Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
The absolute cheek of Leadsom trying to paint this tactic as anything other than underhand.

I don't think I've seen parliament at such a low. This will never reach the news highlights but 99% of MPs who have spoken have been genuinly outraged at the tactics. Both sides.

Can any of our older members remember anything quite like this?

On the plus side my Tory MP (booo) gave her a rinsing, i may have to write a letter of congratulation
 
I mean, this is literally 19 out of every 20 people just rinsing the government for their utter contempt of just about everyone in parliament and everyone in this country apart from the “gerronrivvittt” crew.
 
Dobba said:
Then why isn't Chuka or any of the other letter signers doing it then? Why aren't you asking them the same question?
Click to expand...

Ah, good, we're onto whataboutism.

There was my thinking the leader of the opposition should get some criticism for not opposing.

The obvious answer is that Corbyn is in charge of 257 MPs. If he's refusing to make supporting a no confidence motion Labour policy why would you think that there would be any realistic chance of it succeeding?

If you're genuinely asking why they're not getting as much criticism as a person who is in with a general chance of actually succeeding in stopping this madness then I don't know what to say.
 
Dobba said:
So why aren't any of the names on that list pushing for the vote themselves?
Click to expand...
I imagine it's something to do with the current leadership of the Labour party, the official opposition that control the whip for another 200-odd MPs, saying they won't back one yet.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Ah, good, we're onto whataboutism.

There was my thinking the leader of the opposition should get some criticism for not opposing.

The obvious answer is that Corbyn is in charge of 257 MPs. If he's refusing to make supporting a no confidence motion Labour policy why would you think that there would be any realistic chance of it succeeding?

If you're genuinely asking why they're not getting as much criticism as a person who is in with a general chance of actually succeeding in stopping this madness then I don't know what to say.
Click to expand...
Pointing out that this list of people who are so eager for Corbyn to call a vote of no confidence, can do it themselves and are clearly so desperate for it to happen that none of them are going to, is whataboutism? :lol:
 
Dobba said:
A list of people who want Corbyn to call a vote of no confidence, when they can do it themselves and are clearly not going to, is whataboutism? :lol:
Click to expand...

Me: Corbyn should be criticised for not opposing Brexit.
You: What about Umunna?

Err, yes. It's a textbook example. Not that I didn't answer your question either and you've ignored that, anyway. Being evasive and slippery doesn't suit you.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Me: Corbyn should be criticised for not opposing Brexit.
You: What about Umunna?

Err, yes. It's a textbook example. Not that I didn't answer your question either and you've ignored that, anyway. Being evasive and slippery doesn't suit you.
Click to expand...
They want a vote of no confidence so badly, that they've all signed a bit of paper and had a photo of it tweeted out for them all to share. None of them. Not a single one of them has the guts (or looking at the numbers, utter fecking stupidity) to push for the vote in the Commons themselves, when they're just as entitled to do so and are clearly so genuinely behind the idea.

They're doing the very thing you're saying Corbyn is doing. The only difference is the latter is apparently the political coward for not calling for the vote for the exact same reasons as those on the list haven't done so.
 
Dobba said:
They want a vote of no confidence so badly, that they've all signed a bit of paper and had a photo of it tweeted out for them all to share. None of them. Not a single one of them has the guts (or looking at the numbers, utter fecking stupidity) to push for the vote in the Commons themselves, when they're just as entitled to do so and are clearly so genuinely behind the idea.

They're doing the very thing you're saying Corbyn is doing. The only difference is the latter is apparently the political coward for not calling for the vote for the exact same reasons as those on the list haven't done so.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you've missed it, it might be easy to do given his record, but Corbyn is the LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION.

If you can't really work it why he, above anyone else, might be singled out for failing to oppose , or why a group of 35 backbench MPs don't think it's worth calling a vote of no confidence when it's not Labour policy then god fecking help you. What was it you said earlier about people and fiddles? You'd argue the sky is green if Corbyn said it was.
 
Last edited:
NinjaFletch said:
I don't know if you've missed it, it might be easy to do given his record, but Corbyn is the LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION.

If you can't really work it why he, above anyone else, might be singled out for failing to oppose then, or why a group of 35 backbench MPs don't think it's worth calling a vote of no confidence when it's not Labour policy then god fecking help you. What was it you said earlier about people and fiddles? You'd argue the sky is green if Corbyn said it was.
Click to expand...
So you've gone from saying they might as well call the vote (regardless of the DUP backing her) because even if May wins, 'So what?' - to saying the list of names who haven't got the guts to call the vote themselves are right not to bother with it, because May will win?

So what?
 
rcoobc said:
Theresa may is going to try and make her deal palletable by getting some concessions on the backstop.

That won't be enough to get it through parliament

Then she's going to have to have to with one of the camps to present the deal in a referendum.

The question is, when will it take place (it won't take place before March, but that means it's taking place in March!! And what will be on the ballet paper.

Brexit2 referendum is now inevitable
Click to expand...
Two pirouettes and a grand pas de chat.
 
rcoobc said:
Theresa may is going to try and make her deal palletable by getting some concessions on the backstop.

That won't be enough to get it through parliament

Then she's going to have to have to with one of the camps to present the deal in a referendum.

The question is, when will it take place (it won't take place before March, but that means it's taking place in March!! And what will be on the ballet paper.

Brexit2 referendum is now inevitable
Click to expand...

I don’t think she’s going to make any concessions. There’s no more negotiating here. What she will do is spend the next few days negotiating on other issues in exchange for Brexit votes.

There will be promises of jobs, more money going to the DUP, concessions to other MP’s on single issues important to them/their constituents.

Brexit negotiations are done and she knows it. She’s going to pull every fecking trick in the book to get the votes to save her oily skin.
 
May's next move will be a referendum, with the choice of her deal or no deal, in an attempt to scare remain support to her deal. It's the only logical choice she has left now.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Me: Corbyn should be criticised for not opposing Brexit.
You: What about Umunna?

Err, yes. It's a textbook example. Not that I didn't answer your question either and you've ignored that, anyway. Being evasive and slippery doesn't suit you.
Click to expand...

Can I just point out that Labour are only doing what any opposition party should be doing and that is challenging the government.

Why should they try to force a confidence vote if they are not yet confident they can win it.
Their best tactic is to sit on their hands and let the government continue to unravel due to this self inflicted chaos.
 
Dobba said:
So you've gone from saying they might as well call the vote because even if May wins, 'So what?' - to saying the list of names who haven't got the guts to call the vote themselves are right not to bother with it, because May will win?
Click to expand...

I'll try one last time. If you still don't get it you never will:

1. Corbyn has nothing to lose by calling a vote of no confidence, because there is a realistic prospect that he will win it. With the declared support of the SNP, Lib Dems and Plaid Cmryu added to Labour votes there are divisions in the Conservative Party to win that vote. Labour might lose, but then it's on the likes of Soubry and Grieve to explain why they put party before country given what they've said to date.
2. If Corbyn calls that vote and May survives, there's nothing stopping him calling another vote of no confidence in 2 months time when May is defeated in the meaningful vote. If anything, precedent dictates that being defeated on such a key piece of legislation dictates a no- confidence vote is called.
3. There's no realistic prospect that a vote of no confidence could be passed without Labour's support so criticising Ummana for not motioning a symbolic vote himself is a completely different argument. It's at best deflection, and at worst you seem to be implying that Corbyn's authority and leadership is so weak that he'd either later decide to support that motion, or that Labour would reject the party's position on mass.
4. As Corbyn is leader of the opposition he should attract more criticism than a fecking backbencher for a failure to oppose demonstrably ruinous government policy.
 
Last edited:
Buster15 said:
Can I just point out that Labour are only doing what any opposition party should be doing and that is challenging the government.

Why should they try to force a confidence vote if they are not yet confident they can win it.
Their best tactic is to sit on their hands and let the government continue to unravel due to this self inflicted chaos.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, opposing government policy by *checks notes* going along with government policy.
 
Buster15 said:
Can I just point out that Labour are only doing what any opposition party should be doing and that is challenging the government.

Why should they try to force a confidence vote if they are not yet confident they can win it.
Their best tactic is to sit on their hands and let the government continue to unravel due to this self inflicted chaos.
Click to expand...
Fine, if this is your generic "government flailing around with one of their manifesto commitments" unravellings. But this one happens to be something that's going to shape the country for the next generation or two, and if it carries on descending into "chaos", self-inflicted by the Tories or not, we're all gonna pay.
 
NinjaFletch said:
I'll try one last time. If you still don't get it you never will:

1. Corbyn has nothing to lose by calling a vote of no confidence, because there is a realistic prospect that he will win it. With the declared support of the SNP, Lib Dems and Plaid Cmryu added to Labour votes there are divisions in the Conservative Party to win that vote. Labour might loose, but then it's on the likes of Soubry and Grieve to explain why they put party before country given what they've said to date.
2. If Corbyn calls that vote and May survives, there's nothing stopping him calling another vote of no confidence in 2 months time when May is defeated in the meaningful vote. If anything, precedent dictates that being defeated on such a key piece of legislation dictates a no- confidence vote is called.
3. There's no realistic prospect that a vote of no confidence could be passed without Labour's support so criticising Ummana for not motioning a symbolic vote himself is a completely different argument. It's at best deflection, and at worst you seem to be implying that Corbyn's authority and leadership is so weak that he'd either later decide to support that motion, or that Labour would reject the party's position on mass.
4. As Corbyn is leader of the opposition he should attract more opposition than a fecking backbencher for a failure to oppose demonstrably ruinous government policy.
Click to expand...
What a shambles eh? Politics on full display, disheartening and dishonest.... Disgraceful.
 
NinjaFletch said:
I'll try one last time. If you still don't get it you never will:

1. Corbyn has nothing to lose by calling a vote of no confidence, because there is a realistic prospect that he will win it. With the declared support of the SNP, Lib Dems and Plaid Cmryu added to Labour votes there are divisions in the Conservative Party to win that vote. Labour might loose, but then it's on the likes of Soubry and Grieve to explain why they put party before country given what they've said to date.
2. If Corbyn calls that vote and May survives, there's nothing stopping him calling another vote of no confidence in 2 months time when May is defeated in the meaningful vote. If anything, precedent dictates that being defeated on such a key piece of legislation dictates a no- confidence vote is called.
3. There's no realistic prospect that a vote of no confidence could be passed without Labour's support so criticising Ummana for not motioning a symbolic vote himself is a completely different argument. It's at best deflection, and at worst you seem to be implying that Corbyn's authority and leadership is so weak that he'd either later decide to support that motion, or that Labour would reject the party's position on mass.
4. As Corbyn is leader of the opposition he should attract more opposition than a fecking backbencher for a failure to oppose demonstrably ruinous government policy.
Click to expand...
Soubry will probably do it as easily as she managed to convince the people at the second People's Vote march that she's concerned about vulnerable people after Brexit, 3 days after she'd voted to keep the Universal Credit rollout risk assessment private. Or how she's managing to reinvent herself as a champion of the EU, despite voting once out of 15 attempts in favour of EU nationals' right to remain in the UK, to 12 times against and 3 times in favour of the UK's membership of the EU, to 13 times against it. Hell, Soubry took to James O'Brien's show on LBC to say she'd prefer a no-deal Brexit to a Labour government last week and People's Vote haven't disowned her yet. Grieve even managed to survive voting against his own amendment, so I can't see this being a problem for either of them.

Every single person on that list has been vocal in their complaints that Labour prioritise an election over a second referendum. The minute the results of the vote are read and May wins, it'll be a race to see which of them is the first to any TV or radio live microphone within a 50 mile radius to say "Look, we tried to get rid of May and we can't. Time for a second referendum". They know a no confidence vote now will lose, they want it to lose, they just don't want to be the ones who table it. They have absolutely no interest in getting rid of the Tories.
 
Ubik said:
Fine, if this is your generic "government flailing around with one of their manifesto commitments" unravellings. But this one happens to be something that's going to shape the country for the next generation or two, and if it carries on descending into "chaos", self-inflicted by the Tories or not, we're all gonna pay.
Click to expand...
That's precisely my view. I hate people saying 'Corbyn's playing a blinder sitting back as the government falls apart'. The whole fecking country will burn if he can't somehow force a change of government or policy.
 
I read Ninjafletch's post and I think Corbyn should do something and I read other posts and I think Labour should hold on and let this government destroy themselves. :(

Although I'm not living in England so I'm not affected by this immediately.
 
So tomorrow... Will the government tomorrow give the opportunity to vote on pulling the vote?

Or will they talk out the motion (essentially a filibuster)

The speaker seemed fairly forceful that they should do the former... But there would surely be a big risk in doing so.

That said when there is eventually a meaningful vote it will be the speaker who selects the amendments that can be voted on and perhaps in the longer term that's a bigger risk?
 
Jippy said:
That's precisely my view. I hate people saying 'Corbyn's playing a blinder sitting back as the government falls apart'. The whole fecking country will burn if he can't somehow force a change of government or policy.
Click to expand...
Nationalising that water though...
 
Ubik said:
Fine, if this is your generic "government flailing around with one of their manifesto commitments" unravellings. But this one happens to be something that's going to shape the country for the next generation or two, and if it carries on descending into "chaos", self-inflicted by the Tories or not, we're all gonna pay.
Click to expand...

Not to mention. We're already at this point. If Labour's 'policy' was to let the Conservatives pull themselves to pieces then congratulations, we're there. They've lurched from one near unprecedented defeat to an unprecedented defeat and it's changed nothing.


afrocentricity said:
What a shambles eh? Politics on full display, disheartening and dishonest.... Disgraceful.
Click to expand...

I just wish you'd waited so I could correct my typos before quoting me, ha.

Dobba said:
Soubry will probably do it as easily as she managed to convince the people at the second People's Vote march that she's concerned about vulnerable people after Brexit, 3 days after she'd voted to keep the Universal Credit rollout risk assessment private. Or how she's managing to reinvent herself as a champion of the EU, despite voting once out of 15 attempts in favour of EU nationals' right to remain in the UK, to 12 times against and 3 times in favour of the UK's membership of the EU, to 13 times against it. Hell, Soubry took to James O'Brien's show on LBC to say she'd prefer a no-deal Brexit to a Labour government last week and People's Vote haven't disowned her yet. Grieve even managed to survive voting against his own amendment, so I can't see this being a problem for either of them.

Every single person on that list has been vocal in their complaints that Labour prioritise an election over a second referendum. The minute the results of the vote are read and May wins, it'll be a race to see which of them is the first to any TV or radio live microphone within a 50 mile radius to say "Look, we tried to get rid of May and we can't. Time for a second referendum". They know a no confidence vote now will lose, they want it to lose, they just don't want to be the ones who table it. They have absolutely no interest in getting rid of the Tories.
Click to expand...

And it costs nothing to find out, and we can go from there. On the other hand there's a very real risk that your defeatist assumption that Labour would lose the vote gets us one step closer to no deal. History won't forget Corbyn's role in it if that happens.
 
Jippy said:
That's precisely my view. I hate people saying 'Corbyn's playing a blinder sitting back as the government falls apart'. The whole fecking country will burn if he can't somehow force a change of government or policy.
Click to expand...
Yes it does seem a bit 'forest for the trees...'
 
Jippy said:
That's precisely my view. I hate people saying 'Corbyn's playing a blinder sitting back as the government falls apart'. The whole fecking country will burn if he can't somehow force a change of government or policy.
Click to expand...

Corbyn could be the leader of the only party in a one party state and still lose the election.
 
NinjaFletch said:
And it costs nothing to find out, and we can go from there. On the other hand there's a very real risk that your defeatist assumption that Labour would lose the vote gets us one step closer to no deal. History won't forget Corbyn's role in it if that happens.
Click to expand...
So if I'm more positive, the Tories who can't be bothered to rally hard enough to trigger a party leadership challenge will vote against May? Even Anna Soubry, who also on James O'Brien's show last week tried to make out that (other than Brexit) the Tories were doing great things, will vote against May? Is that all that's been stopping the Tories from being defeated, me knowing how two-faced Tory twats work?
 
Ubik said:
Nationalising that water though...
Click to expand...
Great so we have Brexit, violate the GFA and borderline expropriate a major asset. Then we deregulate to hell and become a tax haven. Pariah status incoming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.