Brexit.

[heganboy]

There is a shot that a heavy defeat for May could result in no Brexit at all.

Interesting at the weekend to hear some Armagh farmers saying they would have a better deal and a louder voice on a "single island". Which is obviously a very different thing than a United Ireland. The ceasefire in the North, the death of McGuinness and the step away from Adams have made this a topic which can be discussed in public and given serious conversation. I didn't hear the word Lundy once.

[Kidder81]

Brexit is dead. May is expected to lose the vote by 200 and Parliament will not allow
No deal to happen. Neither will the EU. The Tories are fucked

So are Labour under Corbyn, who doesn't appear to stand for anything, unless DUP-like it's contrary to the Tories.

Don't ever, ever underestimate the electorate's ability to do something stupid. I've long argued for a meritocracy whereby only educated, literate, gainfully-employed, properly sentient beings are allowed to vote. 

Bit concerning that Corbyn doesent seem to understand the single market and customs union. He really doesent have the first notion

Bit concerning that people are focused on blaming Corbyn for a problem created by the Tories and completely fucked up by the Tories. Corbyn is clear on how Britain needs to be rebooted. Brexit is actually a side show in many ways because lots of people are already fcuked in Britain. And whether Brexit happens or not that won't change under the Tories. I think Corbyn's understanding on many issues over the years has proven to be spot on when many others were completely wrong. The most important thing Britain needs is a change of government.

Ah come on now, Corbyn doesent even have a position on Brexit. He was asked yesterday 7 times by Andrew Marr if he would back a people's vote or renegotiate Brexit. He is a Brexiteer. He is remarkably uninformed on the one issue that is the only show in town, which is astonishing. This is the worst government in my memory and Labour are trailing in the polls.

[Main Street]

Sf's 7 mps would have zero influence in the commons. The SNP have 35 and did have over 50 and what exactly has that done for them?

With a few Tory abstentions 7 would be the clincher
None of the Shinner objections make sense. They don't have to swear loyalty to the Queen. SD'P didn't.
They could build political relationships with sympathetic Scottish, Welsh and Labour politicians.
They are stuck in a trap they built for themselves.

They do, Seafoid. And the SDLP MPs did. Northern nationalism has made it clear it is not the slightest bit interested in being represented in the British parliament, end of.

Here's the facts Seafoid or you can listen to red hander who spouts the SF line verbatim.

https://mobile.twitter.com/markdurkan/status/1067124640164864001?lang=en

Jog on, ye clown. I haven't voted Sinn Fein in over 20 years. What I spout is a republican line, not all republicans are Sinn Fein voters

Mark Durkan did not swear an oath of allegiance to the queen, instead he affirmed an allegiance to the queen. Is there a difference? I think not.

Mark Durcan's stunt was that of a poor man's cute hoor, not fit to lace the boots of the original cute hoor , de Valera.
The hue and cry over the oath in the anglo irish treaty  was a false cause celebre for the anti treaty side and inflamed by Dev himself. Fwiw, Dev and all TDs in 1927  were not required to swear an oath or affirm allegiance to the monarch. Dev being one of the original authors of that oath knew that but in an environment of post civil war hostilities, managed to fake outrage over the requirement to take the oath, however by overtly using crafty subterfuge,  he stage manage avoidance --  the uncrowned king of cute hoors.

[Franko]

Brexit is dead. May is expected to lose the vote by 200 and Parliament will not allow
No deal to happen. Neither will the EU. The Tories are fucked

So are Labour under Corbyn, who doesn't appear to stand for anything, unless DUP-like it's contrary to the Tories.

Don't ever, ever underestimate the electorate's ability to do something stupid. I've long argued for a meritocracy whereby only educated, literate, gainfully-employed, properly sentient beings are allowed to vote. 

Bit concerning that Corbyn doesent seem to understand the single market and customs union. He really doesent have the first notion

Bit concerning that people are focused on blaming Corbyn for a problem created by the Tories and completely fucked up by the Tories. Corbyn is clear on how Britain needs to be rebooted. Brexit is actually a side show in many ways because lots of people are already fcuked in Britain. And whether Brexit happens or not that won't change under the Tories. I think Corbyn's understanding on many issues over the years has proven to be spot on when many others were completely wrong. The most important thing Britain needs is a change of government.

Nobody is blaming Corbyn for the problem, they are criticising his response.  Nobody is in any doubt as to who created the problem but people (rightly IMO) see his weak response as exacerbating it.

I had such high hopes for Corbyn when he started but I can't help but feel that he has been a total let down.  I thought he was going to be a straight-talking truth-to-power type guy who was going to make change happen.  He hasn't made any change happen.  Brexit is THE single biggest issue in politics at the moment and he hasn't got a clear position on it.  He needs to take a stance.  If that is pro-Brexit, so be it.  He will be going against the prevailing opinion of his own party members though and I think he will pay for it at the ballot box.

IMO Brexit is going to reduce living standards for a generation in this country.  I think Corbyn sees this as a necessary evil so he can take power and implement his socialist policies, away from the prying eyes of the uber capitalist EU.  It sounds good in principle, but impoverishing a generation of people is too high a price to pay to attain it.

[imtommygunn]

I agree with your first 2 paragraphs but not your 3rd one as I don't think he is being cynical here.

I would have been all for Corbyn too. If he was strong he'd be in power. Instead we have the tories who probably have a number of top people who'll get very rich of this directing already poor people to become even poorer. Corbyn has no real clear stance on what he thinks about Brexit. He offers very little in the way of alternatives. He was the person who I would have hoped would have offered something here but he has offered nothing.

The tories and Farage created this mess but they couldn't care less about "common" people so you never would have held out any hope for them. I held out some hope for Corbyn and find he has been a huge let down and to be honest Labour need to get rid. There is a smear campaign against him yes but not because of that because he will never ever see a better chance to take the bull by the horns and he couldn't do it. It's not just that he couldn't do it but it's the complete lack of decisiveness to do anything.

[mackers]

His call for a general election smacks of political opportunism also. A GE will muddy the waters further.  Brexit is too big an issue to be solved with a GE.  At least FF in the south have said they will not force a GE there until Brexit is tidied up.  From the outside looking in it looks like they are putting the future of the country ahead of party gain (no doubt there may be a more cynical reason for it but at least what they are doing looks less cynical than what Corbyn's at).

[Walter Cronc]

Surely its a matter of time before Kier Starmer takes over and is the next Labour PM.

In moments like these you think back to what ifs regarding the two Milliband brothers!!

[Franko]

I agree with your first 2 paragraphs but not your 3rd one as I don't think he is being cynical here.

I would have been all for Corbyn too. If he was strong he'd be in power. Instead we have the tories who probably have a number of top people who'll get very rich of this directing already poor people to become even poorer. Corbyn has no real clear stance on what he thinks about Brexit. He offers very little in the way of alternatives. He was the person who I would have hoped would have offered something here but he has offered nothing.

The tories and Farage created this mess but they couldn't care less about "common" people so you never would have held out any hope for them. I held out some hope for Corbyn and find he has been a huge let down and to be honest Labour need to get rid. There is a smear campaign against him yes but not because of that because he will never ever see a better chance to take the bull by the horns and he couldn't do it. It's not just that he couldn't do it but it's the complete lack of decisiveness to do anything.

Genuine question.  What do you think is the reasoning behind his (lack of) position on this?

I'm really struggling to work out why he has such a laissez faire attitude to the whole thing.  All I can come up with is what I said above.  Would be really happy to be corrected as to his motives.

[Walter Cronc]

I agree with your first 2 paragraphs but not your 3rd one as I don't think he is being cynical here.

I would have been all for Corbyn too. If he was strong he'd be in power. Instead we have the tories who probably have a number of top people who'll get very rich of this directing already poor people to become even poorer. Corbyn has no real clear stance on what he thinks about Brexit. He offers very little in the way of alternatives. He was the person who I would have hoped would have offered something here but he has offered nothing.

The tories and Farage created this mess but they couldn't care less about "common" people so you never would have held out any hope for them. I held out some hope for Corbyn and find he has been a huge let down and to be honest Labour need to get rid. There is a smear campaign against him yes but not because of that because he will never ever see a better chance to take the bull by the horns and he couldn't do it. It's not just that he couldn't do it but it's the complete lack of decisiveness to do anything.

Genuine question.  What do you think is the reasoning behind his (lack of) position on this?

I'm really struggling to work out why he has such a laissez faire attitude to the whole thing.  All I can come up with is what I said above.  Would be really happy to be corrected as to his motives.

He's that genuine and actually dislikes the EU and what it stands for - whilst at the same time can't be seen to support it? Thats my only guess which makes little sense either.

[imtommygunn]

I agree with your first 2 paragraphs but not your 3rd one as I don't think he is being cynical here.

I would have been all for Corbyn too. If he was strong he'd be in power. Instead we have the tories who probably have a number of top people who'll get very rich of this directing already poor people to become even poorer. Corbyn has no real clear stance on what he thinks about Brexit. He offers very little in the way of alternatives. He was the person who I would have hoped would have offered something here but he has offered nothing.

The tories and Farage created this mess but they couldn't care less about "common" people so you never would have held out any hope for them. I held out some hope for Corbyn and find he has been a huge let down and to be honest Labour need to get rid. There is a smear campaign against him yes but not because of that because he will never ever see a better chance to take the bull by the horns and he couldn't do it. It's not just that he couldn't do it but it's the complete lack of decisiveness to do anything.

Genuine question.  What do you think is the reasoning behind his (lack of) position on this?

I'm really struggling to work out why he has such a laissez faire attitude to the whole thing.  All I can come up with is what I said above.  Would be really happy to be corrected as to his motives.

You raise a good question and I am not sure of the answer but to be totally honest I think a lack of competence comes into it. That and a lack of conviction. He doesn't like the EU which I would expect of people of his kind of belief system but he just isn't competent enough to try and come up with an answer(though to be fair none of them are).

I just don't think he would be cynical enough to let things fall to shit to get into power. I could be very wrong on that and he could be like every other politician about mind you...

[omaghjoe]

I agree with your first 2 paragraphs but not your 3rd one as I don't think he is being cynical here.

I would have been all for Corbyn too. If he was strong he'd be in power. Instead we have the tories who probably have a number of top people who'll get very rich of this directing already poor people to become even poorer. Corbyn has no real clear stance on what he thinks about Brexit. He offers very little in the way of alternatives. He was the person who I would have hoped would have offered something here but he has offered nothing.

The tories and Farage created this mess but they couldn't care less about "common" people so you never would have held out any hope for them. I held out some hope for Corbyn and find he has been a huge let down and to be honest Labour need to get rid. There is a smear campaign against him yes but not because of that because he will never ever see a better chance to take the bull by the horns and he couldn't do it. It's not just that he couldn't do it but it's the complete lack of decisiveness to do anything.

Genuine question.  What do you think is the reasoning behind his (lack of) position on this?

I'm really struggling to work out why he has such a laissez faire attitude to the whole thing.  All I can come up with is what I said above.  Would be really happy to be corrected as to his motives.

He's that genuine and actually dislikes the EU and what it stands for - whilst at the same time can't be seen to support it? Thats my only guess which makes little sense either.

He's a fundamentalist at heart who has opposed the UN from the beginning. That and his left wing base of which include both the Marxists and the disgruntled working class oppose the EU.
Tho he cant come out against it as most Labour are remainers.

Pragmatism is not his strong point

[Hound]

It's crying out for a leading politician on either side (Tory or Labour) to come up with something like:

Yes, the EU has a lot of problems and a lot of drawbacks, but we're still far better inside it, gaining all the benefits of membership and trying to make changes from within rather than looking in from outside.
If we remain, we'll continue to adopt EU laws we agree with (the vast majority) but opt out of the ones we do not agree with (tax harmonisation, the euro, etc). 

Unfortunately Corbyn is completely idealogically against the EU, despite what EU rules and regulations have done for workers' rights. If the UK had never joined the EU, the firing of workers would likely nearly be as easy in the UK as it is in the US.

[JohnDenver]

I agree with your first 2 paragraphs but not your 3rd one as I don't think he is being cynical here.

I would have been all for Corbyn too. If he was strong he'd be in power. Instead we have the tories who probably have a number of top people who'll get very rich of this directing already poor people to become even poorer. Corbyn has no real clear stance on what he thinks about Brexit. He offers very little in the way of alternatives. He was the person who I would have hoped would have offered something here but he has offered nothing.

The tories and Farage created this mess but they couldn't care less about "common" people so you never would have held out any hope for them. I held out some hope for Corbyn and find he has been a huge let down and to be honest Labour need to get rid. There is a smear campaign against him yes but not because of that because he will never ever see a better chance to take the bull by the horns and he couldn't do it. It's not just that he couldn't do it but it's the complete lack of decisiveness to do anything.

Genuine question.  What do you think is the reasoning behind his (lack of) position on this?

I'm really struggling to work out why he has such a laissez faire attitude to the whole thing.  All I can come up with is what I said above.  Would be really happy to be corrected as to his motives.

IMO Corbyn is no mug - he's more or less stuck between a rock and a hard place, as if there was a general election, he would need to be winning seats in areas which are currently pro-leave. So he can't be seen to alienate either population at the minute and more or less needs to saddle the fence.

That's my take on it, but sure it's politics - who knows what amount of skullduggery goes on behind the scenes

[Franko]

Three options are on the table at the minute.

No Deal
May's Deal
Remain

Corbyn is against all three.  The EU have said repeatedly that there will be no renegotiation of the deal yet he keeps saying that's what he's going to do.  His position is every bit as ludicrous as the ERG's.

It pains me to say it but he needs to front up or move aside.  Blind ideology got us into this mess.  Time to get dispense with the ideologues and and let the pragmatists take the reins.

[Hardy]

It's crying out for a leading politician on either side (Tory or Labour) to come up with something like:

Yes, the EU has a lot of problems and a lot of drawbacks, but we're still far better inside it, gaining all the benefits of membership and trying to make changes from within rather than looking in from outside.
If we remain, we'll continue to adopt EU laws we agree with (the vast majority) but opt out of the ones we do not agree with (tax harmonisation, the euro, etc). 

Unfortunately Corbyn is completely idealogically against the EU, despite what EU rules and regulations have done for workers' rights. If the UK had never joined the EU, the firing of workers would likely nearly be as easy in the UK as it is in the US.

... and will be if they leave - it's what Brexit is substantially about. That's why I can't forgive Corbyn's refusal to do his job and work to stop Brexit in the interest of the people he purports to represent.