| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 07:56 - Nov 14 with 1199 views | tabletopjoe |
Going? |  |
| 'Let the ignorant argue with themselves' -- CL |
|  |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 08:15 - Nov 14 with 1183 views | Darth_Koont |
Not really sure why the LibDems are chasing this so hard.
I get the point that they need MPs even in our bad electoral system that favours the two bigger parties. But if they actually want to stop Brexit above all else, then they need to be smart.
Their Revoke Article 50 was never achievable, so support Labour's better deal and a second referendum in seats where it's the only winnable option. And certainly avoid the scenario where Johnson takes the country even further on their ideological safari with the worst possible deal and a likely crash out to No Deal when they can't deliver in the transition period.
Last time they put their own interests ahead of the country's they were crucified by the electorate afterwards. So it's not even advisable on that score. |  |
| |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 08:33 - Nov 14 with 1127 views | WD19 |
Its not weird, based on all available evidence it is entirely in keeping with the level of competence you would expect from a political party in 2019. |  | | |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 08:38 - Nov 14 with 1122 views | Clapham_Junction |
I can't get my head around how they spent so long calling for a second vote, and then as soon as Labour make it a formal policy, they don't want it anymore.
Someone I was talking to suggested that maybe they think Brexit will happen anyway and they are just positioning themselves to pick up remain voters after that like the SNP did with pro-independence voters after 2014.
It's a shame people aren't turning to the Greens, who are more realistic about cooperation (and are more serious about dealing with the actual biggest issue we're facing). |  | | |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 09:51 - Nov 14 with 1058 views | Darth_Koont |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 08:38 - Nov 14 by Clapham_Junction |
I can't get my head around how they spent so long calling for a second vote, and then as soon as Labour make it a formal policy, they don't want it anymore.
Someone I was talking to suggested that maybe they think Brexit will happen anyway and they are just positioning themselves to pick up remain voters after that like the SNP did with pro-independence voters after 2014.
It's a shame people aren't turning to the Greens, who are more realistic about cooperation (and are more serious about dealing with the actual biggest issue we're facing). |
Be interesting to see how long their hardline approach lasts. The downward trend in their polling versus the upward trend of Labour's suggests that they'll be in danger of being bombed out unless they make some form of electoral compromise.
Not sure Swinson sees that or wants to see it. But she might even lose her own seat at this rate. Certainly if she and the LibDems are viewed as helping deliver Brexit AND a putrefyingTory government. [Post edited 14 Nov 2019 9:53]
| |
| |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 10:40 - Nov 14 with 1028 views | WeWereZombies |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 08:15 - Nov 14 by Darth_Koont |
Not really sure why the LibDems are chasing this so hard.
I get the point that they need MPs even in our bad electoral system that favours the two bigger parties. But if they actually want to stop Brexit above all else, then they need to be smart.
Their Revoke Article 50 was never achievable, so support Labour's better deal and a second referendum in seats where it's the only winnable option. And certainly avoid the scenario where Johnson takes the country even further on their ideological safari with the worst possible deal and a likely crash out to No Deal when they can't deliver in the transition period.
Last time they put their own interests ahead of the country's they were crucified by the electorate afterwards. So it's not even advisable on that score. |
Revoke Article 50 was never achievable? How can that be when it is what most of us want?
It's a tough decision to stand down candidates who won't stand...
But one thing voters have been crying out for is clarity on Brexit, Labour certainly do not have it, the Conservatives say they will get Brexit done and then when the day comes it is not done. Swinson may be a godsend to caricaturist in the gutter press because she has taken a firm stand on something that the rest of the parties and the media that support them have been working overtime to persuade us is not the done thing but if it is the right thing then honourable voters will go with it.
Shame to see The Guardian going the way of The Telegraph though, guess you can only go to The Financial Times and The Economist for balanced reporting now. |  |
| |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 10:56 - Nov 14 with 998 views | Pinewoodblue |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 10:40 - Nov 14 by WeWereZombies |
Revoke Article 50 was never achievable? How can that be when it is what most of us want?
It's a tough decision to stand down candidates who won't stand...
But one thing voters have been crying out for is clarity on Brexit, Labour certainly do not have it, the Conservatives say they will get Brexit done and then when the day comes it is not done. Swinson may be a godsend to caricaturist in the gutter press because she has taken a firm stand on something that the rest of the parties and the media that support them have been working overtime to persuade us is not the done thing but if it is the right thing then honourable voters will go with it.
Shame to see The Guardian going the way of The Telegraph though, guess you can only go to The Financial Times and The Economist for balanced reporting now. |
The only way to secure a balanced view is to get your 'news' from more than one source.
I include Martin Baxter ( electoral calculus) with regards to polls and predictions although his most recent prediction is scary, predicted an overall majority in excess of 100 for Boris. |  |
| |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 10:58 - Nov 14 with 997 views | Darth_Koont |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 10:40 - Nov 14 by WeWereZombies |
Revoke Article 50 was never achievable? How can that be when it is what most of us want?
It's a tough decision to stand down candidates who won't stand...
But one thing voters have been crying out for is clarity on Brexit, Labour certainly do not have it, the Conservatives say they will get Brexit done and then when the day comes it is not done. Swinson may be a godsend to caricaturist in the gutter press because she has taken a firm stand on something that the rest of the parties and the media that support them have been working overtime to persuade us is not the done thing but if it is the right thing then honourable voters will go with it.
Shame to see The Guardian going the way of The Telegraph though, guess you can only go to The Financial Times and The Economist for balanced reporting now. |
In the sense that they were never going to get a majority or be the leading party in a coalition to push it through.
Yes, of course I'd revoke it today if that was possible.
I think you're over-egging the lack of clarity on Labour's Brexit proposal. What's the point and value of the extreme clarity of Revoke Article 50 (that isn't going to happen and will disenfranchise millions of Leavers) versus a hard or even No Deal Brexit?
With Revoke no longer a viable option given the entrenched positions since 2016 then we need something practical to step back from the Tory cliff-face. Ever since May took us down the hard, red-line Brexit we've been crying out for a softer Brexit proposal that somehow actually reflects the referendum. And then it's fair to put that deal to a people's vote.
Facing off between a purely theoretical Revoke and a very real Hard Brexit (and gambling on that) seems to be suit party political interests much more than it suits the country and our future. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 11:01 - Nov 14 with 989 views | WeWereZombies |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 10:58 - Nov 14 by Darth_Koont |
In the sense that they were never going to get a majority or be the leading party in a coalition to push it through.
Yes, of course I'd revoke it today if that was possible.
I think you're over-egging the lack of clarity on Labour's Brexit proposal. What's the point and value of the extreme clarity of Revoke Article 50 (that isn't going to happen and will disenfranchise millions of Leavers) versus a hard or even No Deal Brexit?
With Revoke no longer a viable option given the entrenched positions since 2016 then we need something practical to step back from the Tory cliff-face. Ever since May took us down the hard, red-line Brexit we've been crying out for a softer Brexit proposal that somehow actually reflects the referendum. And then it's fair to put that deal to a people's vote.
Facing off between a purely theoretical Revoke and a very real Hard Brexit (and gambling on that) seems to be suit party political interests much more than it suits the country and our future. |
There you go, swallowed the only possible thing is some type of Brexit line, haven't you? | |
| |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 11:08 - Nov 14 with 958 views | Darth_Koont |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 11:01 - Nov 14 by WeWereZombies |
There you go, swallowed the only possible thing is some type of Brexit line, haven't you? |
Not at all. I hope even a soft Brexit would be kicked into touch.
It would be pointless and worse for the country but at least it wouldn't be crippling. We're in damage control in so many areas of our politics and society now with Brexit probably the biggest and most likely to trigger collapse. | |
| |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 11:13 - Nov 14 with 943 views | WeWereZombies |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 10:56 - Nov 14 by Pinewoodblue |
The only way to secure a balanced view is to get your 'news' from more than one source.
I include Martin Baxter ( electoral calculus) with regards to polls and predictions although his most recent prediction is scary, predicted an overall majority in excess of 100 for Boris. |
There is a lot to be said for that point of view providing your news sources are reliable, it must be used with some circumspection. If the news sources you choose are, say, The Sun and The Morning Star and The National you may end up feeling nothing but anger and confusion rather than having some hope of balanced resolution of views. | |
| |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 11:27 - Nov 14 with 922 views | giant_stow |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 10:40 - Nov 14 by WeWereZombies |
Revoke Article 50 was never achievable? How can that be when it is what most of us want?
It's a tough decision to stand down candidates who won't stand...
But one thing voters have been crying out for is clarity on Brexit, Labour certainly do not have it, the Conservatives say they will get Brexit done and then when the day comes it is not done. Swinson may be a godsend to caricaturist in the gutter press because she has taken a firm stand on something that the rest of the parties and the media that support them have been working overtime to persuade us is not the done thing but if it is the right thing then honourable voters will go with it.
Shame to see The Guardian going the way of The Telegraph though, guess you can only go to The Financial Times and The Economist for balanced reporting now. |
Hi mr Zombie, I'm just wondering why your cross with the Guardian, presumably over this story?
Agreed that you can't trust one source on its own btw. |  |
| |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 11:40 - Nov 14 with 903 views | WeWereZombies |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 11:27 - Nov 14 by giant_stow |
Hi mr Zombie, I'm just wondering why your cross with the Guardian, presumably over this story?
Agreed that you can't trust one source on its own btw. |
More disappointed than cross, it is fairly obvious that Swinson had made a couple of bold moves before the campaigns even got properly underway. The stance to commit to revoking Article 50 may prove unpopular with, say, one third of voters but will be admired by another third and could sway many of the final third. Then the statement that she was not prepared to form a coalition with either Johnson or Corbyn was emphatic too, although it should be noted that she would no doubt welcome a coalition with either Conservatives or Labour provided they ditched their leader and accepted her as Prime Minister.
People chunter on about politicians not being straightforward and then one is and it seems to upset them even more. Or perhaps it is just journalists worried about filling column inches with real news rather than perpetuating an endless uncertainty where anyone can say anything and be half true. | |
| |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 11:55 - Nov 14 with 880 views | giant_stow |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 11:40 - Nov 14 by WeWereZombies |
More disappointed than cross, it is fairly obvious that Swinson had made a couple of bold moves before the campaigns even got properly underway. The stance to commit to revoking Article 50 may prove unpopular with, say, one third of voters but will be admired by another third and could sway many of the final third. Then the statement that she was not prepared to form a coalition with either Johnson or Corbyn was emphatic too, although it should be noted that she would no doubt welcome a coalition with either Conservatives or Labour provided they ditched their leader and accepted her as Prime Minister.
People chunter on about politicians not being straightforward and then one is and it seems to upset them even more. Or perhaps it is just journalists worried about filling column inches with real news rather than perpetuating an endless uncertainty where anyone can say anything and be half true. |
Fair enough and thanks for the reply - so your problem is more about their general spin on things rather than this item?
I think i read somewhere that its been decided that Swinson must appeal to Tory remainers, hence her unwillingness to get too close to labour or be seen to be supporting labour candidates in individual constituencies like Canterbury. Can't help thinking that seems odd though when even the local party hierarchy there seems to back their man's resignation fully and are even ready to openly recommend voting labour.
I just think she has to be careful not to loose site of the main goal and the goal that will unite the most new lib dem voters.
Perhaps this tough stance is just for the election and will soon be modified afterwards if required? | |
| |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 11:59 - Nov 14 with 875 views | Darth_Koont |
| more evidence of the lib dems going a bit wierd. on 11:40 - Nov 14 by WeWereZombies |
More disappointed than cross, it is fairly obvious that Swinson had made a couple of bold moves before the campaigns even got properly underway. The stance to commit to revoking Article 50 may prove unpopular with, say, one third of voters but will be admired by another third and could sway many of the final third. Then the statement that she was not prepared to form a coalition with either Johnson or Corbyn was emphatic too, although it should be noted that she would no doubt welcome a coalition with either Conservatives or Labour provided they ditched their leader and accepted her as Prime Minister.
People chunter on about politicians not being straightforward and then one is and it seems to upset them even more. Or perhaps it is just journalists worried about filling column inches with real news rather than perpetuating an endless uncertainty where anyone can say anything and be half true. |
You have my sympathies re: "real news and not perpetuating an endless uncertainty".
Putting the rest of the media's treatment to the side, I'd say exactly the same about people's characterisation of Labour's policy on Brexit. It's clearly a compromise position, which is dismissed as a muddle. But it's really not - and it's much more practical than the binary choices others are proposing. It's just too convenient to dismiss it as such.
Re: Swinson she's unfortunately exactly where our silly FPTP takes us. An important voice that is in practical terms only now useful tactically, even to achieve the LibDem's own aims. Unless they'd just rather have more MPs and battle Labour to maybe become the opposition party in about 10 years' time. But if it's all about party politics even at this critical juncture in the UK's history then I don't expect they'll have much of a chance of that. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
