nayimfromthehalfwayline
Luka Modric
I get where danish is coming from, but could never vote for Corbyn myself.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Politics, politics, politics
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
I get where danish is coming from, but could never vote for Corbyn myself.
StephenH
David Ginola
Compared to Boris he’s a superstar!
I would vote Labour if it was not for Corbyn.
Nothing wrong with the recognition of the state of Palestine and being critical of Netanyahu’s Israel!
Danishfurniturelover
the prettiest spice girl
He is also one of those self hating far lefty types. But I am turning a blind eye to all that and going to focus on the radical stuff that he does. It is what I liked about UKIP, they were the only ones to say the truth about the EU, they look all parties have their bad points, corby has his bad points but I am voting for radical change. As much as I dislike him and his policies Trump is at least trying to do what he said he would before he got elected. Maybe a new breed of politics, so I want Corbyn to win to change things, think he would bankrupt us but he would make the country more progressive and fairer and I want that.
Khan is a fcuking muppet, he reminds me of Blair, he will hide behind his skin colour to make he is not like the old school. But the is something slimy and fake about him like Blair and Cameron. Cant stand the man.
markysimmo
Johnny nice-tits
I feel he is massively dodgy and is some sort of sleeper cell agent for ISIS or something
Govt selling arms to Saudis and this is an argument ?
Danishfurniturelover
the prettiest spice girl
Could be said of most liberal lawyers in London right now though.
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
We agree! Is Brexit costing us? Yes it is. But hopefully house prices come down. London and south east being less international post Brexit should take a chunk off the overheated property market.
Fantastic. I hope you have an amazing time. Said before: if you can go to the Chimp rehab place in courtry, it was a special place. Get to travel into the interior of the country, see proper Africa, and stay in a tree house!! Can't recomend it highly enough.
My ex was upset by the european 50s women with strapping young locals there. She never minded older guys with younger girls. Probably jealous!
Why would any business making goods, or exporting services invest in the UK now? In real terms we are down probably billions in economic activity that hasn't happened becasue of Brexit. The UK was growing at the top of the charts for nations pre-vote. Now we have some of the lowest growth of any developed nation.
True. Have a butchers round Gambia. Maybe able to get in on importing something from there! Have to add on extra transport and customs checks, but there is oppotunity for sure if it happens. I don't think it will make things cheaper however. We have had it pretty good in the EU.
If you ignore the Sun's imagery of the EU, and actually look at what it does, the EU aint so bad. Nation states couldn't control pollution so easily as its cross-boarder - sea and air pollution for example. Most of what the EU does is boring trade and diplomacy. Stuff the UK doesn't have to bother with. In the US you're allowed a certain amount of rat hair in food stuffs, chlorine in chicken, steroids in beef etc. In short, food laws are less for consumers and more for businesses making money from food. That's not the case in the EU, which doesn't allow any forign bodies in food. The Eu is a force for good and protects people, far more than nation states in many instances.
Keep us up to date on Gambia!!
Rorschach
Sonny Walters
This is so far wrong I don't know where to start on it.
Danishfurniturelover
the prettiest spice girl
We agree! Is Brexit costing us? Yes it is. But hopefully house prices come down. London and south east being less international post Brexit should take a chunk off the overheated property market.
Fantastic. I hope you have an amazing time. Said before: if you can go to the Chimp rehab place in courtry, it was a special place. Get to travel into the interior of the country, see proper Africa, and stay in a tree house!! Can't recomend it highly enough.
My ex was upset by the european 50s women with strapping young locals there. She never minded older guys with younger girls. Probably jealous!
Why would any business making goods, or exporting services invest in the UK now? In real terms we are down probably billions in economic activity that hasn't happened becasue of Brexit. The UK was growing at the top of the charts for nations pre-vote. Now we have some of the lowest growth of any developed nation.
True. Have a butchers round Gambia. Maybe able to get in on importing something from there! Have to add on extra transport and customs checks, but there is oppotunity for sure if it happens. I don't think it will make things cheaper however. We have had it pretty good in the EU.
If you ignore the Sun's imagery of the EU, and actually look at what it does, the EU aint so bad. Nation states couldn't control pollution so easily as its cross-boarder - sea and air pollution for example. Most of what the EU does is boring trade and diplomacy. Stuff the UK doesn't have to bother with. In the US you're allowed a certain amount of rat hair in food stuffs, chlorine in chicken, steroids in beef etc. In short, food laws are less for consumers and more for businesses making money from food. That's not the case in the EU, which doesn't allow any forign bodies in food. The Eu is a force for good and protects people, far more than nation states in many instances.
Keep us up to date on Gambia!!
Never read the sun and never will mate, doing a trade deal with America does not and should not mean we accept their standards, which is why you need a Corbyn government as the tories would be to soft to stand up to it, just look at May's negotiating. I would trust Corbyn to stand up more for people.
But with regards standards in food services, it was not so long ago we were eating food from France that had Romanian horses in, so I do not think the EU is as good as you are making out.
Danishfurniturelover
the prettiest spice girl
The guy is a mad clam who I do not agree with, but he is trying to implement his mad policies, it tinkles people off, and to be honest his trade war with China seems stupid from where I am sitting. But he is trying to actually do stuff. Compare that to the shower of brick we have over here on both sides who are only interested in delaying tactics so they can go off and get some other job in another department some where else.
I will vote for Corbyn because I am hoping if he can get in he will change things radically and quickly, privatise the railways, build houses, actually do things. Of course I am not so naive as to not be aware that he might not do any of these things or he might get stopped by the mechanics of whitehall.
StephenH
David Ginola
I think you could be wasting you time m8.
AuroRaman
Chris Armstrong
He’s doing a really brick job of it if that were true.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Luka Modric
Theresa May's Brexit deal is "doomed" and must be renegotiated, ex-defence secretary Sir Michael Fallon has said.
Sir Michael launched a scathing attack on the proposed EU agreement, saying it was the "worst of all worlds".
Asked whether Mrs May should stay on as Tory leader if it was rejected by MPs, he said it was "up to my colleagues".
The BBC's Laura Kuenssberg said he was "not one of the usual suspects" on Europe and his remarks showed the depth of Conservative opposition to the deal.
Parliament will vote on whether to accept or reject the terms of the UK's withdrawal and future relations negotiated by Mrs May on 11 Decembe
Sir Michael's decision to come out against the deal is a blow to the prime minister, who is struggling to muster support in Parliament for it.
Labour, the Lib Dems, the SNP and the Democratic Unionists have said they will vote against the deal while many Tories have said publicly they are opposed.
Opponents of the deal say it will keep the UK too closely tied to EU rules and make it harder to strike future trade deals with other countries and minimise their value.
US President Donald Trump told reporters on Sunday the withdrawal agreement "sounds like a great deal for the EU" and meant the UK might not be able to trade with the US.
In other developments:
Sir Michael Fallon, who served as defence secretary under David Cameron and Theresa May before having to resign a year ago, told MPs on Monday the agreement was a "huge gamble" as it would see the UK give up its power to influence EU rules and regulations in return for vague assurances over future trade arrangements.
He told BBC Radio 4's Today that "this is not a good deal and we need a better deal", saying that Mr Trump's criticism of its repercussions for transatlantic relations "could not simply be brushed off".
"My fear is that this deal gives us the worst of all worlds," he said. "No guarantee of smooth trade in the future and no ability to reduce the tariffs that we need to conclude trade deals with the rest of the world.
"So, unless the House of Commons can be persuaded somehow that those are possible then I think, yes, the deal is doomed."
Asked if Mrs May was also doomed, he replied "that's up to my colleagues", while stressing that a change of leader would not necessarily address the difficulties the UK now found itself in.
When it was put to him that did not sound like an endorsement of Mrs May, he replied "take it any way you want".
Could Brexit be delayed?
Sir Michael said the 29 March 2019 date for Brexit, which is enshrined in UK law, may have to be pushed back to give negotiators the time to make major improvements to the agreement.
All 28 EU states would need to agree to extend the Article 50 process of negotiations to allow this to happen, something Theresa May has repeatedly ruled out.
Cabinet Office David Lidington said he did not think doing this "would get us anywhere" as the EU had made clear this was the only deal on the table.
He told Today there was no "Plan B" and the agreement was a "decent compromise" which would provide a springboard to the next stage of negotiations on the two sides' future relationship.
The prime minister is continuing to making the case for the agreement, which she says delivers on the 2016 referendum vote in key areas and is in the national interest.
During visits to Wales and Northern Ireland, she will meet business and political leaders and argue that it gives certainty to farmers and other businesses.
Under the proposed agreement, the UK would not be able to complete any trade deal with a country outside the EU until the end of the proposed transition period - currently scheduled to last until 31 December 2020.
In reality, any bilateral agreement between the UK and the US is likely to take years to negotiate given its complexity, differing standards in areas such as agriculture, and the fact it would require ratification by the US Congress.
Sir Michael launched a scathing attack on the proposed EU agreement, saying it was the "worst of all worlds".
Asked whether Mrs May should stay on as Tory leader if it was rejected by MPs, he said it was "up to my colleagues".
The BBC's Laura Kuenssberg said he was "not one of the usual suspects" on Europe and his remarks showed the depth of Conservative opposition to the deal.
Parliament will vote on whether to accept or reject the terms of the UK's withdrawal and future relations negotiated by Mrs May on 11 Decembe
Sir Michael's decision to come out against the deal is a blow to the prime minister, who is struggling to muster support in Parliament for it.
Labour, the Lib Dems, the SNP and the Democratic Unionists have said they will vote against the deal while many Tories have said publicly they are opposed.
Opponents of the deal say it will keep the UK too closely tied to EU rules and make it harder to strike future trade deals with other countries and minimise their value.
US President Donald Trump told reporters on Sunday the withdrawal agreement "sounds like a great deal for the EU" and meant the UK might not be able to trade with the US.
In other developments:
- Other political parties have demanded to be involved in any televised Brexit debate, after Theresa May challenged Jeremy Corbyn to a head-to-head encounter
- Research published by the London School of Economics, King's College and the Institute for Fiscal Studies suggests the PM's Brexit deal could leave the economy as much as 5.5% smaller in 10 years time than it would be if the UK stayed in the EU
- Judges at the European Court of Justice examining whether the UK can call off the process of leaving the EU without permission from member states, following a challenge by a group of Scottish politicians
- International Trade Secretary Liam Fox is visiting Israel to boost economic ties ahead of Brexit
Sir Michael Fallon, who served as defence secretary under David Cameron and Theresa May before having to resign a year ago, told MPs on Monday the agreement was a "huge gamble" as it would see the UK give up its power to influence EU rules and regulations in return for vague assurances over future trade arrangements.
He told BBC Radio 4's Today that "this is not a good deal and we need a better deal", saying that Mr Trump's criticism of its repercussions for transatlantic relations "could not simply be brushed off".
"My fear is that this deal gives us the worst of all worlds," he said. "No guarantee of smooth trade in the future and no ability to reduce the tariffs that we need to conclude trade deals with the rest of the world.
"So, unless the House of Commons can be persuaded somehow that those are possible then I think, yes, the deal is doomed."
Asked if Mrs May was also doomed, he replied "that's up to my colleagues", while stressing that a change of leader would not necessarily address the difficulties the UK now found itself in.
When it was put to him that did not sound like an endorsement of Mrs May, he replied "take it any way you want".
Could Brexit be delayed?
Sir Michael said the 29 March 2019 date for Brexit, which is enshrined in UK law, may have to be pushed back to give negotiators the time to make major improvements to the agreement.
All 28 EU states would need to agree to extend the Article 50 process of negotiations to allow this to happen, something Theresa May has repeatedly ruled out.
Cabinet Office David Lidington said he did not think doing this "would get us anywhere" as the EU had made clear this was the only deal on the table.
He told Today there was no "Plan B" and the agreement was a "decent compromise" which would provide a springboard to the next stage of negotiations on the two sides' future relationship.
The prime minister is continuing to making the case for the agreement, which she says delivers on the 2016 referendum vote in key areas and is in the national interest.
During visits to Wales and Northern Ireland, she will meet business and political leaders and argue that it gives certainty to farmers and other businesses.
Under the proposed agreement, the UK would not be able to complete any trade deal with a country outside the EU until the end of the proposed transition period - currently scheduled to last until 31 December 2020.
In reality, any bilateral agreement between the UK and the US is likely to take years to negotiate given its complexity, differing standards in areas such as agriculture, and the fact it would require ratification by the US Congress.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Luka Modric
Brexit: Referendum may be inevitable - John McDonnell
Shadow chancellor John McDonnell has suggested it is "inevitable" another EU referendum will be called if Labour are not able to force a general election.
An election remains Labour's preferred option if - as is widely expected - MPs vote down Theresa May's Brexit deal on 11 December.
The shadow chancellor said forcing an election would be "very difficult".
And if it was not possible, he told the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg, the party would push for another referendum.
Mr McDonnell told the BBC's political editor: "We want a deal that will protect jobs and the economy.
"If we can't achieve that - the government can't achieve that - we should have a general election, but that's very difficult to do because of the nature of the legislation that David Cameron brought forward.
"If that's not possible, we'll be calling upon the government then to join us in a public vote. It's difficult to judge each stage, but that's the sequence I think that we'll inevitably go through over this period."
Asked by Laura Kuenssberg if a vote of no confidence did not bring down the government and lead to a general election, a second referendum was "inevitable", Mr McDonnell replied: "That's right.
"Our policy is if we can't get a general election, then the other option which we've kept on the table is a people's vote."
Asked about shadow home secretary Diane Abbott's claim that the Leave side could win another referendum, he said: "It might do. It's very difficult to call at the moment."
He said most of the Labour MPs campaigning for another referendum were the "strongest Remainers".
"So, the caution for them and for all of us, whichever argument you put, is the people will decide. As we saw in the last referendum, it's very difficult to predict which way the people will decide on this.
"I've seen a lot of polls that have said there has been a shift from Leave to Remain. I've also seen other polls saying actually we're just about the same as we were then."
He said he had voted Remain in the 2016 EU referendum and he believed it was still the "best option" but he also respected "the wishes of the people".
If there were to be another referendum, he said, there would be a "debate" in the Labour Party about its position but it could not support Theresa May's "current" deal, if that were on the ballot paper.
Prime Minister Theresa May, who is Conservative Party leader, said that Mr McDonnell's comments about another referendum showed that "the true Labour position" was that they want to "frustrate Brexit".
Speaking in Scotland, the prime minister said another referendum would be a "betrayal of the vote of the British people" adding that the Government had negotiated a deal that "delivers Brexit" while "protecting jobs, protecting livelihoods, protecting security and protecting our United Kingdom".
A fresh referendum could be held only if the government legislates for one and a majority in the Commons supports it.
Theresa May has faced repeated calls to hold another referendum from Labour, Lib Dem, SNP, Green and a small number of Conservative MPs, who are members of the People's Vote campaign, but has always rejected them.
Under the Fixed-Term Parliament Act, introduced in 2011 by David Cameron's coalition government, a general election can be called if two-thirds of MPs vote for one.
Alternatively, if a majority of MPs back a no-confidence vote in the prime minister, a 14-day period is allowed for a new government to be formed with the approval of MPs. If no such vote is passed, a new election must be held.
Shadow chancellor John McDonnell has suggested it is "inevitable" another EU referendum will be called if Labour are not able to force a general election.
An election remains Labour's preferred option if - as is widely expected - MPs vote down Theresa May's Brexit deal on 11 December.
The shadow chancellor said forcing an election would be "very difficult".
And if it was not possible, he told the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg, the party would push for another referendum.
Mr McDonnell told the BBC's political editor: "We want a deal that will protect jobs and the economy.
"If we can't achieve that - the government can't achieve that - we should have a general election, but that's very difficult to do because of the nature of the legislation that David Cameron brought forward.
"If that's not possible, we'll be calling upon the government then to join us in a public vote. It's difficult to judge each stage, but that's the sequence I think that we'll inevitably go through over this period."
Asked by Laura Kuenssberg if a vote of no confidence did not bring down the government and lead to a general election, a second referendum was "inevitable", Mr McDonnell replied: "That's right.
"Our policy is if we can't get a general election, then the other option which we've kept on the table is a people's vote."
Asked about shadow home secretary Diane Abbott's claim that the Leave side could win another referendum, he said: "It might do. It's very difficult to call at the moment."
He said most of the Labour MPs campaigning for another referendum were the "strongest Remainers".
"So, the caution for them and for all of us, whichever argument you put, is the people will decide. As we saw in the last referendum, it's very difficult to predict which way the people will decide on this.
"I've seen a lot of polls that have said there has been a shift from Leave to Remain. I've also seen other polls saying actually we're just about the same as we were then."
He said he had voted Remain in the 2016 EU referendum and he believed it was still the "best option" but he also respected "the wishes of the people".
If there were to be another referendum, he said, there would be a "debate" in the Labour Party about its position but it could not support Theresa May's "current" deal, if that were on the ballot paper.
Prime Minister Theresa May, who is Conservative Party leader, said that Mr McDonnell's comments about another referendum showed that "the true Labour position" was that they want to "frustrate Brexit".
Speaking in Scotland, the prime minister said another referendum would be a "betrayal of the vote of the British people" adding that the Government had negotiated a deal that "delivers Brexit" while "protecting jobs, protecting livelihoods, protecting security and protecting our United Kingdom".
A fresh referendum could be held only if the government legislates for one and a majority in the Commons supports it.
Theresa May has faced repeated calls to hold another referendum from Labour, Lib Dem, SNP, Green and a small number of Conservative MPs, who are members of the People's Vote campaign, but has always rejected them.
Under the Fixed-Term Parliament Act, introduced in 2011 by David Cameron's coalition government, a general election can be called if two-thirds of MPs vote for one.
Alternatively, if a majority of MPs back a no-confidence vote in the prime minister, a 14-day period is allowed for a new government to be formed with the approval of MPs. If no such vote is passed, a new election must be held.
ShipOfTheseus
Clint Dempsey
Seumas Milne's pushback against all that, yesterday, would have been amusing if this wasn't all so serious.
Just realised that the Maybot has scheduled the meaningful vote for the Barca match, as well, presumably because she's scared that Tracy Crouch would have voted against it.
Just realised that the Maybot has scheduled the meaningful vote for the Barca match, as well, presumably because she's scared that Tracy Crouch would have voted against it.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Luka Modric
Thats the real question.
I think everyone assumes Remain vs Deal vs No Deal - but I wouldnt bet against Deal vs No Deal, Mays a clam like that.
Baleforce
Ron Henry
Who knows, logically, the deal being voted down by parliament and the EU insisting that the negotiation is over would kill "deal".
Not a lot of logic in the entire process so far though.
ShipOfTheseus
Clint Dempsey
So there are proponents of a three way referendum using AV. In which case, the options are really clear: May's deal, revocation or Thelma & Louise. Various people - some of them quite sensible - take a position which I find really counter-intuitive, that anything more than a binary choice would confuse the public. Even though it works perfectly well for electing mayors.
Some have suggested that there's a repeat stay/leave referendum, and then - if the answer remains leave - a deal versus no-deal vote, either on the same ballot paper or a couple of weeks later. For some reason that appeals to people who are worried about Condorcet paradoxes and legitimacy for the three-way vote.
If it's binary, Labour has suggested it could only be deal or revoke. However, I suspect that the only way you could get a referendum through parliament would be if the Brexit fundamentalists supported it - or, of course, if May suddenly reverse-ferreted and proposed it as a way out. Or if May's successor as Tory leader did so. In which case, it's just possible that no-deal versus deal, or even no-deal versus revoke, might make it onto the paper.
Then there's the question about the franchise and whether 16 year olds could get a vote. If Labour goes for the people's vote option, supported by Tory remainists and other parties, and it gets through against the wishes of Govt and Brexiters, the legislation needs to do all it can to ensure that the vote goes the right way. Franchise considerations would have to be baked in legislatively, otherwise the Electoral Commission would be nobbled by government and would want to rerun as previously.
TL/DR: no fudging idea. But it's an interesting question.