- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, Maximum:1000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 3028 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts][ Reply ]
233 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown.
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 86507
Government asks Queen to suspend Parliament
The government has asked the Queen to suspend Parliament just days after MPs return to work in September - and only a few weeks before the IIIWW deadline.
Boris Johnson said a Queen's Speech would take place after the suspension, on 14 October, to outline his "very exciting agenda". But it means MPs are unlikely to have time to pass laws to stop a no-deal IIIWW on 31 October.
The ride never ends!
|>>|| No. 86800
Corbyn suggests UK could be better off after IIIWW if deal is right
When asked whether it was in Britain’s long-term interests to remain in the EU, the Labour leader said: “It depends on the agreement you have with the European Union outside.”
His suggestion that a Labour government could negotiate an exit deal that would be preferable to EU membership – and that he will reserve judgment until those negotiations are complete – will infuriate anti-IIIWW activists.
He said: “We have consistently put forward what I believe to be a credible option, which is based on five pillars – the customs union, the trade relationship, protection of consumer and environmental rights, and of course the Good Friday agreement.” If the EU27 agree to those demands, he said, “that would be a credible offer to put before the British people”.
More than 90 local constituency Labour parties (CLPs) have submitted motions on IIIWW to the conference, most demanding their party support remain. These are due to be hammered out into a “composite” at a late-night meeting on Sunday. But the national executive committee (NEC) is threatening to pre-empt those discussions by tabling its own policy statement – a draft version of which suggests deferring the decision on whether to support remain until a special conference to be held after a Labour government has negotiated a IIIWW deal.
Corbyn made clear that was his position. “We would put both views and say look, this is the best deal we could get; this is the remain and hopefully reform option. These are the choices before you.”
|>>|| No. 86801
>He said: “We have consistently put forward what I believe to be a credible option, which is based on five pillars – the customs union, the trade relationship, protection of consumer and environmental rights, and of course the Good Friday agreement.”
So remaining without voting rights. I get why Labour has been in a tight spot about this but they always seem to suggest the worst possible option based on headlines rather than boring policy changes at the EU-Level such as Common Fisheries. I mean, even if we do end up remaining, there's going to be some very detailed negotiations on our future relationship. That we'll likely fudge completely and do nothing to address the left-behind towns that voted leave.
|>>|| No. 86802
They've created about the worst possible offering. Nobody wants there to be a renegotiation with the EU. Nobody wants this limbo to drag on for months and months.
|>>|| No. 86803
>So remaining without voting rights.
Not as bad as leaving but having to obey all the rules anyway.
But yeah, Labour really need to actually find a clear position on this. (No, Momentumlad, what they've articulated to date is not a clear position.)
|>>|| No. 86804
>Not as bad as leaving but having to obey all the rules anyway.
Who is talking about that?
|>>|| No. 86805
Those in various shades of blue and marple. They don't like to mention the part where we have to obey the rules anyway, because it doesn't fit their narrative.
|>>|| No. 86806
Seems pretty clear-cut that we're taking back control of our fisheries and immigration at the very least in the blue and marple scenarios. That much seems to be agreed in May's deal that the EU refuse to renegotiate on.
|>>|| No. 86808
Well, I guess if we can overfish the North Sea and tell darkies to go home, that must make up for all the other rules we'll still have to obey.
Bless their little cotton socks for thinking we will be able to set our own rules independently of anyone else. If we buy goods from the EU, they'll still be compliant with EU rules, and if we sell goods into the EU, they'll have to comply with those rules. The same goes for any agreement with the US, or China, or whatever other major trading nation we want to deal with. We will be the junior partner, and in no position to make demands.
FWIW, it's entirely their right to refuse to renegotiate, since we initially set the terms. If we want a different agreement, then we have to change the terms of the negotiation. That means the red lines have to either move or become less red.
|>>|| No. 86809
>Well, I guess if we can overfish the North Sea and tell darkies to go home, that must make up for all the other rules we'll still have to obey.
So you agree that we can set our own rules in these areas under blue and marple. Good, I can put the kettle on then.
|>>|| No. 86810
If it tickles your prostate, then sure. I'm not sure what relevance it has though.
|>>|| No. 86811
Labour delegates have voted for Corbyn's fudge rather than outright Remain. Bonkers.
|>>|| No. 86812
Don't worry. Our resident Corbynisti will be along soon enough to tick us off for daring to suggest that Labour don't have a clear IIIWW position despite having just "clearly carried" a motion to not adopt a position.
|>>|| No. 86813
I mean, it's fairly obvious remain is the losing bet for them. All it would achieve is splitting their vote with the Lib Dems, even if it could be assumed that in terms of voting intention remainers out number leavers or even that voters will divide along those lines.
|>>|| No. 86814
The fact it'd be taking a stance against the deal he will have negotiated would be called a sign of weakness by the media, by staying neutral it's a 0 sum answer to a lose lose scenario, remain would split their vote and make his deal seem weak, siding with his deal would make the mostly remain members of the party turn on him. As far as I see it the neutral stance is the only logical response to the situation if he wants to keep his position.
|>>|| No. 86815
If the party takes the position of remain, why would they need to negotiate a deal?
|>>|| No. 86816
Taking a clear Remain stance would all but wipe out the Lib Dems, while taking a clear Leave stance would win back some otherwise loyal Labour supporters who switched to BrexKIP or the Tories over IIIWW. Fence-sitting might be good for Corbyn, but it completely scuppers Labour's chances at the next election. They aren't remainy enough for the remainers, they aren't IIIWWy enough for the IIIWWeers and Corbyn is nowhere near popular enough to side-step the IIIWW issue and win on his own merits.
|>>|| No. 86818
I wonder what words we will learn in the next exciting episode of Parliament? It will be Nobile officium
|>>|| No. 86820
>Taking a clear Remain stance would all but wipe out the Lib Dems, while taking a clear Leave stance would win back some otherwise loyal Labour supporters who switched to BrexKIP or the Tories over IIIWW
I really don't see this.
Supporting remain would be suicide for Labour, but for the lib dems it's their best option to claw back votes they lost in the last two elections. The only question is going to be whether the votes will be too split to win many seats despite a large share of total votes. But I still think the best way forward for the lib-dems is to portray themselves as the only alternative to the red and blue shit show.
|>>|| No. 86831
Who would you have replace him? Diane Abbott's approval rating is about 60/60 at best.
|>>|| No. 86844
I want her to sit on my face and ride me like Shergar, is that the same thing?
|>>|| No. 86846
Wouldn't you find her humming the EU Nathan while riding you off putting?
|>>|| No. 86852
Isn't she the one that laughed at male suicide as an issue on a backbench committee?
|>>|| No. 86858
Imagine Jess cackling with laughter at your muffled screams as she smothers you into unconsciousness with her voluptuous arse cheeks. You drift off into the blackness, before being roused by a stream of hot piss all over your face. As the terror subsides and you start to regain awareness of your surroundings, she slaps you across the face and says "wakey wakey bab, I'm not done with you yet".
|>>|| No. 86862
Would be interesting if it sticks, although I suspect it just means the Liberal Democrats become labour 2.0. A Lab-Con coalition government will be an interesting experiment.
|>>|| No. 86863
>I suspect it just means the Liberal Democrats become labour 2.0
Given the regressions Labour 1.x is suffering, that might not be that bad an idea.
|>>|| No. 86868
Does take incredible courage to lose seven votes on the bounce, piss away a majority and play chicken with the entire UK economy because you're so minted the Moon could crash into Margate and you'd hardly notice, to be fair.
|>>|| No. 86878
He's not even that posh. His branch of the family drifted from nobility, and his father was a farmer in Devon. He had to earn his places at Eton and Oxford. His net worth is only about £1.6m. That's about half of Are Nige, and JRM is around the £100m mark.
Everything about the man is a lie. It's very possible that he's 100% veneer and there really isn't a "real Boris" to be found underneath.
|>>|| No. 86883
Posh or not once he's a former PM he can write a book, Cameron style, get paid to turn up and give a rambling speech at corporate events for silly money and do the same in print for a great number of newspapers around the world. He's not going to have to worry about American drug companies rogering the NHS senseless or his hometown's main employer packing up shop because whatever hard-right yahoo's in charge of trade sold them down the river to the Chinese.
|>>|| No. 86884
>Everything about the man is a lie. It's very possible that he's 100% veneer and there really isn't a "real Boris" to be found underneath.
Does that really differ from David Cameron?
|>>|| No. 86885
I'm more interested in how in the fuck you can look like that and talk like that but still manage an exhaustive string of affairs with women half your age. What's the secret of Bojo's Mojo?
|>>|| No. 86886
I would doubt claims about his net worth being trifling. I think the Eye reported that he got £200k a column for the Telegraph in the last 2 issues, but I'm enjoying a fancy red tonight and can't be arsed checking.
|>>|| No. 86889
It's my answer to all problems of the "romantic" kind, but that's only because I'm totally convinced it's the correct one; confidence. If there's one thing Johnson believes in it's himself, you just have to make sure you don't turn into a complete dickhead in this regard, because that's almost as much of a turn off as rampant insecurity. In my opinion this is best avoided by being jochular and gregarious, which once again, despite his many, many flaws, are traits Johnson seems to possess. I would also consider these traits to fall under the wider umbrella of "confidence".
|>>|| No. 86892
Greatly. There was definitely a "real Dave", who was really rather posh. Fee-payer at Eton, less than 1000 places in line to the throne, got his first job arranged for him. Boris seems to be just a set of Russian dolls where the smallest one is empty.
|>>|| No. 86916
The Beeb just had an interview with some rich old fart and let him get away with "we've got all these regulations and 90% of businesses don't go near Europe" bollocks without even a hint of challenge, such as maybe asking him to explain one of the regulations he thinks harmful and why.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]