Some joke surely? What's happening in the House is a disaster for people who support the EU, with May being given a free hand to do what she wants, and Labour offering no opposition. The Lords daren't make anything other than tiny tweaks to A50 given that the unamended bill got a majority of nearly 500 in the other place. And you can't really claim that the media is giving the pro-EU argument a fair hearing, can you?
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Some joke surely? What's happening in the House is a disaster for people who support the EU, with May being given a free hand to do what she wants, and Labour offering no opposition. The Lords daren't make anything other than tiny tweaks to A50 given that the unamended bill got a majority of nearly 500 in the other place. And you can't really claim that the media is giving the pro-EU argument a fair hearing, can you?
MPs in the house are doing exactly what they should, they've quite thoroughly and at length repeatedly laid out their concerns but at the same time voted to respect the referendum result. Voting to respect the referendum is not the same thing as offering no opposition.
May will do what she wants, she's got a majority.
Blair putting his PR expertise on what MPs are already saying wont change anything.
He couldn't even resist getting in a bit of xenophobia/racism as well. He's a fecking cnut.
I'm not sure how people can say opposition to Brexit is going well when in the space of a few months, hard Brexit has become the default option. The only real "victory" that's been won is forcing a vote to occur in the Commons, which itself basically just resulted in the Opposition looking ridiculous again. May has absolutely no threat from her left so is happy hoovering up all lapsing Ukippers to her right.
Suggesting that a prime minister can do as they please if they have a majority is a obviously not true. PMs know that if they fail to meet the wishes of the public too much for too long, they're dead meat. A PMs power comes from public approval.
May knows she has to satisfy the public's expectations on Brexit. As such the battle for what kind of Brexit we see is as much about winning over the public as it is winning in the House.
Those expectations come in part from what people see and hear in the press. And all they've seen and heard for 7 months is what the hard Brexiteers have been saying. The pro-Eu argument has been nowhere. Whether that's advocating for staying in the EU if the deal is bad, or wanting a close relationship the EU in the deal, it flows from the same argument.
Leaving on WTO terms should be the ultimate red line. The idea that it would be better to do that than stay in the EU is anathema to Remainers. And yet if we sit back and blithely allow the pro-Brexiteers to dominate the landscape, then as we approach end of negotiations, if May doesn't get a good deal (a very real possibility) then people will think it's a decent backup option.
As we saw with A50, sitting back to wait and see what happens doesn't work. Your opponents set the agenda. We need to be making the argument clearly all the way along. And right no, no-ones doing that.
He could make more money without doing this
Call me a sucker but I reckon Blair just gives a shit, I'd do the same in his shoes. The opposition is dead and does need a poster boy, lib dems are useless. There could maybe be someone better than Blair but he is a damn sight better than Boris, Gove and Farage.
Blair without the Iraq fiasco - where do we reckon his legacy would stand?
He'd still have a tonne of economic negatives, many of which have come to the surface since his departure from office. You can also trace issues regarding devolution and the EU back to the days of New Labour. And given Blair'ss mindset on overseas intervention, the chances are that we'd have sent British forces somewhere else.
Just make sure he always stands behind a small wall so nobody can see the blood stained money overflowing his pockets.
Perhaps arguably in a similar manner to Thatcher - one of the greatest PM's we've had if you like him, towards the opposite end if not. Arguably contributed to some of the problems we have now but largely led an era of relative prosperity, at least in his first term or two. I'd take him in a heartbeat over Cameron or May.
It was a great speech and I think Blair is well aware that people will dismiss it simply because it was made by him, but he has stepped in because no-one else is doing so.
Given the circumstances today, if Trump decides to invade a nation with the blessing of nations such as Saudi and he asks the UK to join, do you honestly think that Global Britain would refuse? Its very easy to condemn Blair, but you mustn't forget that back then the US was lead by a similar cry baby to Trump. The US had bailed the UK in two world wars, it enjoys a great financial relationship with the US and the US treats the UK as an equal rather then some country whose 1/3 of Texas for the mere reason that its a partner the US can depend on. I was anti Iraqi war but I must admit that the pressure for the UK to join that war was ridiculously high.
The funny thing is that one one hand Brexiteers ridicule Blair for caving in to Bush and on the other hand they pushed this country in a situation when they simply have to cave in to the US because they don't really have a choice. During Blair's administration the UK was a proud member of the EU. That gave the UK unrestricted access to the single market. Brexit Britain is desperate for a deal with the US because to give them some credibility in the world fora.
The funny thing is that one one hand Brexiteers ridicule Blair for caving in to Bush and on the other hand they pushed this country in a situation when they simply have to cave in to the US because they don't really have a choice. During Blair's administration the UK was a proud member of the EU. That gave the UK unrestricted access to the single market. Brexit Britain is desperate for a deal with the US because to give them some credibility in the world fora.
Have you been on holiday?
You have a point sure, but Trump is a a whole different kind of fish to Blair or any other western leader in modern history. Resistance to any decision by him to invade a country would be monumental in the UK and anywhere else. Blair could go with Bush cos he had the support of the British people. Maybe he lied to do it but in the wake of 911 it was easy enough for him to gather enough support either way. Trump can't make a valid argument for anything. Unless there are clear-cut reasons to take action somewhere like NK starting nuclear war or something, I don't think there is any chance a British PM could support Trump in a war.
Good analysis, quite a contrast.
I was thinking about it yesterday after Unmutual said similar and it's true, there really is no-one of stature left to make the case. So depressing.
Whilst there's no doubt a lot of truth in the points regarding the Liberal and Tory destabilisation of Labour, the platform for the SNP to destroy Labour began long ago in the 90s with tuition fees and was completed when the invasion of Iraq.
Quite simply, to hit the political middle ground in England Labour had to move so right they were no longer representave of general Scottish public opinion. This is an issue in lots of England too, but in Scotland the SNP saw a gap and they filled it. Labour are dead in Scotland even though, ironically, they now have a leaser who, Eurosceptiscism aside, would have been more popular because they are seen to have betrayed lots of core values that Labour were meant to have when in government.
This also fuels the independance movement in Scotland, because if you go through all those years of Tory governments, to then get a disapointingly right wing Labour, followed by a series of increasingly right wing governments and populist movements in England it starts to seem that the only escape is constitutional change. In short, the nationalist movement in Scotland is broadly driven by the left (and that will lead to problems soon enough as nationalist and left wing principles are not natural bedfellows).
Because, unbelievably considering how far he got and how far he has been since, he has absolutely zero self awareness.
Self awareness isn't a money maker or blood lust satisifier so he's not interested in acquiring any.
Nonsense. Trump isn't similar to anyone. I'm no fan of Bush but what you mean by cry baby I have no idea.
Well thank heavens for that.
He might not has been as lunatic then Trump was but George W was hardly the brighest bulb around. His invasion of Iraq was purely to finish what daddy started and he was determined to do so as much as Trump is determined to push his immigration ban
Honestly! its come to this?
its called history mate and as a person who comes from a former British colony who also won the George Cross for valour it hurts me as much as it might hurt to you. The Nazis were beaten by the Russians and the US saved Europe from the Russians. Without the Russians we would be speaking German by now. Without the US we would probably be communists. Poor Jeremy C, he was that close to achieve his dream
Last edited:
Trump has no precedent.
Is he?
He's an idiot. Check
He's determined to stick to his idiotic plan. Check
He's a self entitled prick who has no idea of governing. Check
I dare to say that Trump is better then Bush. The latter was a war monger. The former is a capitalist pig. Both were/are very determined to push their plans. Oh well, it depends what you prefer really.
What does change a little is that back then the UK could stand up to the US. Sure the US would be pissed off by it. After all they did bailed the UK in two world wars and they do alot of business together. Some bridges might even get burnt in the process which will be quickly been built once Obama came to power. However the UK would survive because it had unrestricted access to the single market. Idiot wasn't liked by most European countries too so the UK would have found good company in doing that. Which leads to my question. If Trump does a Bush can the UK truly show the middle finger at him? We've already seeing the British Trump changing opinion from 'not going to New York to avoid Trump' to something way more friendly. That's something Brexiters should think about before criticizing Blair
Don't take me wrong, I am not a big fan of his either
No, I know you're not! I just don't think he's meaningfully comparable to any recent White House administration.
People tend to have very short memories. That's the problem with them.
Yesterday I spend hours debating with my own countrymen who think that Hitler might have had a point in starting the whole shit up. They would say that people had the right of self determination, that Hitler never wanted a war with Britain and that the real enemy were the Russians not the Germans. If that discussion happened just a generation before then I assure you that they would have ended up having to pick their teeth right from the floor. Now we've got olive skinned Maltese whom you would barely recognise them from Arabs who think they are frigging Aryans. Their grandparents would be ashamed of them if they were still alive.
Bush was a bloody idiot and a warmonger who left a world that is far more dangerous then he found it.
Unless you are suggesting that Brown should take a greater share of the blame, i don't think there's a great deal to argue. And in large part, the basis for the prosperity was a gift of the times.
Having actually read the article, the proposal isn't all that controversial. We continue to use mixed range of measurements after all.
You could replace 'He' with 'Brussels', and the spirit of your point cold work just as well yo know.
Those retired people can finally use them again for the last 5 or 10 years of their life.
When I was a butcher we used to deal in pounds and ounces for the older customers still. We just used to convert it for them.
There's nothing stopping the UK using Imperial measures now, as long as the metric equivalent is shown bolder.
If, however, they plan on only using imperial measures in the future, then they won't be exporting anything as everything would have to be labelled in metric.
Same applies for EU rules on exports to the EU.
Basically, therefore, nothing will change.
he must not understand how much a lot of people hate him, while he doesn't provoke the utter hate Thatcher did among some, their is still a large portion of the population think the guy should be in prison.
The idea that he thinks he is the man to front a movement like this is hilarious, he will put people off more then inspire.
It's almost enough to make me vote UKIP to be honest and I'm a liberal europhile.
We'll be able to export to the US though won't we?
A US gallon is not the same as a UK gallon
Also all shipping is done in metric so.... no.
Didn't know that so thank you Paul.A US gallon is not the same as a UK gallon
Also all shipping is done in metric so.... no.