame them.

The EU wanted a Northern Ireland backstop. The UK wanted a UK-wide one. The EU compromised. Obviously, we will blame the foreigners for a mess entirely of our making and that will make a few xenophobes feel good for a while. But it will not solve a thing. A move designed to keep the Tories together whatever the cost to the country is unlikely to be forgotten or forgiven.

Who said the UK wanted a UK-wide one? This is a terrible interpretation of statehood that makes Theresa May out to be some kind of Louis XIV figure. L'etat c'est moi

Theresa May was open to a UK wide backstop, the UK never voted for a UK-wide backstop. Parliament never endorsed it. MPs from across Parliament expressed opposition to it long before it was agreed.

The UK government got what it asked for. The EU compromised. No-one has voted for a No Deal Brexit. It is clear Parliament doesn’t want one. The only reason it will happen is because the Theresa May is putting her party before her country.

No it didn't. The UK government set a red line that we would be able to have our own trade policy and the backstop drives a coach and horses through that. The fact that May folded on this out of fear of no deal doesn't make it what the UK wanted.

Parliament may not have voted for no deal, but that is immaterial. It voted to Leave on 29 March and has subsequently not voted for a deal. No deal is a consequence of that, not a choice.

If MPs really want to prevent no deal they can do so easily. All these remainer opposition MPs who pretend that no deal is the end of days could avoid that by ratifying May's deal.

The fact that Labour, Lib Dem and SNP MPs would rather try and get one over the Tories than avoid no deal demonstrates to me that even they don't believe no deal is as bad as they make out.

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Just catching up the thread and not much harmony around, sadly

The debate is as polarised and heated as ever with no compromise in sight

But compromise there has to be and we need a whole load of mps to grow up

Saying that is easy, but I do wish the anger and unnecessary attacks could be dialled down even a little as no one wins in such a confrontational situation

MPs have reached a compromise. Its the EU that aren't willing to compromise an inch. If there's no deal, we can quite reasonably blame them.

They will have stuck to their word when we thought they wouldn’t. It is absolutely, categorically, most definitely our fault.

rcs1000 said:

https://twitter.com/pickledpuffin/status/1094562283806703616

Reminiscent of London 2011.

rcs1000 said:

I came,

I saw the discussion,

I left...

As would I have done, but what caught my eye was the claim that whatever a democratically-elected government does is therefore democratic by definition.

That makes me wonder why governments with sufficient majorities don't simply declare their political flavour to be government in perpetuity. Democratic by definition, that would be.

Good evening, everyone. Happy hours arguing.

If this is what pb.com is like now, what’s it going to be like in the small hours of 30th March a few hours after there’s No Deal?

NickPalmer said:

The right way for potential PMs to eat a bacon roll, perhaps? Remember those innocent days?

Are there Conservatives who admit they'd actually feel better if EdM and EdB were running things, rather than TM and PH (not to forget Andrea Jenkyn, of course), even if EdM was a sloppy eater and EdB was a bit fat?

That's a slightly odd question, because it's hard to see any world in which EdM and EdB would be attempting to implement Brexit in a hung parliament dependent on the ERG and DUP for support.

But if you mean 'would a normal, sane government under any of the leading pre-Corbyn Labour politicians be preferable to a no-deal crash-out followed very probably by a Corbyn government?', then, yes, of course it would be massively preferable.

Chris said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SeanT said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SeanT said:

What amazes me is the number of people who are blithely unaware of what is facing us, potentially, in less than seven weeks. Or if they are aware, they are presuming Oh someone will sort it out.

No one is there to sort it out. I don't think planes will fall out of the sky, but there could be a chain reaction of very very nasty shocking political/economic crises, one on top of the other, as consequences multiply into catastrophes. It could be Lehmans but worse.

OK, time for the gym and some soothing endorphins. Then maybe a gallon of gin.

Or it could be like the dot-com-bubble bursting. Lots of hype and then life goes on.

It really isn't like the dot com bubble. Trust me. It is the unravelling overnight - the brutal severing, even - of 45 years of economic, political, social, cultural, educational, and governmental integration. Of course we should never have let this integration get so deep, and we should have asked the people when to stop, and we would have stopped some time ago, and Brexit would never have been a word, let alone a thing.

But thanks to two generations of lying europhiles we are now DEEPLY enmeshed in the EU system, and chopping us out of it, in one fell swoop, is going to HURT. We just have to hope the hurt is relatively temporary.

But if we're going to do it, then we may as well do it swiftly and in full, like ripping off a bandage. And I don't think it will hurt that much ...

You're beyond parody.

Because I disagree with you? Very mature.

We debated this years ago. If I was afraid of leaving, I would have voted Remain. To me the possibility of the EU not playing too nicely with us after a Leave vote was something I'd considered before the referendum. I'm confused if this has come to a shock for everyone else.

Philip_Thompson said:

Streeter said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Just catching up the thread and not much harmony around, sadly

The debate is as polarised and heated as ever with no compromise in sight

But compromise there has to be and we need a whole load of mps to grow up

Saying that is easy, but I do wish the anger and unnecessary attacks could be dialled down even a little as no one wins in such a confrontational situation

MPs have reached a compromise. Its the EU that aren't willing to compromise an inch. If there's no deal, we can quite reasonably blame them.

They will have stuck to their word when we thought they wouldn’t. It is absolutely, categorically, most definitely our fault.

And we will have stuck to our word when they thought we wouldn't.

And life will go on. And we won't put up a hard border in NI and lets see if Varadkar does. My money is on no, this whole backstop nonsense was a bluff.

That's such an infantile way of thinking about it. If Varadkar doesn't send in the building contractors on day one to put up some new customs posts, it doesn't mean we've successfully called his bluff. The government would have to implement as much of the backstop unilaterally as they could and there would need to be a border poll.

SeanT said:

Philip_Thompson said:

If MPs really want to prevent no deal they can do so easily. All these remainer opposition MPs who pretend that no deal is the end of days could avoid that by ratifying May's deal.

The fact that Labour, Lib Dem and SNP MPs would rather try and get one over the Tories than avoid no deal demonstrates to me that even they don't believe no deal is as bad as they make out.

Er this is bollocks. Of the three parties you mention only the Lib Dems MIGHT have the country's larger interests at heart. For the leadership of Labour, a chaotic, apocalyptic Crash Brexit is ideal, if owned by the Tories, as it is possibly the only way an appalled, betrayed electorate would angrily vote Corbyn into power.

Likewise, for the SNP, a chaotic hard Brexit could be their last best chance to announce a 2nd indyref, and win it. A busted Britain is easier to leave.

Plus you ignore the Guns of August angle. Very very few people wanted World War One. But as positions became polarised and troops were made ready and artillery was loaded onto trains the momentum towards an undesired war became unstoppable, even though most of the individual actors did not want this outcome.

I said MPs not leaders.

If the likes of Keir Starmer etc really believe No Deal will be a disaster then they should ratify the deal. Unless they actively want to have a disaster. If Corbyn is OK with a disaster then so be it but his MPs should do what Corbyn has a lifetime habit of and break the three line whip.

Its hard to take seriously people moaning that No Deal is a disaster then with a straight face rejecting a Deal to seek partisan advantage.

Philip_Thompson said:

Streeter said:

Bring on diamond-hard Brexit, you said.

Looks like you’ll get your wish - get over it.

A hard Brexit could be stopped today if Remain supporting MPs swung behind May's very soft deal.

Other than trying to get one over the Tories, or for Grieves et al trying to reverse democracy, I see no reason why those genuinely opposed to no deal should reject the only deal on offer to stop it.

Don't cry crocodile tears about Leavers being OK with Leaving.

We have to cut out the Bluekip cancer. I’m beginning to look forward to no deal.

Richard_Nabavi said:

NickPalmer said:

The right way for potential PMs to eat a bacon roll, perhaps? Remember those innocent days?

Are there Conservatives who admit they'd actually feel better if EdM and EdB were running things, rather than TM and PH (not to forget Andrea Jenkyn, of course), even if EdM was a sloppy eater and EdB was a bit fat?

That's a slightly odd question, because it's hard to see any world in which EdM and EdB would be attempting to implement Brexit in a hung parliament dependent on the ERG and DUP for support.

But if you mean 'would a normal, sane government under any of the leading pre-Corbyn Labour politicians be preferable to a no-deal crash-out followed very probably by a Corbyn government?', then, yes, of course it would be massively preferable.

A Tory No Deal Brexit is the one scenario under which Jeremy Corbyn has a realistic chance of becoming PM. Which, of course, is why he wants one.

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Streeter said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Just catching up the thread and not much harmony around, sadly

The debate is as polarised and heated as ever with no compromise in sight

But compromise there has to be and we need a whole load of mps to grow up

Saying that is easy, but I do wish the anger and unnecessary attacks could be dialled down even a little as no one wins in such a confrontational situation

MPs have reached a compromise. Its the EU that aren't willing to compromise an inch. If there's no deal, we can quite reasonably blame them.

They will have stuck to their word when we thought they wouldn’t. It is absolutely, categorically, most definitely our fault.

And we will have stuck to our word when they thought we wouldn't.

And life will go on. And we won't put up a hard border in NI and lets see if Varadkar does. My money is on no, this whole backstop nonsense was a bluff.

That's such an infantile way of thinking about it. If Varadkar doesn't send in the building contractors on day one to put up some new customs posts, it doesn't mean we've successfully called his bluff. The government would have to implement as much of the backstop unilaterally as they could and there would need to be a border poll.

No there wouldn't be a need for one. The only time there needs to be a border poll is if there is sufficient demand to show there needs to be one. Which bullshit hypothetical polls don't show. A reasonable way to show it would be the voters voting for representatives who back one and that has not happened.

SeanT said:

Casino_Royale said:

If this is what pb.com is like now, what’s it going to be like in the small hours of 30th March a few hours after there’s No Deal?

There will be blood.

What does that look like online?

Or are we all going to meet up outside Dirty Dicks for a massive punch up?

Richard_Tyndall said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TOPPING said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

gypsumfantastic said:

Alanbrooke said:

ReggieCide said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/ftwestminster/status/1094988507074973697

FT anti brexit stance showing. Of course brexit is a negative to the economy but we are doing better than Italy and Germany and on a par with France

I did wonder why it was a blow to the data?

proabaly because they were rooting for a huge depression post the vote and it hasnt happened

I mean, we haven't left the EU yet. The chaos has barely started. We're still several weeks away from when the ironic contempt starts giving away to first serious concern and then blind panic.

Except the Remain tossers were predicting all those terrible catastrophes just for voting for Brexit before we even actually enacted it. And then when none of their terrible predictions turned out to be true they pretended they were talking about something else - like the lying scum they are.

None? Not the exchange rate or anything like that?

Another Leaver dickhead trying to rewrite history.

The exchange rate drops were beneficial not a catastrophe. They were something we would have wanted even without any mention of Brexit.

Don't forget that the exchange rate drops are beneficial for those who want to create wealth and have a country which lives within its means.

People who want cheaper imported tat and cheaper foreign holidays and who are willing to shut down UK exporting businesses to get them take the opposite view.

Well indeed. That kind of common sense seems to be lost on some of our Remainer colleagues.

Except it isn't common sense. If you could devalue your way to prosperity how come the pre-Euro German economy was so successful? Devaluation gives you a short term boost. We've had one over the last couple of years as it happens, and it hasn't done my bank balance any harm. But once the extra import costs catch up with your cash flow you realise that the benefits weren't just fleeting but weren't even as good as they looked.

I love reading your posts. You really know how to put a good case and be sharp without being abusive. Just think how good they would be if you were actually right as well.

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

NickPalmer said:

The right way for potential PMs to eat a bacon roll, perhaps? Remember those innocent days?

Are there Conservatives who admit they'd actually feel better if EdM and EdB were running things, rather than TM and PH (not to forget Andrea Jenkyn, of course), even if EdM was a sloppy eater and EdB was a bit fat?

That's a slightly odd question, because it's hard to see any world in which EdM and EdB would be attempting to implement Brexit in a hung parliament dependent on the ERG and DUP for support.

But if you mean 'would a normal, sane government under any of the leading pre-Corbyn Labour politicians be preferable to a no-deal crash-out followed very probably by a Corbyn government?', then, yes, of course it would be massively preferable.

A Tory No Deal Brexit is the one scenario under which Jeremy Corbyn has a realistic chance of becoming PM. Which, of course, is why he wants one.

Yep.

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Just catching up the thread and not much harmony around, sadly

The debate is as polarised and heated as ever with no compromise in sight

But compromise there has to be and we need a whole load of mps to grow up

Saying that is easy, but I do wish the anger and unnecessary attacks could be dialled down even a little as no one wins in such a confrontational situation

MPs have reached a compromise. Its the EU that aren't willing to compromise an inch. If there's no deal, we can quite reasonably blame them.

The EU wanted a Northern Ireland backstop. The UK wanted a UK-wide one. The EU compromised. Obviously, we will blame the foreigners for a mess entirely of our making and that will make a few xenophobes feel good for a while. But it will not solve a thing. A move designed to keep the Tories together whatever the cost to the country is unlikely to be forgotten or forgiven.

Who said the UK wanted a UK-wide one? This is a terrible interpretation of statehood that makes Theresa May out to be some kind of Louis XIV figure. L'etat c'est moi

Theresa May was open to a UK wide backstop, the UK never voted for a UK-wide backstop. Parliament never endorsed it. MPs from across Parliament expressed opposition to it long before it was agreed.

Because if you are a rule taker those rules protect you too. The UK gains more with 27 countries, plus a host of third countries, being bound to the UK on the rules against having to follow the rules itself. Those rules protect the UK even if it has no say over drafting them and they didn't take UK interests into account when drafting them. With a high probability we are heading eventually to the Vassal State. Problem is, this means less democratic accountability, not more. Mrs May's issues, the fact three Leaver Brexit have resigned in frustration and MPs can't decide what to do, all stem from this contradiction.

Casino_Royale said:

SeanT said:

Casino_Royale said:

If this is what pb.com is like now, what’s it going to be like in the small hours of 30th March a few hours after there’s No Deal?

There will be blood.

What does that look like online?

Or are we all going to meet up outside Dirty Dicks for a massive punch up?

Of course not.

Bishopsgate police station is only a couple of doors down.

Recidivist said:

MarqueeMark said:

"Labour’s massive problem is that the leadership is out of step with the vast majority of those who vote for the party."

The Tory's massive problem is that the Remainer leader is out of step with the vast majority of those who vote for the party.

The LibDem's massive problem is the leader.

Good summary.

If MM believes (and he is a Conservative activist) that ERG fanaticism is the majority view of Conservative voters then I find that worrying.

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

In which case can you DM me about some magic beans I have going cheap.

You bemoan May supposedly putting party ahead of country in seeking to get her deal through but being OK with no deal.

How are opposition MPs bemoaning no deal while rejecting the only deal in front of them doing anything other than putting party ahead of country?

To be fair SO has been just as critical of the opposition MPs as he has of the Government. He has shown no favouritism in his disdain for MPs of every colour.

SeanT said:

Then put it this way: all else being equal, would you rather Ed Balls had been in charge of Brexit from the start, rather than TMay? I think the answer has to be Yes. He's smarter, more flexible, better informed, and is probably a superior negotiator.

Yes, I think you are right on that. I've always thought he was the best of the generation of Labour politicians following on from Blair and Brown.

AlastairMeeks said:

Casino_Royale said:

SeanT said:

Casino_Royale said:

If this is what pb.com is like now, what’s it going to be like in the small hours of 30th March a few hours after there’s No Deal?

There will be blood.

What does that look like online?

Or are we all going to meet up outside Dirty Dicks for a massive punch up?

Of course not.

Bishopsgate police station is only a couple of doors down.

Ha!

Casino_Royale said:

williamglenn said:

Casino_Royale said:

If this is what pb.com is like now, what’s it going to be like in the small hours of 30th March a few hours after there’s No Deal?

It will be quite surreal because initially nothing will happen, and then there'll be a media scrum about the first tangible effect of Brexit.

Breaking News: "A consignment of carrots has been stopped for inspection in Calais"

I’ve been told on here there will be riots in the streets within 48 hours and a massive demands nationwide for an instant reversal of course.

When I say initially I mean in the hours after the clock ticks 11pm.

Recidivist said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TOPPING said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

gypsumfantastic said:

Alanbrooke said:

proabaly because they were rooting for a huge depression post the vote and it hasnt happened

I mean, we haven't left the EU yet. The chaos has barely started. We're still several weeks away from when the ironic contempt starts giving away to first serious concern and then blind panic.

Except the Remain tossers were predicting all those terrible catastrophes just for voting for Brexit before we even actually enacted it. And then when none of their terrible predictions turned out to be true they pretended they were talking about something else - like the lying scum they are.

None? Not the exchange rate or anything like that?

Another Leaver dickhead trying to rewrite history.

The exchange rate drops were beneficial not a catastrophe. They were something we would have wanted even without any mention of Brexit.

Don't forget that the exchange rate drops are beneficial for those who want to create wealth and have a country which lives within its means.

People who want cheaper imported tat and cheaper foreign holidays and who are willing to shut down UK exporting businesses to get them take the opposite view.

Well indeed. That kind of common sense seems to be lost on some of our Remainer colleagues.

Except it isn't common sense. If you could devalue your way to prosperity how come the pre-Euro German economy was so successful? Devaluation gives you a short term boost. We've had one over the last couple of years as it happens, and it hasn't done my bank balance any harm. But once the extra import costs catch up with your cash flow you realise that the benefits weren't just fleeting but weren't even as good as they looked.

I love reading your posts. You really know how to put a good case and be sharp without being abusive. Just think how good they would be if you were actually right as well.

You can live within yours means and increase your productivity.

Or you can devalue.

Most of the UK's people and all of its politicians have no intention of living within its means and also having increasingly little intention or ability to improve their productivity.

AlastairMeeks said:

SeanT said:

Casino_Royale said:

If this is what pb.com is like now, what’s it going to be like in the small hours of 30th March a few hours after there’s No Deal?

There will be blood.

Jasper Carrot once joked that CND members would be unbearable after a nuclear war, constantly saying “I told you so”.

The Greenham Common women wouldn't have been able to.

Casino_Royale said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

NickPalmer said:

The right way for potential PMs to eat a bacon roll, perhaps? Remember those innocent days?

Are there Conservatives who admit they'd actually feel better if EdM and EdB were running things, rather than TM and PH (not to forget Andrea Jenkyn, of course), even if EdM was a sloppy eater and EdB was a bit fat?

That's a slightly odd question, because it's hard to see any world in which EdM and EdB would be attempting to implement Brexit in a hung parliament dependent on the ERG and DUP for support.

But if you mean 'would a normal, sane government under any of the leading pre-Corbyn Labour politicians be preferable to a no-deal crash-out followed very probably by a Corbyn government?', then, yes, of course it would be massively preferable.

A Tory No Deal Brexit is the one scenario under which Jeremy Corbyn has a realistic chance of becoming PM. Which, of course, is why he wants one.

Yep.

If he stays as Labour leader I’m resigned to him becoming PM at the next election whatever the outcome of Brexit.

I think all roads lead there, at present.

The God help us one and all!

williamglenn said:

Casino_Royale said:

williamglenn said:

Casino_Royale said:

If this is what pb.com is like now, what’s it going to be like in the small hours of 30th March a few hours after there’s No Deal?

It will be quite surreal because initially nothing will happen, and then there'll be a media scrum about the first tangible effect of Brexit.

Breaking News: "A consignment of carrots has been stopped for inspection in Calais"

I’ve been told on here there will be riots in the streets within 48 hours and a massive demands nationwide for an instant reversal of course.

When I say initially I mean in the hours after the clock ticks 11pm.

The story there will be about Sterling and the market reaction.

I would also expect Mark Carney and the BoE, and Hammond, to take to the air.

One interesting question is how easily the Govenment will be able to get emergency legislation through in its aftermath.

I don’t know if this is just me but all the major supermarkets I regularly use - Sainsbury’s, Waitrose and M&S - seem to have noteably diversified their supply chains recently.

I don’t think this is one off. I regularly buy fresh fruit and veg there and, for example, in Waitrose on Saturday got a whole shop (peppers, sweetcorn, strawberries, bananas, apples, lettuce, cucumber, broccoli, mange tout and beans) without anything being from the EU, except mandarins from Spain.

The rest was UK, India, Morocco, Guatemala, Peru, Chile, Mexico and South Africa.

Casino_Royale said:

I don’t know if this is just me but all the major supermarkets I regularly use - Sainsbury’s, Waitrose and M&S - seem to have noteably diversified their supply chains recently.

I don’t think this is one off. I regularly buy fresh fruit and veg there and, for example, in Waitrose on Saturday got a whole shop (beans, sweetcorn, strawberries, bananas, apples, lettuce, cucumber, broccoli, mange tout and beans) without anything being from the EU, except mandarins from Spain.

The rest was UK, India, Morocco, Guatemala, Peru, Chile, Mexico and South Africa.

They can't possibly be as bad as indigenous Whitehall mandarins.

Casino_Royale said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

NickPalmer said:

The right way for potential PMs to eat a bacon roll, perhaps? Remember those innocent days?

Are there Conservatives who admit they'd actually feel better if EdM and EdB were running things, rather than TM and PH (not to forget Andrea Jenkyn, of course), even if EdM was a sloppy eater and EdB was a bit fat?

That's a slightly odd question, because it's hard to see any world in which EdM and EdB would be attempting to implement Brexit in a hung parliament dependent on the ERG and DUP for support.

But if you mean 'would a normal, sane government under any of the leading pre-Corbyn Labour politicians be preferable to a no-deal crash-out followed very probably by a Corbyn government?', then, yes, of course it would be massively preferable.

A Tory No Deal Brexit is the one scenario under which Jeremy Corbyn has a realistic chance of becoming PM. Which, of course, is why he wants one.

Yep.

If he stays as Labour leader I’m resigned to him becoming PM at the next election whatever the outcome of Brexit.

I think all roads lead there, at present.

I mostly agree. The longer till the next GE the more chance the Tories have of recovery, but there's no way they last until 2022, and even then it is not certain, given other factors (recession possibility, length of time in office and so on)

FF43 said:

"Leaving properly" is a slogan, not a policy. I agree we're not ready yet to face up honestly to the implications of Brexit. But if we benefit from the rules, and we do for the reasons I have just given, we are highly likely to go Vassal State eventually. You can only hunt unicorns for so long, because actually they don't exist. We are still hunting the unicorns.

No it's not a slogan it has a meaning I thought was clear. Let's rephrase.

I'm ok with Remaining where we get a say in our rules.
I'm ok with Leaving and determining out own rules.
I'm not ok with being a vassal.

Leaving and setting our own rules (giving up the rights, benefits and obligations of their rules) is not unicorn hunting.

SeanT said:

Casino_Royale said:

williamglenn said:

Casino_Royale said:

If this is what pb.com is like now, what’s it going to be like in the small hours of 30th March a few hours after there’s No Deal?

It will be quite surreal because initially nothing will happen, and then there'll be a media scrum about the first tangible effect of Brexit.

Breaking News: "A consignment of carrots has been stopped for inspection in Calais"

I’ve been told on here there will be riots in the streets within 48 hours and a massive demands nationwide for an instant reversal of course.

There could be riots, but I doubt it. More likely is a nasty run on the pound, another crash in property, a huge fall in foreign investment, and therefore a deep and wide recession, just as the rest of Europe is already tumbling. Ugh.

Politically we could see turmoil in Belfast and Edinburgh and potential referendums in both.

So the worst case scenario is that the UK breaks up, GDP drops by 5-10%, manufacturing goes into long term decline, and property goes into a Japanese style slump from which it never recovers. Would the UK (or what's left of it) survive and prosper long term? I think probably yes, we aren't Argentina. We might even, one day, thrive in our independence.

But I'd far rather not take this horrible dangerous route to that independence.

Shouldn't you have considered that before the referendum?

FF43 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FF43 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

<

Who said the UK wanted a UK-wide one? This is a terrible interpretation of statehood that makes Theresa May out to be some kind of Louis XIV figure. L'etat c'est moi

Theresa May was open to a UK wide backstop, the UK never voted for a UK-wide backstop. Parliament never endorsed it. MPs from across Parliament expressed opposition to it long before it was agreed.

Because if you are a rule taker those rules protect you too. The UK gains more with 27 countries being bound to the UK on the rules against having to follow the rules itself. Those rules protect the UK even if it has no say over drafting them and they didn't take UK interests into account when drafting them. With a high probability we are heading eventually to the Vassal State. Problem is, this means less democratic accountability, not more. Mrs May's issues, the fact three Leaver Brexit have resigned in frustration and MPs can't decide what to do, all stem from this contradiction.

Mrs May's issues do, because she's not reconciled herself to Leaving properly.

You're right that a vassal state leaves us worse off. That's why I oppose the backstop so vehemently.

I'm OK with Remaining.
I'm OK with Leaving.
I am not OK with Leaving but being a vassal.

"Leaving properly" is a slogan, not a policy. I agree we're not ready yet to face up honestly to the implications of Brexit. But if we benefit from the rules, and we do for the reasons I have just given, we are highly likely to go Vassal State eventually. You can only hunt unicorns for so long, because actually they don't exist. We are still hunting the unicorns.

And edit, my interest in Brexit is whether Leavers will ultimately accept the Vassal State, as being better than not leaving at all. I suspect they will because they don't in general seem interested in the exercise of sovereignty and making the necessary trade offs, which is what sovereignty means. That's more a Remainer thing. Leavers seem in general to view sovereignty in symbolic terms. If so, Philip, you would be an exception to this generalisation.

DavidL said:

The Windies are looking so ordinary atm. Really, really missing Holder. Turning into a very dull game.

Makes you wonder what would have been the outcome if England had properly prepared before the Tests.

Gardenwalker said:

I see the only debate tonight is how fucking dreadful Brexit will be.

We really have come along way from the Empire 2.0 wankbank of 2016.

they knew...

https://twitter.com/brianspanner1/status/746488316510482433?lang=en

Gardenwalker said:

I see the only debate tonight is how fucking dreadful Brexit will be.

We really have come along way from the Empire 2.0 wankbank of 2016.

The job description of the Australian High Commissioner seems to include telling Brexiteers what they want to hear.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/10/britain-global-trading-power-brexit-can/

When confronted by change, it can be comforting to seek to shield oneself from the outside world. This was the sentiment Australia fell victim to in the 1970s, and what shaped the attitude of those who resisted repeal of the Corn Laws in the 19th century. They were wrong then, and they are wrong now.

For the first time in almost half a century, Britain can once again be the master of its own trading destiny. It is an exciting opportunity – but only if it is bold enough to seize the day.

Scott_P said:

Gardenwalker said:

I see the only debate tonight is how fucking dreadful Brexit will be.

We really have come along way from the Empire 2.0 wankbank of 2016.

they knew...

/twitter.com/brianspanner1/status/746488316510482433?lang=en

For the nth time, weren’t they like that because Cameron had just resigned?

RobD said:

For the nth time, weren’t they like that because Cameron had just resigned?

No

They were like that because they were shitting themselves. With good reason.

Scott_P said:

RobD said:

For the nth time, weren’t they like that because Cameron had just resigned?

No

They were like that because they were shitting themselves. With good reason.

Really? I thought there was a rather celebratory party after this.

SeanT said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SeanT said:

Casino_Royale said:

williamglenn said:

Casino_Royale said:

If this is what pb.com is like now, what’s it going to be like in the small hours of 30th March a few hours after there’s No Deal?

It will be quite surreal because initially nothing will happen, and then there'll be a media scrum about the first tangible effect of Brexit.

Breaking News: "A consignment of carrots has been stopped for inspection in Calais"

I’ve been told on here there will be riots in the streets within 48 hours and a massive demands nationwide for an instant reversal of course.

There could be riots, but I doubt it. More likely is a nasty run on the pound, another crash in property, a huge fall in foreign investment, and therefore a deep and wide recession, just as the rest of Europe is already tumbling. Ugh.

Politically we could see turmoil in Belfast and Edinburgh and potential referendums in both.

So the worst case scenario is that the UK breaks up, GDP drops by 5-10%, manufacturing goes into long term decline, and property goes into a Japanese style slump from which it never recovers. Would the UK (or what's left of it) survive and prosper long term? I think probably yes, we aren't Argentina. We might even, one day, thrive in our independence.

But I'd far rather not take this horrible dangerous route to that independence.

Shouldn't you have considered that before the referendum?

I did. I thought long and hard about all this (I was especially sensitive to the risk of another Scots indyref, and one the Nats would win - that issue was the one thing that nearly tipped me to Remain).

In the end I decided that the chances of No Deal Brexit were utterly minimal. and sanity would prevail and we'd get a kind of Dan Hannan EFTA-ish Brexit.

I confess I had NOT properly considered the difficulties of the Irish border. But then, who had?

Not me, it’s true.

I was more worried about the idea of the U.K. imposing sanctions upon itself, the loss of continental and global clout, and fueling Scottish independence. It’s only post 2016 that I’ve added destabilising Northern Ireland to the mix.

RobD said:

Really? I thought there was a rather celebratory party after this.

This was shortly before BoZo announced his lack of testicular fortitude to a weeping Nadine on National TV.

That was a party for some.

SeanT said:

Philip_Thompson:

"I agree with all of that. Or course if the EU (and the Irish in particular) want to avoid anything "tragic" then they can compromise. They won't unless May is prepared to take us over the cliff but if she is prepared to we can get a good deal potentially. Its our only shot"


****

I think there are now too many in the EU who are resigned to, or even relishing, a No Deal, as they think it will hurt us waaaaaay more than them. It will be painful for all, but it will bind the EU tighter. See the polls in Ireland where they say they will accept a No Deal rather than accede on the backstop.

Yes, German car-makers etc are finally squealing, likewise French farmers etc, but it is too late. The political energy and willingness does not exist, on the continent, to overrule the Brussels ideologues and get a compromise.

They are playing with fire, but they think they can handle it. We are playing with multiple potential fires, I've no idea if we can handle it.

When the history is written, it will be a history of mutual misunderstanding: we did not comprehend how much Brussels would take control of the negotiations, and how wedded Brussels is to defending the EU as proto-superstate rather than individual nations or interests within. They did not understand how the UK values its democratic system and would refuse to allow a 2nd vote, even when confronted with calamity.

And so, here we are. Over the top we go. It's like the end of Blackadder.

Yeah. And they all died.

After the 1983 general election Corbyn was probably one of the top 10 most Eurosceptic MPs in Parliament out of 650. There weren't many Tories in that category at the time.

FF43 said:

FF43 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FF43 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

<

Who said the UK wanted a UK-wide one? This is a terrible interpretation of statehood that makes Theresa May out to be some kind of Louis XIV figure. L'etat c'est moi

Theresa May was open to a UK wide backstop, the UK never voted for a UK-wide backstop. Parliament never endorsed it. MPs from across Parliament expressed opposition to it long before it was agreed.

Because if you are a rule taker those rules protect you too. The UK gains more with 27 countries being bound to the UK on the rules against having to follow the rules itself. Those rules protect the UK even if it has no say over drafting them and they didn't take UK interests into account when drafting them. With a high probability we are heading eventually to the Vassal State. Problem is, this means less democratic accountability, not more. Mrs May's issues, the fact three Leaver Brexit have resigned in frustration and MPs can't decide what to do, all stem from this contradiction.

Mrs May's issues do, because she's not reconciled herself to Leaving properly.

You're right that a vassal state leaves us worse off. That's why I oppose the backstop so vehemently.

I'm OK with Remaining.
I'm OK with Leaving.
I am not OK with Leaving but being a vassal.

"Leaving properly" is a slogan, not a policy. I agree we're not ready yet to face up honestly to the implications of Brexit. But if we benefit from the rules, and we do for the reasons I have just given, we are highly likely to go Vassal State eventually. You can only hunt unicorns for so long, because actually they don't exist. We are still hunting the unicorns.

And edit, my interest in Brexit is whether Leavers will ultimately accept the Vassal State, as being better than not leaving at all. I suspect they will because they don't in general seem interested in the exercise of sovereignty and making the necessary trade offs, which is what sovereignty means. That's more a Remainer thing. Leavers seem in general to view sovereignty in symbolic terms. If so, Philip, you would be an exception to this generalisation.

Maybe.

To me take back control was not a slogan. It is what I voted for.

If we give up control to gain Brexit then I don't want it. May's deal is worse than remaining.

But I'm unusual in not being afraid of either remaining or leaving. I was torn in the referendum and think we will be fine either way.

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

NickPalmer said:

The right way for potential PMs to eat a bacon roll, perhaps? Remember those innocent days?

Are there Conservatives who admit they'd actually feel better if EdM and EdB were running things, rather than TM and PH (not to forget Andrea Jenkyn, of course), even if EdM was a sloppy eater and EdB was a bit fat?

That's a slightly odd question, because it's hard to see any world in which EdM and EdB would be attempting to implement Brexit in a hung parliament dependent on the ERG and DUP for support.

But if you mean 'would a normal, sane government under any of the leading pre-Corbyn Labour politicians be preferable to a no-deal crash-out followed very probably by a Corbyn government?', then, yes, of course it would be massively preferable.

A Tory No Deal Brexit is the one scenario under which Jeremy Corbyn has a realistic chance of becoming PM. Which, of course, is why he wants one.

Actually Corbyn's best chance of becoming PM is if the Tories revoke Brexit given most polls show a majority of Tory voters prefer No Deal to Remain and it would see mass defections of Tory Leave voters to UKIP or Farage's new party enabling Corbyn to pick up scores of seats on a split right-wing vote.

No Deal is worse for the Tories longer term than a Deal given the greater threat to the economy and the Union but revoking Brexit could see not only Corbyn become PM but the Tories fall to third place and cease to be even the main opposition party