Brexit again...

[For Us All]

9 hours ago, The_godfather said:

They've also taken place in Kenya, which has about as much relevance as the non-point that you are not making.

It happened in Tory controlled England, so it's CLEARLY the Conservatives fault.

Of course it is,nothing at all to do with a corrupt Labour council?🤔

[tommytunstall]

13 hours ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

Labour's position has remained pretty much the same since the result of the referendum was announced with the current position to put the vote to the public (hardly undemocratic) one that has slowly evolved as the process has gone on. In fact, you could easily argue that Labour has been the most democratic of the 3 main parties, unlike the tories and their illegal attempts to bypass parliament or their yellow counterparts' pledge to just ignore around half the population. 
I find your singling out of Labour for their swivelling, ducking/ diving and divisions quite startling. First get rid of the log in your own eye; then you will see well enough to deal with the speck in your friend's.

Also, if I were you, I'd pay little heed to what the press are saying about the "battle for the leadership". Do you not think they've got something of an agenda?

You are obviously a honest believer in the current Labour Party, and I admire that. Unfortunately you are blinkered most of Joe Public see them as a complete shambles, now firmly owned by Momentum and Mcluskey and his fellow dinosaurs. Labour has a leader, who was indecisive, now he is not so sure.  They are jûdged in their own heartlands as unelectable.

[For Us All]

42 minutes ago, tommytunstall said:

You are obviously a honest believer in the current Labour Party, and I admire that. Unfortunately you are blinkered most of Joe Public see them as a complete shambles, now firmly owned by Momentum and Mcluskey and his fellow dinosaurs. Labour has a leader, who was indecisive, now he is not so sure.  They are jûdged in their own heartlands as unelectable.

Anyone who is promoting higher immigration,shorter prison sentences and a continuation of electoral fraud is out of touch with their core voters.

[mr.hobblesworth]

10 hours ago, The_godfather said:

Slowly evolved? Is it a position, or a policy, or a principle?  Labour are hopelessly divided, largely as a result of impotent and divisive leadership. Their current position is only based on seeing which way the wind is blowing, not on any great commitment to anything other than trying to sneak (and sneak it will be, for any victory will not be resounding) into power.

The lack of clarity has both had serious negative consequences to Labour's reputation (e.g. how is it possible that they could be less popular than the current 'government'??), and been a key factor in preventing the government being held to account since 2016. 

It shouldn't just be ignored because of manifest inadequacies elsewhere.

Everywhere is hopelessly divided. The country couldn't be more divided. Seriously, what position do you think 'the leadership' should have taken? In what ways have the government not been held to account that could have been done by a party without a majority?

 

[mr.hobblesworth]

50 minutes ago, tommytunstall said:

You are obviously a honest believer in the current Labour Party, and I admire that. Unfortunately you are blinkered most of Joe Public see them as a complete shambles, now firmly owned by Momentum and Mcluskey and his fellow dinosaurs. Labour has a leader, who was indecisive, now he is not so sure.  They are jûdged in their own heartlands as unelectable.

I think it's the public that's blinkered. Labour is controlled by it's half a million members; we appoint everyone from the Leader to the NEC. Momentum no more own the party than anyone else. Obviously there's an overlap of Momentum members and those who want Labour to return to being a left-wing, Socialist party (I'm both). Momentum aren't some scary bunch of SWP types, just people who feel energised by the direction that Corbyn has taken the party in and want to campaign. Certainly, if it weren't for Momentum, we wouldn't have seen Labour get the biggest share of the vote in 70 years.

[tommytunstall]

2 hours ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

I think it's the public that's blinkered. Labour is controlled by it's half a million members; we appoint everyone from the Leader to the NEC. Momentum no more own the party than anyone else. Obviously there's an overlap of Momentum members and those who want Labour to return to being a left-wing, Socialist party (I'm both). Momentum aren't some scary bunch of SWP types, just people who feel energised by the direction that Corbyn has taken the party in and want to campaign. Certainly, if it weren't for Momentum, we wouldn't have seen Labour get the biggest share of the vote in 70 years.

Understand that the members decide, it was the same pre Brown and Blair. The problem is what the members want is not in tune with the electorate. Go out into streets pubs etc and you will find Labour are currently not electable.

[mr.hobblesworth]

I might well be eating my words whenever the next election happens but lets wait and see what happens when we can discuss policies and the media are legally bound to report relatively accurately. As it stands, it feels like Brexit is drowning everything else and people with more absolute beliefs are moving towards the 2 parties with the more extreme views. When that's  out of the way, and we can discuss things like providing kids with Cystic Fibrosis with medication that they couldn't otherwise afford, we can hopefully make some progress.

[mr.hobblesworth]

I think this, from The Guardian, kind of backs up what I'm saying. I think the graph below would look completely different if Brexit was out of the way and people were giving their preference based on the parties' policies. "If" being the operative word.

 

Quote

 

And on the subject of polling, the latest ITV/Cardiff University Welsh barometer poll gives the Conservatives a significant lead over Labour in Wales. It puts the Tories on 29% (up 5 points from the same poll in July) and Labour on 25% (up 3).

Here are the figures.

 

 Welsh barometer poll Photograph: ITV

At the 2017 general election Labour won 49% of the vote in Wales, and the Conservatives just 34%.

In his analysis of the figures Prof Roger Awan-Scully from Cardiff University says Brexit helps to explain the shift over the last two years. He says:

What the poll shows above all, though, are the stark divisions in Wales – as across most of Britain – on the issue of Brexit. Among 2016 Remain voters, the Conservatives are in a distant fourth place, while the Brexit Party wins literally zero percent support; among 2016 Leavers, the Conservatives win nearly half of all support (49%) and the Brexit Party the bulk of the remainder (another 29%) ...

What these figures suggest is that any general election occurring soon would open the possibility of profound changes in Welsh politics. Labour have won the last 26 general elections here. You don’t manage that without having some serious staying power, so it would take a brave person to bet heavily against them doing so once more. But the tectonic plates may be shifting.

 

 

[geosname]

21 minutes ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

I might well be eating my words whenever the next election happens but lets wait and see what happens when we can discuss policies and the media are legally bound to report relatively accurately. As it stands, it feels like Brexit is drowning everything else and people with more absolute beliefs are moving towards the 2 parties with the more extreme views. When that's  out of the way, and we can discuss things like providing kids with Cystic Fibrosis with medication that they couldn't otherwise afford, we can hopefully make some progress.

I hope that happens (not you eating your words) when brexit or not is over.

Sadly I don't think it will. I think 50% will remain angry whichever way it goes and vent that anger at elections for some time. I think it has shifted the political map/battleground to far to recover for many years.

I hope I'm wrong and the country can resume some normality even though I hate what the normality was... a stagnant mire of hope and promises rarely delivered.

[For Us All]

3 hours ago, geosname said:

I hope that happens (not you eating your words) when brexit or not is over.

Sadly I don't think it will. I think 50% will remain angry whichever way it goes and vent that anger at elections for some time. I think it has shifted the political map/battleground to far to recover for many years.

I hope I'm wrong and the country can resume some normality even though I hate what the normality was... a stagnant mire of hope and promises rarely delivered.

If only the losers had accepted defeat, perhaps this would have all been done and dusted?

[The_godfather]

11 hours ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

I think this, from The Guardian, kind of backs up what I'm saying. I think the graph below would look completely different if Brexit was out of the way and people were giving their preference based on the parties' policies. "If" being the operative word.

 

 

Let me understand - what you are saying is that your evidence to back up your viewpoint is that if things were completely different, and the most dominant issue for a generation didn't exist, you think said viewpoint would be borne out...?

Is it just possible that Jeremy Corbyn is both a decent enough guy with some good ideas on ways to improve people's lot in life; and also the wrong guy at completely the wrong time to try and implement them? Politics is all about time and place. Had the referendum gone the other way you might be looking at a Labour government. But you're not, and it will be impossible to try and tackle the shambles of Brexit and austerity at the same time.

If Brexit goes ahead, the Tories will be in for another 5 years, and Britain is going to be in a bad place. Any deal will not likely be agreed by the end of the next parliament at least. Even if Labour somehow get in, they've got Bob hope of implementing anything that they want to because the economy is going to be in such a state. He is clearly not the right person to be leading the Labour party forwards. I don't know who is.

[geosname]

[Fosse69]

16 hours ago, For Us All said:

If only the losers had accepted defeat, perhaps this would have all been done and dusted?

Purely a Tory internal dispute, one wing was not happy with May`s deal, now the other wing will not be happy with the Canada minus deal, together with all the industrial areas in England. Apart from the invisible custom  patrols on the invisible border which maybe acceptable if the visible bungs are sufficient. 

[Bycarsbill]

2 hours ago, Fosse69 said:

Purely a Tory internal dispute, one wing was not happy with May`s deal, now the other wing will not be happy with the Canada minus deal, together with all the industrial areas in England. Apart from the invisible custom  patrols on the invisible border which maybe acceptable if the visible bungs are sufficient. 

Total cobblers! How do you come to this conclusion? The vast majority of Tory MPs voted in favour of Theresa May's deal, while only a handful of Labour members of parliament voted for it!  The Labour party is equally (if not more) split on their views on Brexit than even the Tories.

[Bycarsbill]

On 14/10/2019 at 20:02, mr.hobblesworth said:

Labour's position has remained pretty much the same since the result of the referendum was announced with the current position to put the vote to the public (hardly undemocratic) one that has slowly evolved as the process has gone on. In fact, you could easily argue that Labour has been the most democratic of the 3 main parties, unlike the tories and their illegal attempts to bypass parliament or their yellow counterparts' pledge to just ignore around half the population. 
I find your singling out of Labour for their swivelling, ducking/ diving and divisions quite startling. First get rid of the log in your own eye; then you will see well enough to deal with the speck in your friend's.

Also, if I were you, I'd pay little heed to what the press are saying about the "battle for the leadership". Do you not think they've got something of an agenda?

But as I understand it, their current position, as you put it; "to put the vote to the public" isn't totally accurate. That position is certainly not Corbyn's and as evidence that there clearly is in-fighting at the top of the party, people like, McDonnell and Rebecca Long-Bailey are now publicly defying Corbyn on this very subject!  So where's the united front on this one? I think your specs are a little too rose-tinted when it comes to Labour's stance (or lack of it) on Brexit--they've been constantly opaque and non-committal on Brexit right from the start. Clever in a political sense I grant you, but hardly working in the country's best interests is it?