FlyTheNest

tinyclanger2 wrote:

If Corbyn continues to ignore Labour members – by which, of course, I mean if he continues to adhere unflinchingly to his principles – then the prime minister will make the House of Commons vote as often as it takes for enough Labour MPs to vote or to abstain to allow her deal to be ratified.

comments from the better informed than me?

Its Rentoul.

Do you really need to be any "better informed" than that?

Yes.

Is anybody hungry? I just had my Christmas dinner (going to the folk's place for Christmas and enjoy cooking my own) and I made way too much.

As for Labour going into a snap GE campaigning for Brexit there was Yougov poll (last weekend?) that had them falling behind the Lib-Dems.

Found it...

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-st ... -1-5820736

You'll note also that Peter Kellner formerly of Yougov is now saying Remain has clear daylight in the polls...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... oples-vote

So one does have to wonder how long it will take before someone has a word with Corbyn, Milne, McCluskey et al and makes it clear to them in no uncertain terms that their current approach to brexit is suicidal. Yes of course they can hide behind the Conference motion, but situations change and I'm pretty certain an overwhelming majority of Labour members and voters would be delighted if Labour backed a second referendum and wouldn't be too upset to see that motion dumped. Because if they don't I'll not be voting for them until Corbyn's gone and I suspect I'm very far from being alone.

tinyclanger2 wrote:I wonder about the degree to which a GE involving a Labour party still espousing no people's vote (even though I'm not sure about it myself) would actually "sweep the Tories from power". What's the current view on that?

Oh yes - and PTO.

Hmmm...'til relatively recently I would've voted for a rabbit in a red rosette...I'd struggle now. That's something that makes me very sad.
On the plus side - getting on very well with my previously tory voting pro EU father in law - so it's not all bad.

RIP Paddy Ashdown.

A reminder of when the LibDems were both more than a single issue cult, and actually knew who the main enemy was.

AFinch wrote:Rare appearance from me. This is from Labour Conference. More specifically: https://twitter.com/SeemaChandwani

Thanks!

Unless there is something somewhere else, I would say that it's not entirely clear what Labour's Brexit stance would be in a snap election scenario. Personally I would have assumed it was "to be decided" from that, but I guess not. It seems it's already settled on a renegotiate, pro-Brexit policy as far as Corbyn is concerned.

Seems Paddy Ashdown has shuffled from this mortal coil.

Had a brief drunken chat with him once at a hotel bar during a conference in Liverpool and he was thoroughly affable.

He did a good job of building up the Lib-Dems on a social democratic platform, something Charlie Kennedy continued and Nick Clegg shat on then destroyed.

And now those two are dead and that c*nt's fucked off to work for Facebook.

Not cool God, not cool.

How has the shit-show of May et al become focused on Labour? Everything we're talking about is academic as there is no GE coming and Labour have the power to do naff all.

Sorry. You're right. So:

Cardiff 1 MUtd 5

and for festive purposes there's always the possibility of an FTN ElfYourself:
https://www.elfyourself.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I do cooking approximately once every five years and have purchased nuts for the making of a roast to take to friends for xmas dinner.
Will wear me festive antlers throughout the process.

Party like it's (May) 1999

.

I think that

1. May won't lose a confidence vote in the commons unless she passes her deal - in which case we will have finalised the withdrawal agreement, but the DUP will then almost certainly withdraw from their supply and confidence agreement and the government will fall, or

2. She loses the 'meaningful vote' (if there ever is one) on her deal, we move towards a no deal exit and enough remain-leaning tories vote with the opposition against her - a number of them are talking abouy this but I won't believe that unless or until it happens.

If it's 1, then I wonder what the legalities are on seeking to revoke Article 50 after the withdrawal agreement has been finalised. I know the ECJ has said very clearly that we can do so now. I wonder if we still can then. If it's 2, then we're in the hands of backbench tories voting to bring down their government and risk putting a Corbyn/McDonnell government in power - I'll believe that when I see it.

Corbyn's stance made sense two years ago, and probably made sense six months ago, but I don't think it makes any sense at all now. I think that now it's just a different way of denying reality.

There is a much simpler policy line to pursue now

a. We've voted to leave.
b. The government have completely cocked up this process and left us with a hopeless deal that nobody is happy with.
c. We reject the binary choice of May's deal or no deal
d. The only way forward is to revoke article 50 and think again about how to do this.
e. There is then a legitimate issue to consider - we think that we can negotiate a better deal than this government have been able to, but at some point we must consider, when we know what the actual deal is, whether the people think that is better than what we have now.

FWIW I didn't read that pertaining to discussion here,particular but a more general question.But what do I know I talk to cuddly toys and hang upside down in cupboards.

Ah. Good.

adam wrote:I think that

1. May won't lose a confidence vote in the commons unless she passes her deal - in which case we will have finalised the withdrawal agreement, but the DUP will then almost certainly withdraw from their supply and confidence agreement and the government will fall, or

2. She loses the 'meaningful vote' (if there ever is one) on her deal, we move towards a no deal exit and enough remain-leaning tories vote with the opposition against her - a number of them are talking abouy this but I won't believe that unless or until it happens.

If it's 1, then I wonder what the legalities are on seeking to revoke Article 50 after the withdrawal agreement has been finalised. I know the ECJ has said very clearly that we can do so now. I wonder if we still can then. If it's 2, then we're in the hands of backbench tories voting to bring down their government and risk putting a Corbyn/McDonnell government in power - I'll believe that when I see it.

Corbyn's stance made sense two years ago, and probably made sense six months ago, but I don't think it makes any sense at all now. I think that now it's just a different way of denying reality.

There is a much simpler policy line to pursue now

a. We've voted to leave.
b. The government have completely cocked up this process and left us with a hopeless deal that nobody is happy with.
c. We reject the binary choice of May's deal or no deal
d. The only way forward is to revoke article 50 and think again about how to do this.
e. There is then a legitimate issue to consider - we think that we can negotiate a better deal than this government have been able to, but at some point we must consider, when we know what the actual deal is, whether the people think that is better than what we have now.

institute for government website had this:
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org. ... article-50" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

he ECJ has made clear that revocation of Article 50 could happen any time until the Withdrawal Agreement had come into force. This implies that it could happen even after a Withdrawal Agreement had been concluded and ratified by both parties, provided it had not yet come into force.

FWIW I don't like the "battle" (with cancer etc)descriptions,as if will power,personal characteristics have f.a to do with it.

As Fernando Pessoa said:

"I have a terrible cold"

I have provided self with aspirin via the medium of lemsip, but am still in search of the truth.

Good to see tc2 return to the fray and make up for lost time (minus the awful music selection)

WADUYAMEAN AWFUL?

You asked for it:

[youtube]vu7RSfHYH74[/youtube]

I could compete with the Guardian headline writers in generating reaction.

tinyclanger2 wrote:You asked for it:

Great record.

Aaarghhhhhhh

Bah humbug

HindleA wrote:FWIW I didn't read that pertaining to discussion here,particular but a more general question.But what do I know I talk to cuddly toys and hang upside down in cupboards.

'kay

How can you tell if a hilltop is "naughty or nice?"

I think it's directly related to the chocolate to cream ratio.

HindleA wrote:How can you tell if a hilltop is "naughty or nice?"

Visit early on Christmas morning and see what's occurred.

tinyclanger2 wrote:Cardiff 1 MUtd 5

United supporter here (my dad's fault) and I have to say I never suspected Solksjaer's necromantic powers to be quite so powerful as to be able to bring an entire football team back to life.

Likewise. Also my dad's fault.

Baby.
Faced.
Assassin.

adam wrote:Corbyn's stance made sense two years ago, and probably made sense six months ago, but I don't think it makes any sense at all now. I think that now it's just a different way of denying reality.

Absolutely.

adam wrote:There is a much simpler policy line to pursue now

a. We've voted to leave.
b. The government have completely cocked up this process and left us with a hopeless deal that nobody is happy with.
c. We reject the binary choice of May's deal or no deal
d. The only way forward is to revoke article 50 and think again about how to do this.
e. There is then a legitimate issue to consider - we think that we can negotiate a better deal than this government have been able to, but at some point we must consider, when we know what the actual deal is, whether the people think that is better than what we have now.

Indeed.

And as it appears we can arbitrarily revoke article 50 whenever we like (which seems absurd so makes total sense in this fiasco) that seems the only sensible course of action, the problem of course being both major English parties are fighting over the same set of idiots and those idiots voted brexit. I can absolutely and fully understand Labour's predicament here, they were within a few thousand votes of winning the last election, so it's those voters they are targetting. Makes total sense. But the next GE will be a different beast, especially if it's a snap election before whatever sordid denouement brexit results in. And I simply do not understand how Corbyn and his coterie don't realise that if they continue down their current suicidal cul de sac they're in for one very big and very nasty surprise.

tinyclanger2 wrote:Likewise. Also my dad's fault.

My Dad's excuse for supporting Man Utd was he was Scottish. Apparently if you're Scottish you can support your local team (which we do) and then support whatever English team you like. I just think he fancied George Best.

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/education- ... ssion=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As previously mentioned the about face from harm to put them in institutions/care of strangers is really quite amazing.


(Appropriation of "choice" for Governmental aims)

To be fair I don't think my dad would have stood much of a chance against the likes of Carolyn Moore, who was miss Great Britain in 1971 and friend of George's.



You don't want to be that close to a gas fire in nylon leopard print. Trust me.

You would think she could have afforded a seat of some sort of even a beanbag.

And some clothes

I could have been decamped into an institution at the taxpayers expense,thankfully my parents wouldn't countenance it.

Why have children and then do your best not to see them,a strange phenomenon to me.

Went to nursery,my mum worked there,she covered all angles.

No concession for parents of disabled children by the way.Similar to the move to "appropriate"housing.The fact that it doesn't exist is a mere detail in "universal" application.

The market will (not)provide

Products are (not)available etc

HindleA wrote:You would think she could have afforded a seat of some sort of even a beanbag.

Some kind of poof would surely have sufficed.

HindleA wrote:Why have children and then do your best not to see them,a strange phenomenon to me.

I did it the other way round for a few years and enjoyed some of the best Christmases I've ever had.

Sky'sGoneOut wrote:

HindleA wrote:You would think she could have afforded a seat of some sort of even a beanbag.

Some kind of poof would surely have sufficed.

"Nay,nay and thrice nay"

Maybe moving twenty odd times made us cling more together.


PTO