This looks worrying for Number 10 and the Tories – politicalbetting.com
Starmer vs Sunak (30 April):Starmer leads on NEARLY ALL leadership characteristics including:Can bring British people together (46% | 26%)Represents change (44% | 25%)Can build a strong economy (40% | 33%)Sunak leads on:is in good physical and mental health (34% | 33%) pic.twitter.com/JZGW7OYmWH
Comments
-
At least our leaders score better on good physical and mental health than their US counterparts would.
Not a bad score for Starmer given how much older than Sunak he is.0 -
Majority Union vote for pay deal
All bar 2 of 14 unions vote for it0 -
Second, like Sunak0
-
So betting wise I am assuming LD locals vote share is probably the biggest value given those Mark Pack stats in the last thread?1
-
Er, which of the many pay disputes is that Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:Majority Union vote for pay deal
All bar 2 of 14 unions vote for it1 -
ReallyBenpointer said:
Er, which of the many pay disputes is that Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:Majority Union vote for pay deal
All bar 2 of 14 unions vote for it
The NHS dispute and the government have just confirmed it will now implement the deal
Unison have just said the lump sums will be in the June pay packets0 -
Hard to call the health one. They're both a bit of a 'funny tinge' in the pic
0 -
BJO will be triggered by SKS winning on 'tells the truth' and 'keeps promises' too
0 -
Millions of workers discover next year that they are now 5% worse off then they were in 2021.
Just in time for the vote at the next election0 -
So HMG are imposing a real-terms pay cut of 5% on those lauded NHS workers?Big_G_NorthWales said:
ReallyBenpointer said:
Er, which of the many pay disputes is that Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:Majority Union vote for pay deal
All bar 2 of 14 unions vote for it
The NHS dispute and the government have just confirmed it will now implement the deal
Unison have just said the lump sums will be in the June pay packets0 -
Does that include his promise on tuition feesSelebian said:BJO will be triggered by SKS winning on 'tells the truth' and 'keeps promises' too
0 -
Polling vs PB Tory Corbynite anecdote.
1 -
I guess not, given the polling.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Does that include his promise on tuition feesSelebian said:BJO will be triggered by SKS winning on 'tells the truth' and 'keeps promises' too
I'm sure others will have examples of Sunak's duplicity, but Starmer looks like the porkie-teller-in-chief of the two to me. Would be a different contest versus Johnson, of course.0 -
12 of 14 NHS unions requested the deal was implemented quickly and the government have agreedBenpointer said:
So HMG are imposing a real-terms pay cut of 5% on those lauded NHS workers?Big_G_NorthWales said:
ReallyBenpointer said:
Er, which of the many pay disputes is that Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:Majority Union vote for pay deal
All bar 2 of 14 unions vote for it
The NHS dispute and the government have just confirmed it will now implement the deal
Unison have just said the lump sums will be in the June pay packets1 -
Isn't this just typical other side of a new leader bounce? There is also always a bit of change around local elections. Seems a strange time to be pleased or worried about this depending on your allegiance - I would want to see this in 4- 6 weeks.1
-
FPT:
What's that 50% based on? I can imagine the women's Euros final rated very well relative to the men's with both featuring England in prime time. The issue is, other than the England games, the women's games will rate very badly outside of primetime.noneoftheabove said:
Blatter would have tried driving up the TV bids by mandating skimpy shorts....tlg86 said:https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/may/02/fifa-threatens-womens-world-cup-broadcast-blackout-in-europe-offers-rights-infantino
Fifa’s president, Gianni Infantino, has warned that a TV blackout of this summer’s Women’s World Cup is on the cards in Europe unless broadcasters there improve on their “unacceptable” offers for the rights.
Speaking at a World Trade Organization meeting in Geneva, Infantino said the bids from the big five countries – Britain, Spain, Italy, Germany and France – were so low compared with the men’s tournament that they amounted to a “slap in the face” of the players and “all women worldwide”.
Interesting approach from FIFA. Not sure it will work.
Looks like most of the games kick off breakfast time in Europe which limits TV interest, but offering 1% of what they pay for the men's tournament when they are getting 50% of the audience figure is certainly taking the piss.0 -
This should be the big worry for Labour - although they appear to be addressing it. Their recent manifestos were insane for the amount of spending committed. They will have to have some sort of independent analysis done ahead of next election, which means of the want to run a sensible government there will be lots of people to disappoint. Probably Their best option is the Tony Blair we will run it like them but they were heartless bastards and we will do something as soon as we can because we care.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Does that include his promise on tuition feesSelebian said:BJO will be triggered by SKS winning on 'tells the truth' and 'keeps promises' too
1 -
Sunak lost to Truss.
Whisper it carefully, Sunak might be a bit of a duffer.2 -
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.1 -
Tournament is down under, so the matches are hardly going to be on at the right times for european viewers.tlg86 said:FPT:
What's that 50% based on? I can imagine the women's Euros final rated very well relative to the men's with both featuring England in prime time. The issue is, other than the England games, the women's games will rate very badly outside of primetime.noneoftheabove said:
Blatter would have tried driving up the TV bids by mandating skimpy shorts....tlg86 said:https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/may/02/fifa-threatens-womens-world-cup-broadcast-blackout-in-europe-offers-rights-infantino
Fifa’s president, Gianni Infantino, has warned that a TV blackout of this summer’s Women’s World Cup is on the cards in Europe unless broadcasters there improve on their “unacceptable” offers for the rights.
Speaking at a World Trade Organization meeting in Geneva, Infantino said the bids from the big five countries – Britain, Spain, Italy, Germany and France – were so low compared with the men’s tournament that they amounted to a “slap in the face” of the players and “all women worldwide”.
Interesting approach from FIFA. Not sure it will work.
Looks like most of the games kick off breakfast time in Europe which limits TV interest, but offering 1% of what they pay for the men's tournament when they are getting 50% of the audience figure is certainly taking the piss.
Or in the words of the Guardian/Infantino...
Due to the time-zone difference, Women’s World Cup matches will be held outside prime-time viewing hours for European markets but Infantino said that was no excuse given that many games would kick off at 9am or 10am in Europe.0 -
Some detailed info from 2019 here:tlg86 said:FPT:
What's that 50% based on? I can imagine the women's Euros final rated very well relative to the men's with both featuring England in prime time. The issue is, other than the England games, the women's games will rate very badly outside of primetime.noneoftheabove said:
Blatter would have tried driving up the TV bids by mandating skimpy shorts....tlg86 said:https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/may/02/fifa-threatens-womens-world-cup-broadcast-blackout-in-europe-offers-rights-infantino
Fifa’s president, Gianni Infantino, has warned that a TV blackout of this summer’s Women’s World Cup is on the cards in Europe unless broadcasters there improve on their “unacceptable” offers for the rights.
Speaking at a World Trade Organization meeting in Geneva, Infantino said the bids from the big five countries – Britain, Spain, Italy, Germany and France – were so low compared with the men’s tournament that they amounted to a “slap in the face” of the players and “all women worldwide”.
Interesting approach from FIFA. Not sure it will work.
Looks like most of the games kick off breakfast time in Europe which limits TV interest, but offering 1% of what they pay for the men's tournament when they are getting 50% of the audience figure is certainly taking the piss.
https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/5fd80f719fbff8e4/original/rvgxekduqpeo1ptbgcng-pdf.pdf
Guessing kick off time will outweigh growth of womens game since 2019 so Europe's audience likely to drop back a bit.0 -
I suppose these results will change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.5
-
A secret Vatican peace mission to end the fighting in Ukraine appears to have been shot down by Kyiv as the country prepares for a long-awaited counteroffensive to drive out President Putin’s invading army.
Pope Francis said on Sunday that the Vatican was involved in behind-the-scenes efforts to end the war. “There is a mission in course now but it is not yet public. When it is public, I will reveal it,” he said after a trip to Hungary that involved talks with Viktor Orban, the Hungarian prime minister, and a Russian Orthodox bishop. “Everyone is interested in the road to peace,” the Pope added.
Last week, Denys Shmyhal, the Ukrainian prime minister, said he had discussed President Zelensky’s peace formula with the Pope during a meeting at the Vatican. Zelensky’s plan includes the withdrawal of all Russian forces from Ukraine and the establishment of a special tribunal to prosecute Russian war crimes. The Kremlin has rejected both demands.
Shmyhal also said he had asked the Pope to help repatriate about 19,500 Ukrainian children who have been deported to Russia or Kremlin-controlled areas of Ukraine.
Francis has said he wants to visit Kyiv and Moscow on a peace mission to end the 14-month conflict, the most serious fighting in Europe since the end of the Second World War. However, an official close to the Ukrainian president’s office said Zelensky had not consented to peace efforts on Ukraine’s behalf.
“If talks are happening, they are happening without our knowledge or our blessing,” the official, who was not identified, told CNN.
Kyiv has said there can be no peace until it has recovered all territory seized by Russia since 2014, including Crimea. A ceasefire, Zelensky’s government argues, would simply allow Russia to regroup and bolster its forces before launching a new invasion.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/war-in-ukraine-pope-francis-pursuing-peace-mission-without-zelenskys-blessing-says-kyiv-v7ghtd5h30 -
The Tories need to exploit Sunak's commanding lead on the physical and mental health question.TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
0 -
BJO fans please explain0
-
But he was the best the Tory party had when Truss was found out / destroyed the economy (delete as appropriate for your viewpoint).TheScreamingEagles said:Sunak lost to Truss.
Whisper it carefully, Sunak might be a bit of a duffer.0 -
TheScreamingEagles said:
I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
It's going to change everything, for Sunak.3 -
I think it would be as crazy to ask now if people wanted to rejoin the EU as it was to ask them in 2016 if they wanted to leave it.williamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
The issue is the democratic process. It would be crazy but perfectly democratic.0 -
Another way of looking at it is that Tory members might be swivle-eyed loons to a man and woman.TheScreamingEagles said:Sunak lost to Truss.
Whisper it carefully, Sunak might be a bit of a duffer.1 -
Not to mention when people realise he is also responsible for illegal immigration, Brexit, the economy, woke, vension, footballers kneeling down for brief periods, and having a curry whilst being a Labour leader.TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
1 -
I sometimes think news stories could be more carefully phrased to avoid misinterpretation.TheScreamingEagles said:A secret Vatican peace mission to end the fighting in Ukraine appears to have been shot down by Kyiv ...
3 -
I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.WhisperingOracle said:TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
It's going to change everything, for Sunak.2 -
Then there is beergate to consider, or currygate if you will – spoken of in hushed tones among the PB Tories: the transgression that will one day come back to bite Sir Keir like a regurgitated madras.TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results will change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
1 -
The absolute madness of the Euroref 2nd voters can be revealed if you simply game out what would have happened if, say, the Scots had voted YES in 2014 then a bunch of YOON politicians had said Nah, that’s a stupid decision, we’re gonna make Scotland vote again, without even enacting independence in the first placewilliamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
A small but significant number of Nats would have realised that British/Scottish democracy was a sham, and could never deliver Indy, and they would have turned to violence. Scotland would have become Ireland in 1916-1920
Would the Brits have done the same if the Brexit vote had been overruled and a 2nd vote ordered, without us Brexiting? Probably, possibly, who knows - remember there was violence before the first Brexit vote: an MP was killed
Even if civil strife had been averted, millions of Leave voters would have boycotted the 2nd vote, correctly assuming that the whole thing was a fix, and their will would never be honoured, and democracy was a lie, and what’s the fucking point. Turnout in future elections would have plunged. Basically it would have shattered British democracy for a generation, maybe forever. Utter utter madness
That’s what I mean when I say hardcore Remainers weren’t just stupid, like Leavers, they were dangerously stupid because they thought their ludicrous shenanigans were “clever”2 -
Bit of a dramatic interpretation but the best I could do given the source material.eek said:
But he was the best the Tory party had when Truss wasTheScreamingEagles said:Sunak lost to Truss.
Whisper it carefully, Sunak might be a bit of a duffer.found out /destroyedthe economy(delete as appropriate for your viewpoint).0 -
The next step for the Conservative Party is now clear.
A renaissance, if you will, nears.
A woman, a queen, a lady awaits the call.
The high priestess of all that is right, fair and true.
Step forward Mary Elizabeth Truss.
Mother. Monarch. Mistress.
You were were wise before your time.
But now your time has come.
T
R
U
S
S
1 -
"So university tuition fees being scrapped will be in a Starmer manifesto?"
SKS "Yes. That's why it's a pledge"
Or a *LIE* as we ordinary folks call it https://twitter.com/TheProleStar/status/16533857873988157440 -
I'm not convinced by the LibDem "now look here" campaign highlighting what they call excessive supermarket profits. Whilst some of the loss-making has stopped I'm not aware of any of them rolling in outrageous largesse. The opposite is true for Asda and especially Morrisons who remain in deep shit.0
-
Brexit is a shitshow.
You were warned, and voted for it anyway.
And here we are.
A generation to undo the damage caused by the selfish few.0 -
Do you mean, over his predecessors as PM? Can't think what else you intend. But also Tories.williamglenn said:
The Tories need to exploit Sunak's commanding lead on the physical and mental health question.TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
0 -
0
-
The taverns of north London, the houseboats on the banks of the Lea, even the wilds of Epping Forest, are thick with murmur.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.WhisperingOracle said:TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
It's going to change everything, for Sunak.
Graygate hangs over Starmer like a shroud. If Currygate was the squall, Graygate is the storm.
2 -
SKSFPE1
-
He cant run on integrity and will be pilloried for being a Liar at the GE 2024RochdalePioneers said:0 -
If that was during the leadership campaign then it was in a Starmer manifesto (his leadership manifesto). Slippery fish, that SKS.bigjohnowls said:"So university tuition fees being scrapped will be in a Starmer manifesto?"
SKS "Yes. That's why it's a pledge"
Or a *LIE* as we ordinary folks call it https://twitter.com/TheProleStar/status/16533857873988157440 -
The madness was attempting to have a second vote before the first was implemented.Leon said:
The absolute madness of the Euroref 2nd voters can be revealed if you simply game out what would have happened if, say, the Scots had voted YES in 2014 then a bunch of YOON politicians had said Nah, that’s a stupid decision, we’re gonna make Scotland vote again, without even enacting independence in the first placewilliamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
A small but significant number of Nats would have realised that British/Scottish democracy was a sham, and could never deliver Indy, and they would have turned to violence. Scotland would have become Ireland in 1916-1920
Would the Brits have done the same if the Brexit vote had been overruled and a 2nd vote ordered, without us Brexiting? Probably, possibly, who knows - remember there was violence before the first Brexit vote: an MP was killed
Even if civil strife had been averted, millions of Leave voters would have boycotted the 2nd vote, correctly assuming that the whole thing was a fix, and their will would never be honoured, and democracy was a lie, and what’s the fucking point. Turnout in future elections would have plunged. Basically it would have shattered British democracy for a generation, maybe forever. Utter utter madness
That’s what I mean when I say hardcore Remainers weren’t just stupid, like Leavers, they were dangerously stupid because they thought their ludicrous shenanigans were “clever”
A second vote is entirely possible now to my mind, precisely because we've left.
The hardcore remainer scenario was the equivalent of say Corbyn winning the GE and then proceeding to have a 'confirmatory vote' before he ever stepped into office.
The equivalent now would be to have a vote after say 4 or 5 years of him having been in office (Say he'd won GE19) which of course is completely democratic.
The key for me is that Brexit has happened as an event. Which makes a vote to rejoin now perfectly democratic. A vote prior to leaving properly (Which was 31st January 2020) would have been unconscionable.
Political reality is it's not going to happen for a while now, but democratically anything after 31st Jan 2020 to rejoin is/was fine.2 -
-
Oh dear. Take some time off. Rest your head.bigjohnowls said:0 -
I’m sipping a martini in a wine bar on soi 8, Sukhumvit and there’s a table of Brits next to me who’ve stopped watching the Liverpool game so - no joke - they can discuss “Greygate”Anabobazina said:
The taverns of north London, the houseboats on the banks of the Lea, even the wilds of Epping Forest, are thick with murmur.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.WhisperingOracle said:TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
It's going to change everything, for Sunak.
Graygate hangs over Starmer like a shroud. If Currygate was the squall, Graygate is the storm.
One guy just said he’s flying home two weeks early to vote Tory when he’s normally Plaid Cymru, just because of Greygate. Another guy said Yeah Starmer’s Ok but Sunak looks so HEALTHY
Bet accordingly
2 -
And her prophet is Kwasi.Anabobazina said:The next step for the Conservative Party is now clear.
A renaissance, if you will, nears.
A woman, a queen, a lady awaits the call.
The high priestess of all that is right, fair and true.
Step forward Mary Elizabeth Truss.
Mother. Monarch. Mistress.
You were were wise before your time.
But now your time has come.
T
R
U
S
S1 -
To add leavers denying we can never have one ever again because of "democracy" are just as bad as the remainers who wanted a second vote before we left.Pulpstar said:
The madness was attempting to have a second vote before the first was implemented.Leon said:
The absolute madness of the Euroref 2nd voters can be revealed if you simply game out what would have happened if, say, the Scots had voted YES in 2014 then a bunch of YOON politicians had said Nah, that’s a stupid decision, we’re gonna make Scotland vote again, without even enacting independence in the first placewilliamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
A small but significant number of Nats would have realised that British/Scottish democracy was a sham, and could never deliver Indy, and they would have turned to violence. Scotland would have become Ireland in 1916-1920
Would the Brits have done the same if the Brexit vote had been overruled and a 2nd vote ordered, without us Brexiting? Probably, possibly, who knows - remember there was violence before the first Brexit vote: an MP was killed
Even if civil strife had been averted, millions of Leave voters would have boycotted the 2nd vote, correctly assuming that the whole thing was a fix, and their will would never be honoured, and democracy was a lie, and what’s the fucking point. Turnout in future elections would have plunged. Basically it would have shattered British democracy for a generation, maybe forever. Utter utter madness
That’s what I mean when I say hardcore Remainers weren’t just stupid, like Leavers, they were dangerously stupid because they thought their ludicrous shenanigans were “clever”
A second vote is entirely possible now to my mind, precisely because we've left.
The hardcore remainer scenario was the equivalent of say Corbyn winning the GE and then proceeding to have a 'confirmatory vote' before he ever stepped into office.
The equivalent now would be to have a vote after say 4 or 5 years of him having been in office (Say he'd won GE19) which of course is completely democratic.
The key for me is that Brexit has happened as an event. Which makes a vote to rejoin now perfectly democratic. A vote prior to leaving properly (Which was 31st January 2020) would have been unconscionable.
Political reality is it's not going to happen for a while now, but democratically anything after 31st Jan 2020 to rejoin is/was fine.0 -
They're giving them a pay rise of 5% more than many in the private sector have had.Benpointer said:
So HMG are imposing a real-terms pay cut of 5% on those lauded NHS workers?Big_G_NorthWales said:
ReallyBenpointer said:
Er, which of the many pay disputes is that Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:Majority Union vote for pay deal
All bar 2 of 14 unions vote for it
The NHS dispute and the government have just confirmed it will now implement the deal
Unison have just said the lump sums will be in the June pay packets1 -
Leon said:
I’m sipping a martini in a wine bar on soi 8, Sukhumvit and there’s a table of Brits next to me who’ve stopped watching the Liverpool game so - no joke - they can discuss “Greygate”Anabobazina said:
The taverns of north London, the houseboats on the banks of the Lea, even the wilds of Epping Forest, are thick with murmur.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.WhisperingOracle said:TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
It's going to change everything, for Sunak.
Graygate hangs over Starmer like a shroud. If Currygate was the squall, Graygate is the storm.
One guy just said he’s flying home two weeks early to vote Tory when he’s normally Plaid Cymru, just because of Greygate. Another guy said Yeah Starmer’s Ok but Sunak looks so HEALTHY
Bet accordingly
0 -
Kickoff time is an absolute killer here. There is a definite groundswell behind women's football but it's still 99% casual fans who will tune in in a kinda-similar way to the Olympics (I know nowt about e.g. Modern Pentathlon, but I'll tune in especially if there's a Brit who could well).noneoftheabove said:
Some detailed info from 2019 here:tlg86 said:FPT:
What's that 50% based on? I can imagine the women's Euros final rated very well relative to the men's with both featuring England in prime time. The issue is, other than the England games, the women's games will rate very badly outside of primetime.noneoftheabove said:
Blatter would have tried driving up the TV bids by mandating skimpy shorts....tlg86 said:https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/may/02/fifa-threatens-womens-world-cup-broadcast-blackout-in-europe-offers-rights-infantino
Fifa’s president, Gianni Infantino, has warned that a TV blackout of this summer’s Women’s World Cup is on the cards in Europe unless broadcasters there improve on their “unacceptable” offers for the rights.
Speaking at a World Trade Organization meeting in Geneva, Infantino said the bids from the big five countries – Britain, Spain, Italy, Germany and France – were so low compared with the men’s tournament that they amounted to a “slap in the face” of the players and “all women worldwide”.
Interesting approach from FIFA. Not sure it will work.
Looks like most of the games kick off breakfast time in Europe which limits TV interest, but offering 1% of what they pay for the men's tournament when they are getting 50% of the audience figure is certainly taking the piss.
https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/5fd80f719fbff8e4/original/rvgxekduqpeo1ptbgcng-pdf.pdf
Guessing kick off time will outweigh growth of womens game since 2019 so Europe's audience likely to drop back a bit.
How many people will be getting up at 5:30 in the morning to watch non-home teams, I'm not sure - but it's nowhere near the number who would do so for the men's WC. Fifa crying sexism about it is pretty funny though.1 -
Seems a mad decision to host it in Australia just as some momentum was getting behind the women's game – given that many of the games will be in the middle of the night in the main global football markets.Ghedebrav said:
Kickoff time is an absolute killer here. There is a definite groundswell behind women's football but it's still 99% casual fans who will tune in in a kinda-similar way to the Olympics (I know nowt about e.g. Modern Pentathlon, but I'll tune in especially if there's a Brit who could well).noneoftheabove said:
Some detailed info from 2019 here:tlg86 said:FPT:
What's that 50% based on? I can imagine the women's Euros final rated very well relative to the men's with both featuring England in prime time. The issue is, other than the England games, the women's games will rate very badly outside of primetime.noneoftheabove said:
Blatter would have tried driving up the TV bids by mandating skimpy shorts....tlg86 said:https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/may/02/fifa-threatens-womens-world-cup-broadcast-blackout-in-europe-offers-rights-infantino
Fifa’s president, Gianni Infantino, has warned that a TV blackout of this summer’s Women’s World Cup is on the cards in Europe unless broadcasters there improve on their “unacceptable” offers for the rights.
Speaking at a World Trade Organization meeting in Geneva, Infantino said the bids from the big five countries – Britain, Spain, Italy, Germany and France – were so low compared with the men’s tournament that they amounted to a “slap in the face” of the players and “all women worldwide”.
Interesting approach from FIFA. Not sure it will work.
Looks like most of the games kick off breakfast time in Europe which limits TV interest, but offering 1% of what they pay for the men's tournament when they are getting 50% of the audience figure is certainly taking the piss.
https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/5fd80f719fbff8e4/original/rvgxekduqpeo1ptbgcng-pdf.pdf
Guessing kick off time will outweigh growth of womens game since 2019 so Europe's audience likely to drop back a bit.
How many people will be getting up at 5:30 in the morning to watch non-home teams, I'm not sure - but it's nowhere near the number who would do so for the men's WC. Fifa crying sexism about it is pretty funny though.0 -
SKS has lost Owen Jones now.
Owen says
" I haven't urged people to vote Labour for a long time and I won't be doing so"
"I've worked out the code for when Starmer is lying; It's when he's gesticulating with his hands or nodding his head, or having his eyes open, or closed, or being awake, or speaking words."
2 -
And 5% less than many in the private sector have had.Driver said:
They're giving them a pay rise of 5% more than many in the private sector have had.Benpointer said:
So HMG are imposing a real-terms pay cut of 5% on those lauded NHS workers?Big_G_NorthWales said:
ReallyBenpointer said:
Er, which of the many pay disputes is that Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:Majority Union vote for pay deal
All bar 2 of 14 unions vote for it
The NHS dispute and the government have just confirmed it will now implement the deal
Unison have just said the lump sums will be in the June pay packets0 -
I'm not aware of many, if any, Leavers saying there can never be a Rejoin referendum?Pulpstar said:
To add leavers denying we can never have one ever again because of "democracy" are just as bad as the remainers who wanted a second vote before we left.Pulpstar said:
The madness was attempting to have a second vote before the first was implemented.Leon said:
The absolute madness of the Euroref 2nd voters can be revealed if you simply game out what would have happened if, say, the Scots had voted YES in 2014 then a bunch of YOON politicians had said Nah, that’s a stupid decision, we’re gonna make Scotland vote again, without even enacting independence in the first placewilliamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
A small but significant number of Nats would have realised that British/Scottish democracy was a sham, and could never deliver Indy, and they would have turned to violence. Scotland would have become Ireland in 1916-1920
Would the Brits have done the same if the Brexit vote had been overruled and a 2nd vote ordered, without us Brexiting? Probably, possibly, who knows - remember there was violence before the first Brexit vote: an MP was killed
Even if civil strife had been averted, millions of Leave voters would have boycotted the 2nd vote, correctly assuming that the whole thing was a fix, and their will would never be honoured, and democracy was a lie, and what’s the fucking point. Turnout in future elections would have plunged. Basically it would have shattered British democracy for a generation, maybe forever. Utter utter madness
That’s what I mean when I say hardcore Remainers weren’t just stupid, like Leavers, they were dangerously stupid because they thought their ludicrous shenanigans were “clever”
A second vote is entirely possible now to my mind, precisely because we've left.
The hardcore remainer scenario was the equivalent of say Corbyn winning the GE and then proceeding to have a 'confirmatory vote' before he ever stepped into office.
The equivalent now would be to have a vote after say 4 or 5 years of him having been in office (Say he'd won GE19) which of course is completely democratic.
The key for me is that Brexit has happened as an event. Which makes a vote to rejoin now perfectly democratic. A vote prior to leaving properly (Which was 31st January 2020) would have been unconscionable.
Political reality is it's not going to happen for a while now, but democratically anything after 31st Jan 2020 to rejoin is/was fine.2 -
What dies FPE mean?Anabobazina said:
Oh dear. Take some time off. Rest your head.bigjohnowls said:
in SKSFPE0 -
That is already priced in - all politicians are liars. So it will be the lies about things that don't bother you vs the things that directly affect you.bigjohnowls said:
He cant run on integrity and will be pilloried for being a Liar at the GE 2024RochdalePioneers said:
If you and other political absolutists want to vote TUSC/REFUK and don't care about the result that is of course your democratic right. Most normals though won't care. Or are you suggesting that as Starmer Is A Liar that they should instead vote for a Tory party full of not just liars but corrupt liars?0 -
Don't kid yourself.williamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
It starts with kicking out the complete berks who thought it would be a great idea.0 -
I don't think reneging on a pledge, however reprehensible it is, makes that pledge a lie. I would imagine when making it, SKS did indeed intend to do it. To be fair, he's also not gaining an electoral advantage from his pledge, as he's reneged upon it before being elected rather than after.bigjohnowls said:"So university tuition fees being scrapped will be in a Starmer manifesto?"
SKS "Yes. That's why it's a pledge"
Or a *LIE* as we ordinary folks call it https://twitter.com/TheProleStar/status/1653385787398815744
2 -
The shitshow doesn't lie in the fact that most voters voted to leave the EU.Leon said:
52%Scott_xP said:Brexit is a shitshow.
You were warned, and voted for it anyway.
And here we are.
A generation to undo the damage caused by the selfish few.
Hardly “the few”
It lies in the fact that a minuscule proportion of Brexit advocates (essentially the ERG and Farage's inner circle of deranged alcoholics) insisted on a version of Brexit that was the precise opposite of the assurances pre-referendum Brexit supporters gave to voters. At their 2019 peak, those lunatics amounted to not much more than 100 people: their number's now getting ever closer to single figures.0 -
I have no doubt that CCHQ will be testing that message faster than you can say Levido.bigjohnowls said:
He cant run on integrity and will be pilloried for being a Liar at the GE 2024RochdalePioneers said:0 -
Sipping ?Leon said:
I’m sipping a martini in a wine bar on soi 8, Sukhumvit and there’s a table of Brits next to me who’ve stopped watching the Liverpool game so - no joke - they can discuss “Greygate”Anabobazina said:
The taverns of north London, the houseboats on the banks of the Lea, even the wilds of Epping Forest, are thick with murmur.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
I've had exactly the same personal experience recently in the youth clubs of Builth Wells, the sushi bars of West Byfleet, and the veterinary surgeons' waiting rooms of Largs. Something is in the air.WhisperingOracle said:TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
There's little else that people are talking about. In drivetime phone-ins in Lothian, bowling clubs in surrey, and all-night kebab shops in Islington, my first-hand experience is that people are furious.TheScreamingEagles said:I suppose these results with change once Starmer experiences the terrible backlash over hiring Sue Gray.
It's going to change everything, for Sunak.
Graygate hangs over Starmer like a shroud. If Currygate was the squall, Graygate is the storm.
One guy just said he’s flying home two weeks early to vote Tory when he’s normally Plaid Cymru, just because of Greygate. Another guy said Yeah Starmer’s Ok but Sunak looks so HEALTHY
Bet accordingly...1 -
Another Referendum is all it takes.williamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?
Tick one box only:
Leave
Remain
The government will implement whatever the majority decide."1 -
Most voters did not vote to leave the EU. Not voting is not the same as voting to leave the EU. The majority of voters did not vote to leave the EU, just a majority of the ones who did vote.Flanner said:
The shitshow doesn't lie in the fact that most voters voted to leave the EU.Leon said:
52%Scott_xP said:Brexit is a shitshow.
You were warned, and voted for it anyway.
And here we are.
A generation to undo the damage caused by the selfish few.
Hardly “the few”
It lies in the fact that a minuscule proportion of Brexit advocates (essentially the ERG and Farage's inner circle of deranged alcoholics) insisted on a version of Brexit that was the precise opposite of the assurances pre-referendum Brexit supporters gave to voters. At their 2019 peak, those lunatics amounted to not much more than 100 people: their number's now getting ever closer to single figures.0 -
For some bizarre reason, maybe I’ve just become excessively cynical, I find I can’t believe FIFA are angry that the low broadcast bids are offensive to women more that they are offensive to FIFA’s love of filling their bank account.Ghedebrav said:
Kickoff time is an absolute killer here. There is a definite groundswell behind women's football but it's still 99% casual fans who will tune in in a kinda-similar way to the Olympics (I know nowt about e.g. Modern Pentathlon, but I'll tune in especially if there's a Brit who could well).noneoftheabove said:
Some detailed info from 2019 here:tlg86 said:FPT:
What's that 50% based on? I can imagine the women's Euros final rated very well relative to the men's with both featuring England in prime time. The issue is, other than the England games, the women's games will rate very badly outside of primetime.noneoftheabove said:
Blatter would have tried driving up the TV bids by mandating skimpy shorts....tlg86 said:https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/may/02/fifa-threatens-womens-world-cup-broadcast-blackout-in-europe-offers-rights-infantino
Fifa’s president, Gianni Infantino, has warned that a TV blackout of this summer’s Women’s World Cup is on the cards in Europe unless broadcasters there improve on their “unacceptable” offers for the rights.
Speaking at a World Trade Organization meeting in Geneva, Infantino said the bids from the big five countries – Britain, Spain, Italy, Germany and France – were so low compared with the men’s tournament that they amounted to a “slap in the face” of the players and “all women worldwide”.
Interesting approach from FIFA. Not sure it will work.
Looks like most of the games kick off breakfast time in Europe which limits TV interest, but offering 1% of what they pay for the men's tournament when they are getting 50% of the audience figure is certainly taking the piss.
https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/5fd80f719fbff8e4/original/rvgxekduqpeo1ptbgcng-pdf.pdf
Guessing kick off time will outweigh growth of womens game since 2019 so Europe's audience likely to drop back a bit.
How many people will be getting up at 5:30 in the morning to watch non-home teams, I'm not sure - but it's nowhere near the number who would do so for the men's WC. Fifa crying sexism about it is pretty funny though.2 -
fans please explainbigjohnowls said:
What dies FPE mean?Anabobazina said:
Oh dear. Take some time off. Rest your head.bigjohnowls said:
in SKSFPE1 -
Werent you 3rd?Benpointer said:Second, like Sunak
0 -
-
You sound like the people who were eagerly waiting for Nicola Sturgeon to give them another referendum on Scottish independence and thought that's all it would take.kinabalu said:
Another Referendum is all it takes.williamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?
Tick one box only:
Leave
Remain
The government will implement whatever the majority decide."2 -
Oh I have never heard that termAnabobazina said:
fans please explainbigjohnowls said:
What dies FPE mean?Anabobazina said:
Oh dear. Take some time off. Rest your head.bigjohnowls said:
in SKSFPE
Silly me4 -
It's a fair point. Largesse for students is just one more policy that can be added to the lengthy list of things that supposedly cannot be afforded because of the state of the public finances, those "difficult choices" that "have to be made" whilst rich old farts' triple locked pensions are maintained and their vast property wealth goes almost entirely untaxed.RochdalePioneers said:
All decisions like this do is confirm that you couldn't put a cigarette paper between the Tories and Labour. They're both bunches of third rate office seeking troughers who are only very distantly acquainted with the truth, and the main aims of both are to sit in ministerial offices and collect fat salaries for doing nothing of any value, whilst defending existing privilege.
The Shadow Cabinet is going to have to do better than endlessly shitting all over its own supporters if it wants to construct a stable electoral coalition. If I were a student who had been flirting with supporting that shower, I'd be sorely tempted to extend the middle finger in the general direction of Keir Starmer and either abstain or lodge a protest with the Greens.1 -
Yes, of coursePulpstar said:
The madness was attempting to have a second vote before the first was implemented.Leon said:
The absolute madness of the Euroref 2nd voters can be revealed if you simply game out what would have happened if, say, the Scots had voted YES in 2014 then a bunch of YOON politicians had said Nah, that’s a stupid decision, we’re gonna make Scotland vote again, without even enacting independence in the first placewilliamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
A small but significant number of Nats would have realised that British/Scottish democracy was a sham, and could never deliver Indy, and they would have turned to violence. Scotland would have become Ireland in 1916-1920
Would the Brits have done the same if the Brexit vote had been overruled and a 2nd vote ordered, without us Brexiting? Probably, possibly, who knows - remember there was violence before the first Brexit vote: an MP was killed
Even if civil strife had been averted, millions of Leave voters would have boycotted the 2nd vote, correctly assuming that the whole thing was a fix, and their will would never be honoured, and democracy was a lie, and what’s the fucking point. Turnout in future elections would have plunged. Basically it would have shattered British democracy for a generation, maybe forever. Utter utter madness
That’s what I mean when I say hardcore Remainers weren’t just stupid, like Leavers, they were dangerously stupid because they thought their ludicrous shenanigans were “clever”
A second vote is entirely possible now to my mind, precisely because we've left.
The hardcore remainer scenario was the equivalent of say Corbyn winning the GE and then proceeding to have a 'confirmatory vote' before he ever stepped into office.
The equivalent now would be to have a vote after say 4 or 5 years of him having been in office (Say he'd won GE19) which of course is completely democratic.
The key for me is that Brexit has happened as an event. Which makes a vote to rejoin now perfectly democratic. A vote prior to leaving properly (Which was 31st January 2020) would have been unconscionable.
Political reality is it's not going to happen for a while now, but democratically anything after 31st Jan 2020 to rejoin is/was fine.
We have now brexited. The vote is honoured. British democracy works. It sticks to promises made by the prime minister, no less. Your Vote Will Count. This Is It. So it is still worth voting in future elections and referendums because it makes a difference. it matters. YOU, the voter, YOU MATTER
Now we’ve done that, Remainers/Rejoiners are free to start campaigning for an immediate 2nd referendum to go straight back in. Heck, if they are persuasive enough, I might even vote for them
But we HAD to honour the first vote. Anything else was insane self harm and would have sent us to a terrible place3 -
Some leavers do have a definite hint of 'forever decided' about them.Driver said:
I'm not aware of many, if any, Leavers saying there can never be a Rejoin referendum?Pulpstar said:
To add leavers denying we can never have one ever again because of "democracy" are just as bad as the remainers who wanted a second vote before we left.Pulpstar said:
The madness was attempting to have a second vote before the first was implemented.Leon said:
The absolute madness of the Euroref 2nd voters can be revealed if you simply game out what would have happened if, say, the Scots had voted YES in 2014 then a bunch of YOON politicians had said Nah, that’s a stupid decision, we’re gonna make Scotland vote again, without even enacting independence in the first placewilliamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
A small but significant number of Nats would have realised that British/Scottish democracy was a sham, and could never deliver Indy, and they would have turned to violence. Scotland would have become Ireland in 1916-1920
Would the Brits have done the same if the Brexit vote had been overruled and a 2nd vote ordered, without us Brexiting? Probably, possibly, who knows - remember there was violence before the first Brexit vote: an MP was killed
Even if civil strife had been averted, millions of Leave voters would have boycotted the 2nd vote, correctly assuming that the whole thing was a fix, and their will would never be honoured, and democracy was a lie, and what’s the fucking point. Turnout in future elections would have plunged. Basically it would have shattered British democracy for a generation, maybe forever. Utter utter madness
That’s what I mean when I say hardcore Remainers weren’t just stupid, like Leavers, they were dangerously stupid because they thought their ludicrous shenanigans were “clever”
A second vote is entirely possible now to my mind, precisely because we've left.
The hardcore remainer scenario was the equivalent of say Corbyn winning the GE and then proceeding to have a 'confirmatory vote' before he ever stepped into office.
The equivalent now would be to have a vote after say 4 or 5 years of him having been in office (Say he'd won GE19) which of course is completely democratic.
The key for me is that Brexit has happened as an event. Which makes a vote to rejoin now perfectly democratic. A vote prior to leaving properly (Which was 31st January 2020) would have been unconscionable.
Political reality is it's not going to happen for a while now, but democratically anything after 31st Jan 2020 to rejoin is/was fine.0 -
Benpointer is SKS and I claim....bigjohnowls said:
Werent you 3rd?Benpointer said:Second, like Sunak
ETA: Unless BP was claiming 2nd in the England resident poster's category (I forget whether TimS is the US-based of our Tims)1 -
Given the toxicity of 'leave' that question formation could backfire spectacularly from a remain leave er... go back in point of viewkinabalu said:
Another Referendum is all it takes.williamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?
Tick one box only:
Leave
Remain
The government will implement whatever the majority decide."
0 -
Perhaps Fifa thinks we should all be forced to watch the matches, possibly with 'Clockwork Orange' style eye implements in place so we don't miss a moment.boulay said:
For some bizarre reason, maybe I’ve just become excessively cynical, I find I can’t believe FIFA are angry that the low broadcast bids are offensive to women more that they are offensive to FIFA’s love of filling their bank account.Ghedebrav said:
Kickoff time is an absolute killer here. There is a definite groundswell behind women's football but it's still 99% casual fans who will tune in in a kinda-similar way to the Olympics (I know nowt about e.g. Modern Pentathlon, but I'll tune in especially if there's a Brit who could well).noneoftheabove said:
Some detailed info from 2019 here:tlg86 said:FPT:
What's that 50% based on? I can imagine the women's Euros final rated very well relative to the men's with both featuring England in prime time. The issue is, other than the England games, the women's games will rate very badly outside of primetime.noneoftheabove said:
Blatter would have tried driving up the TV bids by mandating skimpy shorts....tlg86 said:https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/may/02/fifa-threatens-womens-world-cup-broadcast-blackout-in-europe-offers-rights-infantino
Fifa’s president, Gianni Infantino, has warned that a TV blackout of this summer’s Women’s World Cup is on the cards in Europe unless broadcasters there improve on their “unacceptable” offers for the rights.
Speaking at a World Trade Organization meeting in Geneva, Infantino said the bids from the big five countries – Britain, Spain, Italy, Germany and France – were so low compared with the men’s tournament that they amounted to a “slap in the face” of the players and “all women worldwide”.
Interesting approach from FIFA. Not sure it will work.
Looks like most of the games kick off breakfast time in Europe which limits TV interest, but offering 1% of what they pay for the men's tournament when they are getting 50% of the audience figure is certainly taking the piss.
https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/5fd80f719fbff8e4/original/rvgxekduqpeo1ptbgcng-pdf.pdf
Guessing kick off time will outweigh growth of womens game since 2019 so Europe's audience likely to drop back a bit.
How many people will be getting up at 5:30 in the morning to watch non-home teams, I'm not sure - but it's nowhere near the number who would do so for the men's WC. Fifa crying sexism about it is pretty funny though.0 -
There’s a whole genre of Bollywood films where the small, nimble hero beats X huge, lumbering thugs sent by The Big Bad.Nigelb said:
Yes, but imagine a cage match between Trump and Sunak.TimS said:At least our leaders score better on good physical and mental health than their US counterparts would.
Not a bad score for Starmer given how much older than Sunak he is.1 -
Speaking of things from the past we really shouldn't return to, looks like Leeds are about to appoint Sam Allardyce.0
-
We've had this discussion so many times, however. It's much less simple than this because many people would argue the first vote was not honoured. A large number of leavers believed they were voting for a reasonably close economic and trading relationship, and in fact were often promised this, for instance.Leon said:
Yes, of coursePulpstar said:
The madness was attempting to have a second vote before the first was implemented.Leon said:
The absolute madness of the Euroref 2nd voters can be revealed if you simply game out what would have happened if, say, the Scots had voted YES in 2014 then a bunch of YOON politicians had said Nah, that’s a stupid decision, we’re gonna make Scotland vote again, without even enacting independence in the first placewilliamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
A small but significant number of Nats would have realised that British/Scottish democracy was a sham, and could never deliver Indy, and they would have turned to violence. Scotland would have become Ireland in 1916-1920
Would the Brits have done the same if the Brexit vote had been overruled and a 2nd vote ordered, without us Brexiting? Probably, possibly, who knows - remember there was violence before the first Brexit vote: an MP was killed
Even if civil strife had been averted, millions of Leave voters would have boycotted the 2nd vote, correctly assuming that the whole thing was a fix, and their will would never be honoured, and democracy was a lie, and what’s the fucking point. Turnout in future elections would have plunged. Basically it would have shattered British democracy for a generation, maybe forever. Utter utter madness
That’s what I mean when I say hardcore Remainers weren’t just stupid, like Leavers, they were dangerously stupid because they thought their ludicrous shenanigans were “clever”
A second vote is entirely possible now to my mind, precisely because we've left.
The hardcore remainer scenario was the equivalent of say Corbyn winning the GE and then proceeding to have a 'confirmatory vote' before he ever stepped into office.
The equivalent now would be to have a vote after say 4 or 5 years of him having been in office (Say he'd won GE19) which of course is completely democratic.
The key for me is that Brexit has happened as an event. Which makes a vote to rejoin now perfectly democratic. A vote prior to leaving properly (Which was 31st January 2020) would have been unconscionable.
Political reality is it's not going to happen for a while now, but democratically anything after 31st Jan 2020 to rejoin is/was fine.
We have now brexited. The vote is honoured. British democracy works. It sticks to promises made by the prime minister, no less. Your Vote Will Count. This Is It. So it is still worth voting in future elections and referendums because it makes a difference. it matters. YOU, the voter, YOU MATTER
Now we’ve done that, Remainers/Rejoiners are free to start campaigning for an immediate 2nd referendum to go straight back in. Heck, if they are persuasive enough, I might even vote for them
But we HAD to honour the first vote. Anything else was insane self harm and would have sent us to a terrible place0 -
Driver said:
They're giving them a pay rise of 5% more than many in the private sector have had.Benpointer said:
So HMG are imposing a real-terms pay cut of 5% on those lauded NHS workers?Big_G_NorthWales said:
ReallyBenpointer said:
Er, which of the many pay disputes is that Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:Majority Union vote for pay deal
All bar 2 of 14 unions vote for it
The NHS dispute and the government have just confirmed it will now implement the deal
Unison have just said the lump sums will be in the June pay packets
Although of course private Sector Pay has risen much more than Public Sector Pay since 2010.Driver said:
They're giving them a pay rise of 5% more than many in the private sector have had.Benpointer said:
So HMG are imposing a real-terms pay cut of 5% on those lauded NHS workers?Big_G_NorthWales said:
ReallyBenpointer said:
Er, which of the many pay disputes is that Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:Majority Union vote for pay deal
All bar 2 of 14 unions vote for it
The NHS dispute and the government have just confirmed it will now implement the deal
Unison have just said the lump sums will be in the June pay packets
Also its not a race to the bottom
Also as a Tory you should surely understand supply and demand and the Market
Vacancies at all time high, is the market working!!0 -
I agree. These numbers are starkly in favour of Shit, Brexit is crap, let’s go back.Nigelb said:
I personally know several Brexit voters who regret their vote
I suspect a lot of if it just because Brexit unfortunately collided with a plague and then a massive war so it’s all turned out worse, and felt worse, than it might have done otherwise, nonetheless the numbers are the numbers and there SHOULD be a serious party campaigning for a new referendum and Rejoin, in the next GE, as it is clearly the wish of millions of people
I can’t for the life of me understand why the Lib Dems aren’t seizing this position and making it their territory. What is the point of them otherwise?
I get why Starmer can’t quite be so courageous but if Labour at some point take up this stance then good luck to them
We Brexited, democratically, and if the British people decide to reverse that in another vote, so be it. Fair enough. That’s what makes us different from the EU (and to my mind democratically superior) - WE DO NOT IGNORE OR OVERRULE REFERENDUMS1 -
kinabalu said:
Another Referendum is all it takes.williamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?
Tick one box only:
Leave
Remain
The government will implement whatever the majority decide."
There's nothing like a simple fair choice.....0 -
Many unreconciled Remainers have internalised a completely false narrative of the period before June 23rd 2016. Either they weren't really engaged in politics at the time, or have managed to rewrite history in their own minds as a result of consuming too much propaganda.Leon said:
Yes, of coursePulpstar said:
The madness was attempting to have a second vote before the first was implemented.Leon said:
The absolute madness of the Euroref 2nd voters can be revealed if you simply game out what would have happened if, say, the Scots had voted YES in 2014 then a bunch of YOON politicians had said Nah, that’s a stupid decision, we’re gonna make Scotland vote again, without even enacting independence in the first placewilliamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
A small but significant number of Nats would have realised that British/Scottish democracy was a sham, and could never deliver Indy, and they would have turned to violence. Scotland would have become Ireland in 1916-1920
Would the Brits have done the same if the Brexit vote had been overruled and a 2nd vote ordered, without us Brexiting? Probably, possibly, who knows - remember there was violence before the first Brexit vote: an MP was killed
Even if civil strife had been averted, millions of Leave voters would have boycotted the 2nd vote, correctly assuming that the whole thing was a fix, and their will would never be honoured, and democracy was a lie, and what’s the fucking point. Turnout in future elections would have plunged. Basically it would have shattered British democracy for a generation, maybe forever. Utter utter madness
That’s what I mean when I say hardcore Remainers weren’t just stupid, like Leavers, they were dangerously stupid because they thought their ludicrous shenanigans were “clever”
A second vote is entirely possible now to my mind, precisely because we've left.
The hardcore remainer scenario was the equivalent of say Corbyn winning the GE and then proceeding to have a 'confirmatory vote' before he ever stepped into office.
The equivalent now would be to have a vote after say 4 or 5 years of him having been in office (Say he'd won GE19) which of course is completely democratic.
The key for me is that Brexit has happened as an event. Which makes a vote to rejoin now perfectly democratic. A vote prior to leaving properly (Which was 31st January 2020) would have been unconscionable.
Political reality is it's not going to happen for a while now, but democratically anything after 31st Jan 2020 to rejoin is/was fine.
We have now brexited. The vote is honoured. British democracy works. It sticks to promises made by the prime minister, no less. Your Vote Will Count. This Is It. So it is still worth voting in future elections and referendums because it makes a difference. it matters. YOU, the voter, YOU MATTER
Now we’ve done that, Remainers/Rejoiners are free to start campaigning for an immediate 2nd referendum to go straight back in. Heck, if they are persuasive enough, I might even vote for them
But we HAD to honour the first vote. Anything else was insane self harm and would have sent us to a terrible place
The most obious example is the question of leaving the single market. What started out with people pointing out that *some* Brexit supporters wanted to stay in the single market has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.3 -
Stop that. 😠 You know you will end up in the spam bin again.Anabobazina said:The next step for the Conservative Party is now clear.
A renaissance, if you will, nears.
A woman, a queen, a lady awaits the call.
The high priestess of all that is right, fair and true.
Step forward Mary Elizabeth Truss.
Mother. Monarch. Mistress.
You were were wise before your time.
But now your time has come.
T
R
U
S
S
I’m beginning to think you can’t help yourself.1 -
Yes because NHS vacancies are at an all time high - and the rates an agency nurse / locum doctor receives for ensuring bare minimum staffing levels are met is rising rapidly..bigjohnowls said:
Although of course private Sector Pay has risen much more than Public Sector Pay since 2010.Driver said:
They're giving them a pay rise of 5% more than many in the private sector have had.Benpointer said:
So HMG are imposing a real-terms pay cut of 5% on those lauded NHS workers?Big_G_NorthWales said:
ReallyBenpointer said:
Er, which of the many pay disputes is that Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:Majority Union vote for pay deal
All bar 2 of 14 unions vote for it
The NHS dispute and the government have just confirmed it will now implement the deal
Unison have just said the lump sums will be in the June pay packets
Also its not a race to the bottom
Also as a Tory you should surely understand supply and demand and the Market
Vacancies at all time high, is the market working!!
0 -
"Labour was wrong to celebrate Raab’s ousting
Labour MP Graham Stringer argues the civil service has become far too powerful."
https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/05/02/labour-was-wrong-to-celebrate-raabs-ousting/1 -
OK so this allows us to segue into:Malmesbury said:
There’s a whole genre of Bollywood films where the small, nimble hero beats X huge, lumbering thugs sent by The Big Bad.Nigelb said:
Yes, but imagine a cage match between Trump and Sunak.TimS said:At least our leaders score better on good physical and mental health than their US counterparts would.
Not a bad score for Starmer given how much older than Sunak he is.
Who would win in a fight between the Westminster party leaders?
0 -
And why were they able to do that? Because too many Remainers in parliament left the field open to them by re-fighting the Leave/Remain question, forcing moderate Leavers to choose between the ERG vision and not leaving at all.Flanner said:
The shitshow doesn't lie in the fact that most voters voted to leave the EU.Leon said:
52%Scott_xP said:Brexit is a shitshow.
You were warned, and voted for it anyway.
And here we are.
A generation to undo the damage caused by the selfish few.
Hardly “the few”
It lies in the fact that a minuscule proportion of Brexit advocates (essentially the ERG and Farage's inner circle of deranged alcoholics) insisted on a version of Brexit that was the precise opposite of the assurances pre-referendum Brexit supporters gave to voters. At their 2019 peak, those lunatics amounted to not much more than 100 people: their number's now getting ever closer to single figures.0 -
No, we voted on what we were offered. Leave or Remain, with no details. Neither side wanted details because Remain would have had to spell out exactly how we avoided further integration and Leave would have split between Hard Brexiteers and EFTA typesWhisperingOracle said:
We've had this discussion so many times, however. It's much less simple than this because many people would argue the first vote was not honoured. A large number of leavers believed they were voting for a reasonably close economic and trading relationship.Leon said:
Yes, of coursePulpstar said:
The madness was attempting to have a second vote before the first was implemented.Leon said:
The absolute madness of the Euroref 2nd voters can be revealed if you simply game out what would have happened if, say, the Scots had voted YES in 2014 then a bunch of YOON politicians had said Nah, that’s a stupid decision, we’re gonna make Scotland vote again, without even enacting independence in the first placewilliamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
A small but significant number of Nats would have realised that British/Scottish democracy was a sham, and could never deliver Indy, and they would have turned to violence. Scotland would have become Ireland in 1916-1920
Would the Brits have done the same if the Brexit vote had been overruled and a 2nd vote ordered, without us Brexiting? Probably, possibly, who knows - remember there was violence before the first Brexit vote: an MP was killed
Even if civil strife had been averted, millions of Leave voters would have boycotted the 2nd vote, correctly assuming that the whole thing was a fix, and their will would never be honoured, and democracy was a lie, and what’s the fucking point. Turnout in future elections would have plunged. Basically it would have shattered British democracy for a generation, maybe forever. Utter utter madness
That’s what I mean when I say hardcore Remainers weren’t just stupid, like Leavers, they were dangerously stupid because they thought their ludicrous shenanigans were “clever”
A second vote is entirely possible now to my mind, precisely because we've left.
The hardcore remainer scenario was the equivalent of say Corbyn winning the GE and then proceeding to have a 'confirmatory vote' before he ever stepped into office.
The equivalent now would be to have a vote after say 4 or 5 years of him having been in office (Say he'd won GE19) which of course is completely democratic.
The key for me is that Brexit has happened as an event. Which makes a vote to rejoin now perfectly democratic. A vote prior to leaving properly (Which was 31st January 2020) would have been unconscionable.
Political reality is it's not going to happen for a while now, but democratically anything after 31st Jan 2020 to rejoin is/was fine.
We have now brexited. The vote is honoured. British democracy works. It sticks to promises made by the prime minister, no less. Your Vote Will Count. This Is It. So it is still worth voting in future elections and referendums because it makes a difference. it matters. YOU, the voter, YOU MATTER
Now we’ve done that, Remainers/Rejoiners are free to start campaigning for an immediate 2nd referendum to go straight back in. Heck, if they are persuasive enough, I might even vote for them
But we HAD to honour the first vote. Anything else was insane self harm and would have sent us to a terrible place
The whole referendum was a shoddy mess for which Cameron must take much of the blame, He did his shitty non-renegotiation, he decided to call the referendum in the slapdash way he did, he decided there would be no 2nd referendum of what kind of Brecit we wanted if it was Leave, and so on and so forth. The essay crisis prime minister produced a D grade essay. That will be Cameron’s terrible epitaph, he totally fucked up the one big job he had
But we could only vote on what the government offered us. Leave or Remain. And thus we voted
Any future government is now free to finesse the deal, of course, and I imagine that will be possible. The EU has it seems finally moved on from its Brexit Britain Must Be Punished attitude (which was understandable from an EU point of view, albeit spiteful and vindictive)2 -
It's not mythology, it's cold, hard factwilliamglenn said:has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce0 -
There are some *massive* structural problems in this country. And if you propose a policy platform to (from your perspective) fix them, you either get laughed off stage (Corbyn) or booted out (Truss).pigeon said:
It's a fair point. Largesse for students is just one more policy that can be added to the lengthy list of things that supposedly cannot be afforded because of the state of the public finances, those "difficult choices" that "have to be made" whilst rich old farts' triple locked pensions are maintained and their vast property wealth goes almost entirely untaxed.RochdalePioneers said:
All decisions like this do is confirm that you couldn't put a cigarette paper between the Tories and Labour. They're both bunches of third rate office seeking troughers who are only very distantly acquainted with the truth, and the main aims of both are to sit in ministerial offices and collect fat salaries for doing nothing of any value, whilst defending existing privilege.
The Shadow Cabinet is going to have to do better than endlessly shitting all over its own supporters if it wants to construct a stable electoral coalition. If I were a student who had been flirting with supporting that shower, I'd be sorely tempted to extend the middle finger in the general direction of Keir Starmer and either abstain or lodge a protest with the Greens.
Our political system no longer allows for divergence from our managed national decline. So of course there is an ever-narrowing gap between the parties. My minimal expectations for the incoming Labour government is to treat people with basic human dignity and not be a cesspool of incompetent corruption.
If we get those, it is worth the change. What we do after that is likely too difficult to achieve without some kind of national crisis where we all have a "where do we go from here" conversation. Covid could have been that, but we had Boris in government.0 -
I'm saying there's no need to overthink it. Party wins a GE promising an In/Out referendum. Same as last time. The only difference is it's the insurgent IN that triggers the EU negotiation process rather than the status quo of OUT. Instead of an exit deal the mandate is to agree an entry deal. This will happen in the medium term and IN will win comfortably as the country collectively screws its head back on.williamglenn said:
You sound like the people who were eagerly waiting for Nicola Sturgeon to give them another referendum on Scottish independence and thought that's all it would take.kinabalu said:
Another Referendum is all it takes.williamglenn said:
You can't step into the same river twice.TOPPING said:
Leavers or remainers may or may not be stupid.Leon said:The big difference between Leavers and Remainers is that Leavers are stupid and Remainers are just as stupid - see @TOPPING et al - but Remainers are haughtily convinced they are much cleverer. This, in a weird way, makes Remainers even stupider - in practise - than Leavers, who are genuinely stupid
Once you understand that, the entire farcical madness of Brexit is explicable, right down to the daily debates on here, still ongoing
People who don't understand that it is perfectly democratic to ask the people about a decision that you previously asked them, nor that parliaments cannot bind successive parliaments, nor that parliament is sovereign are, however, very, very stupid indeed.
2016 was a one-off fork in the road. We can't go back and change our minds, and the previous status quo isn't on offer anyway.
Any new attempt to join the EU needs to start with a party winning an election with a commitment to negotiate accession and everything that comes with it. It doesn't start with rerunning the 2016 vote.
"Should the United Kingdom remain in no man's land or leave to join every other European country in the European Union?
Tick one box only:
Leave
Remain
The government will implement whatever the majority decide."0 -
Yes, but he's a loon.Andy_JS said:"Labour was wrong to celebrate Raab’s ousting
Labour MP Graham Stringer argues the civil service has become far too powerful."
https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/05/02/labour-was-wrong-to-celebrate-raabs-ousting/0 -
Thank you for illustrating my point.Scott_xP said:
It's not mythology, it's cold, hard factwilliamglenn said:has been mythologised as *nobody* saying that we would leave the single market, even though both Leave and Remain campaigns were clear before the referendum that this is what would happen.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce
Michael Gove says leaving EU would mean quitting single market
- https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e
Cameron: ‘I’ll pull UK out of the single market after Brexit’
- https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/4
