Topic: Brexit: "Vultus inanis est et mori in fossa ego sum!"

[classycarra]

So true.

Jimothy
‏ @XRedTimX


Strange how Corbyn somehow has the magic ability to stop Brexit at any point and is constantly berated for it, except at the point at which he makes a move to actually do it, when he miraculously becomes incapable of doing anything.

I suppose that (apparent) conundrum to you and your peers could probably be solved if you understand that he is berated for not having tried to stop brexit (you said yourself he's pro a labour brexit), but then on the rare occasions he puts his mind to something to try and achieve anything his embarrassing incompetence shows him up.

There's an easy solution to that real 'thinker' of a problem you're struggling with mate.

[filopastry]

Skynews are saying  the Tories "rebels" have said they are happy to talk to and meet Jeremy about his plan.

If a compromise can be found that enough of them will fall in behind, then the LibDems will look pretty stupid for saying "No" off the bat when they will rapidly have to come around to say "yes".

That said I remain unconvinced Corbyn can get enough Tories on board to get the votes required, given its not as though every non Tory vote is locked in, I don't think he could depend on Hoey's vote and there is no leverage to apply there given she is standing down anyway, and some of the current hefty number of "Independents" aren't sure things either.

It's a big win for Corbyn if he can make it happen though, likely to ease Labour's problem with some of the Remainer vote it is haemorrhaging and if he can not behave like a total tit in his short time in office probably eases some of his personal negatives as well

[classycarra]

All credit to the Lib Dems who would happily get in bed with the tories for 5 years but seem unwilling to comprehend a short term agreement to work with Corbyn to prevent no deal.

Definitely not a Tory-lite party, not at all.

Do you ever look beyond the optics and tribal identity? Politics can be quite interesting, if you take an interest.

[filopastry]

I thought no deal was apocalyptic though?

Surely the Lib Dems would work with the devil himself if it were to avoid it? That's their entire platform currently isnt it, prevent no deal. Fuck knows what else they stand for beyond Brexit.

Sorry you are mixing it up with Labour's platform which is stop No Deal, the LibDems is to stop Brexit.

To be honest a fair few of the politically active Remainers I know, are just as opposed to May's deal as they are to No Deal.

As I said anyway I think the LibDems have made a misstep on this, all they needed to say was that they aren't convinced Corbyn is the right person to lead a GNU, but if he can get the votes to make it work they will provide temporary support. Then say that they equally hope that in the same spirit of compromise they hope that if Corbyn cannot get the votes to form a government he will support any other compromise candidates who emerge with the same aim.

[Cpt_Reina]

Sorry you are mixing it up with Labour's platform which is stop No Deal, the LibDems is to stop Brexit.

To be honest a fair few of the politically active Remainers I know, are just as opposed to May's deal as they are to No Deal.

Start with preventing no deal shall we? Probably more pressing.

Constant calls to be grown up and pragmatic soon go out of the window as soon as its the centrists needing to compromise.

[Trada]

[redmark]

That said if I was the LibDems I wouldn't have ruled it out, just said they would support it if Corbyn had the votes from elsewhere to make it work, but that they thought that was unlikely to happen under his leadership.

Yep, that should have been the message. The Lib Dems are in danger of claiming some of the 'credit' for this going disastrously wrong themselves, if they're not careful. If the reason for not supporting a Corbyn anti-no-deal temporary government is that the Tory rebels won't support it, let the Tory rebels say that.

Of course in reality, the Lib Dems are also putting party a little ahead of country, and don't want Labour to recover any partial credit for heading off a no deal.

[classycarra]

Start with preventing no deal shall we? Probably more pressing.

Hmm, it's pressing is it?

How come your man didn't call a vote of no confidence in Johnson when he had the chance, instead of standing on a platform outside parliament to be verbally felated by Richard Burgon and a gang of two hundred SWP weirdos.

[filopastry]

Start with preventing no deal shall we? Probably more pressing.

Constant calls to be grown up and pragmatic soon go out of the window as soon as its the centrists needing to compromise.

I agree on the need for compromise, and I repeat I think it was a bit daft of the LDs to say No (I'm assuming they did, I haven't seen the statement) but that applies to all sides.

If Corbyn can get enough Tory support to make it work the LDs will fall in line anyway

[Ghost Town]

Yeh, like him or loathe him Corbyn is probably going to be pretty important over the next few months so the professionals involved  - the MPs etc - really need to bite their tongues and accept that and thereafter see what they can do, and how they can work work him, influence him, persuade him, bribe him, corral him or even trick him, into scuppering Brexit.

Maintaining the 'purity' of your anti-Corbynism is not going to help anyone.

[redmark]

Hmm, it's pressing is it?

How come your man didn't call a vote of no confidence in Johnson when he had the chance, instead of standing on a platform outside parliament to be verbally felated by Richard Burgon and a gang of two hundred SWP weirdos.

Because it would have failed. The Tory rebels had stated they weren't prepared to pass a VONC the day after Johnson became PM.

[Cpt_Reina]

Hmm, it's pressing is it?

How come your man didn't call a vote of no confidence in Johnson when he had the chance, instead of standing on a platform outside parliament to be verbally felated by Richard Burgon and a gang of two hundred SWP weirdos.

Corbyn isn't 'my man' but he's called it now at point where he feels confident he has some backing to do so, evidenced by the willingness from other parties (less the Lib Dems) to come to the table.

So what difference does it make really? He's done it. Unless of course you're more arsed about having a pop at 'my man' than you are about preventing no deal, like the Lib Dems.

[redmark]

Corbyn isn't 'my man' but he's called it now at point where he feels confident he has some backing to do so, evidenced by the willingness from other parties (less the Lib Dems) to come to the table.

So what difference does it make really? He's done it. Unless of course you're more arsed about having a pop at 'my man' than you are about preventing no deal, like the Lib Dems.

To be pedantic , he hasn't done it - he's indicated he will do it 'as soon as it looks likely to succeed'.

[filopastry]

Yep, that should have been the message. The Lib Dems are in danger of claiming some of the 'credit' for this going disastrously wrong themselves, if they're not careful. If the reason for not supporting a Corbyn anti-no-deal temporary government is that the Tory rebels won't support it, let the Tory rebels say that.

Of course in reality, the Lib Dems are also putting party a little ahead of country, and don't want Labour to recover any partial credit for heading off a no deal.

I agree they absolutely are.

It's a problem all round though, a more Corbyn friendly LibDem party is likely to struggle more in the Tory marginals they are fighting in the South West, and Labour needs them to make inroads there to help deprive the tories of a majority. Current leadership of Labour just sees the LDs as the enemy as much as the Tories are.

That attitude doesn't help when it comes to putting together a GNU, it also won't help if it comes to Labour needing other party support to get into govt (which realistcially looks the only way they would be likely to get into govt at present)

[Cpt_Reina]

To be pedantic , he hasn't done it - he's indicated he will do it 'as soon as it looks likely to succeed'.

 

[filopastry]

Because it would have failed. The Tory rebels had stated they weren't prepared to pass a VONC the day after Johnson became PM.

I believe the vote wouldn't actually have happened until the first day back in Sept, the reason to call it then was to give time because of the timetable to Brexit and/or another election

[redmark]

I believe vote wouldn't actually have happened until the first day back in Sept, the reason to call it then was to give time because of the timetable to Brexit and/or another election

Sorry you're right - though certainly the rebels were talking about giving Johnson time to see how he would approach the issues in government and it might have pushed them into a more supportive position, or allowed Johnson to focus more on the 'dangers of Corbyn'.

[oldfordie]

I don't see how Corbyn has the right to lay down conditions to bring the VONC, he's been calling for another GE every week for the last year. the problem is is he telling other parties they have to support him as leader before he agrees to call the VONC. is this what he means by only calling a VONC when he knows it can be won as that isn't true. MPs opposed to Johnson will support the VONC , it's about what happens next. I think the MPs will support Corbyn eventually, they maybe wanting him to go on record for making the VONC conditional, he will only call it if he knows he will become leader, he is making a big mistake.

[filopastry]

Lucas was pretty sensible in what she said

I welcome Corbyn’s Vote of No Confidence & will support his temporary Govt to avoid No Deal (tho would prefer #PeoplesVote before General Election)
But if he can’t gain confidence of House, will he commit to support an MP from his party or another who can?

[Jiminy Cricket]

Yeh, like him or loathe him Corbyn is probably going to be pretty important over the next few months so the professionals involved  - the MPs etc - really need to bite their tongues and accept that and thereafter see what they can do, and how they can work work him, influence him, persuade him, bribe him, corral him or even trick him, into scuppering Brexit.

Maintaining the 'purity' of your anti-Corbynism is not going to help anyone.

I don't disagree with any of that. But how many of us here will trust Corbyn do as expected/instructed? Suppose he starts going off on tangents, the last thing the GoNU will wish to do is scrap it all and attempt to start over. Corbyn is a duplicitous, sneaky snake, and nearly everyone knows it. This is why it is difficult for me to see how he could command the confidence of the majority of the House.

So, Corbyn will try to get his way (to be come PM). It will be difficult for the potential GoNU to refuse, but they will have every expectation of him failing in his duty to them and the country. If the potential GoNU instead go against Corbyn, he will do everything he can to prevent the GoNU from forming. He's a fucking horrible human being. Stupid. Small. Selfish. Oh, and - did I mention - stupid.

[redmark]

So, Corbyn will try to get his way (to be come PM). It will be difficult for the potential GoNU to refuse, but they will have every expectation of him failing in his duty to them and the country. If the potential GoNU instead go against Corbyn, he will do everything he can to prevent the GoNU from forming. He's a fucking horrible human being. Stupid. Small. Selfish. Oh, and - did I mention - stupid.

Not to argue that point, but I expect the offer from the Tory rebels to meet will be precisely to establish a very detailed timeline of exactly what a Corbyn caretaker government would do - and if it isn't very, very specific (and probably publicly committed to), I imagine they will reject Corbyn as a potential PM. People like Grieve and Letwin have a much better grasp of parliamentary processes than Corbyn seems to.

The interesting wording in the statement from those four Tories would be "... happy to meet with you as well as colleagues from other opposition parties". I wonder if Grieve/Boles/Letwin/Spelman would want long term colleagues on this issue like Yvette Cooper and Hillary Benn in the room; and how the Labour leadership would react to that.

[ShakaHislop]

Does the antisemitism row just go away then? Are you all guilty of putting stopping a no deal Brexit over Jews?

*LAAS Statement: Our Concern at MP Support for a Jeremy Corbyn Government*
- “It should be the first red line of any genuinely antiracist MP that Mr Corbyn be kept away from power”.
- Full statement attached or link below.

https://twitter.com/LabourAgainstAS/status/1161933171837022209

[ShakaHislop]

Lammy's done an Adonis.

https://twitter.com/DavidLammy/status/1161902200987279361

[oldfordie]

Does the antisemitism row just go away then? Are you all guilty of putting stopping a no deal Brexit over Jews?

https://twitter.com/LabourAgainstAS/status/1161933171837022209

Save it for the next GE, this is about kicking Johnson out before 31st Oct and getting a referendum or a GE to vote in MPs who will support another referendum.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Though I can understand the concerns of LAAS, Corbyn would not be a PM in the ordinary sense. Now, I don't trust Corbyn to perform his duty as leader of a potential GoNU as he should, but I think there is zero chance of him being able to enact (for example) anti-Semitic legislation. He will try to fuck about with his obligations to prevent a No-Deal Brexit, but I cannot see how he would be able to anything of consequence unrelated to that.

Or, is there something I'm missing?

[Andy]

Or, is there something I'm missing?

A unity government needs a leader that people can unite behind. As someone said already, he can't unite his own party.

I'm not convinced he'll try to enact anti-Semitic legislation (!!) but I don't trust his stance on Brexit, or how he'll try to steer the EU debate after avoiding No Deal.

Lib Dems want no Brexit and this still seems at odds with what Corbyn wants - although the latter might be changing now...

[Zeb]

The interesting wording in the statement from those four Tories would be "... happy to meet with you as well as colleagues from other opposition parties". I wonder if Grieve/Boles/Letwin/Spelman would want long term colleagues on this issue like Yvette Cooper and Hillary Benn in the room; and how the Labour leadership would react to that.

Soubry wasn't included on the distribution list for Corbyn's letter so there's one leader of an opposition party...

[classycarra]

So what difference does it make really? He's done it. Unless of course you're more arsed about having a pop at 'my man' than you are about preventing no deal, like the Lib Dems.

There's that default childish tribal response

No I'm more arsed about preventing no deal, for sure. That's why I'm quite pro Corbyn leaving his position after his many failings.

[Zeb]

Start with preventing no deal shall we? Probably more pressing.

Constant calls to be grown up and pragmatic soon go out of the window as soon as its the centrists needing to compromise.

Look at it from the longer term perspective. This is to get another stay to 'no deal'. There then has to be a general election which the Tories lose and a majority is in place (Labour minority government or whatever) to see through a referendum and revocation of Article 50. That's not happening if Lib Dems don't take seats from the Tories in the south by holding onto and winning over people who will vote Tory. And they don't take those seats having put an extremely unpopular Labour leader into Downing Street. So is Corbyn being pragmatic and compromising or offering a poison pill? Is this the opening bid of not rejecting the idea out of hand or the final offer?

Labour leadership was told by conference that 'no deal' was to be avoided at all costs, a general election was the first named thing, and then "If we cannot get a general election Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote." Compromise on this isn't one way or it won't work. And expecting other parties to kneel to zod will work out as well as expecting the half of the Labour vote which has gone missing to do so.

[ShakaHislop]

Save it for the next GE, this is about kicking Johnson out before 31st Oct and getting a referendum or a GE to vote in MPs who will support another referendum.

So put the antisemite lightning rod in power because Labour moderates couldn't get their act together and kick him out before now? Yeah, no.

Parliament doesn't exist to wipe the arse of the constant mess that is the Labour Party. They should get their own house in order before having the gall to criticise anyone else.

[Jiminy Cricket]

A unity government needs a leader that people can unite behind. As someone said already, he can't unite his own party.

I'm not convinced he'll try to enact anti-Semitic legislation (!!) but I don't trust his stance on Brexit, or how he'll try to steer the EU debate after avoiding No Deal.

Lib Dems want no Brexit and this still seems at odds with what Corbyn wants - although the latter might be changing now...

I totally agree that Corbyn would be a hugely problematic choice as leader of a GoNU. But, if he forces the choice upon all those opposing No-Deal, what are they to do? If they do not play ball, I am certain that Corbyn will do everything he can to ensure that a GoNU never happens. He's as big a monster as Johnson.

[Jiminy Cricket]

So put the antisemite lightning rod in power because Labour moderates couldn't get their act together and kick him out before now? Yeah, no.

If Labour MPs grow spines, then of course no to Corbyn. But, in the main, they have been pretty spineless so far. So what to do then? Genuine question. I really do not know.

[Andy]

So what difference does it make really? He's done it. Unless of course you're more arsed about having a pop at 'my man' than you are about preventing no deal, like the Lib Dems.

Out of interest: if you had to choose between No Deal and preventing it with a unity government not led by Corbyn, which would you choose?

[ShakaHislop]

If Labour MPs grow spines, then of course no to Corbyn. But, in the main, they have been pretty spineless so far. So what to do then? Genuine question. I really do not know.

It's a no to putting Corbyn into power no matter what. It's Labour who is forcing this choice on everyone else.

Streeting showing himself up here, after months of bleating about antisemitism.

https://twitter.com/wesstreeting/status/1161885193910804483

[Jiminy Cricket]

Tell me, is Lucas still the favourite, or has that time passed now? If so - and I've not seen her name mentioned - what about (and I cannot quite believe I am suggesting this), Anna Soubry as PM (in a GoNU)?

[Andy]

I totally agree that Corbyn would be a hugely problematic choice as leader of a GoNU. But, if he forces the choice upon all those opposing No-Deal, what are they to do? If they do not play ball, I am certain that Corbyn will do everything he can to ensure that a GoNU never happens. He's as big a monster as Johnson.

It doesn't have to be the choice though - that is why Swinson is speaking to Ken Clarke, Harman etc...

[redmark]

A unity government needs a leader that people can unite behind. As someone said already, he can't unite his own party.

I'm not convinced he'll try to enact anti-Semitic legislation (!!) but I don't trust his stance on Brexit, or how he'll try to steer the EU debate after avoiding No Deal.

Lib Dems want no Brexit and this still seems at odds with what Corbyn wants - although the latter might be changing now...

He won't be PM after avoiding No Deal (unless he wins an election).

I have significant reservations about Corbyn, but MPs not trusting him seems redundant; he literally can't do anything without their support.

[redmark]

So put the antisemite lightning rod in power because Labour moderates couldn't get their act together and kick him out before now? Yeah, no.

Parliament doesn't exist to wipe the arse of the constant mess that is the Labour Party. They should get their own house in order before having the gall to criticise anyone else.

What power?

[ShakaHislop]

What power?

The power of Prime Minister. I don't give a fuck if he was only PM for 1 minute. I never want, nor should he ever be PM for any length of time and I fully support Swinson's stance on this.

[Jiminy Cricket]

It doesn't have to be the choice though - that is why Swinson is speaking to Ken Clarke, Harman etc...

I understand this. But two problems: 1) how many Labour MPs will (openly) support someone other than Corbyn; and 2) isn't a VoNC reliant upon Corbyn calling for one!? Won't Corbyn just fuck off with his ball if he does not get his own way?