Page 648 of 662

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:16 am
by Winegums
crabcakes_windermere wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:40 pm
Winegums wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 6:00 pm
Why do you think we'd have no single market access if we were in the CU?
Are you fucking kidding? You’re promoting Corbyn’s ‘solution’ as being great, and you don’t know what it is???!??!

He wants ‘a’ customs union outside the single market, because you don’t get to be in the single market and restrict freedom of movement.

‘Access’ to the single market is a red herring. EVERYONE has access to it. The benefits are from being IN it.

For christ’s sake, at least know what it is you’re pushing.

https://fullfact.org/europe/labour-cust ... le-market/
I've never promoted his solution as great, I've simply said that hard brexit is bad, and crying for a second referendum is stupid.

Being in a/the CU doesn't preclude access to single market. Whatever deal is made, is made. Expecting Labour to pivot to hard remain is stupid because there's no way Labour would win a GE if they did that.

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:01 am
by lord_kobel
You do know you're talking bollocks, right?

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:28 am
by Safe_Timber_Man
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:16 am
crabcakes_windermere wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:40 pm
Winegums wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 6:00 pm
Why do you think we'd have no single market access if we were in the CU?
Are you fucking kidding? You’re promoting Corbyn’s ‘solution’ as being great, and you don’t know what it is???!??!

He wants ‘a’ customs union outside the single market, because you don’t get to be in the single market and restrict freedom of movement.

‘Access’ to the single market is a red herring. EVERYONE has access to it. The benefits are from being IN it.

For christ’s sake, at least know what it is you’re pushing.

https://fullfact.org/europe/labour-cust ... le-market/
I've never promoted his solution as great, I've simply said that hard brexit is bad, and crying for a second referendum is stupid.

Being in a/the CU doesn't preclude access to single market. Whatever deal is made, is made. Expecting Labour to pivot to hard remain is stupid because there's no way Labour would win a GE if they did that.


You're floundering here.

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:03 am
by crabcakes_windermere
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:16 am
I've never promoted his solution as great, I've simply said that hard brexit is bad, and crying for a second referendum is stupid.

Being in a/the CU doesn't preclude access to single market. Whatever deal is made, is made. Expecting Labour to pivot to hard remain is stupid because there's no way Labour would win a GE if they did that.
Well on that we're agreed, because his solution is awful. But how you can go from 'what's going to happen is bad' to 'pursuing a viable way out of it is stupid' is beyond me - other than you don't want a second referendum primarily because Corbyn doesn't want one rather than for any reason of viability.

Being in New Zealand doesn't preclude *access* to the single market. You just trade with it on its terms. The benefits are being *within* it. Labour's plan for a customs union that's as close to what we have now but not ACTUALLY what we have now is the tell - it will be as close as possible, but that won't actually be that close because of the caveats added. And in that sense, it of course won't be as good.

But all this is moot, as there isn't going to be a renegotiation (as the EU has said), and there is no time to do it. So now it's a choice between remain or Tory brexit deal or no deal hard brexit. So in that scenario, continuing to push for an alternative solution *that is not available* is as good as pushing for hard brexit. And the results show how disastrous a tactic that is.

Labour might not outright win a GE if they switched to a solid, non-ambiguous remain stance. But they would almost certainly do well enough to avoid haemorrhaging votes to the Lib Dems and greens and be the biggest block so best able to form a govt. Sticking with their current stance will see them hacked back at a GE as they were in the local and EU votes.

So sure, stick with the current policy. It makes Corbyn's departure all the more likely and weakens their bargaining position in the almost inevitable hung parliament after the next GE in favour of strong remain parties. I'm all for this exercise in idiocy to be over with sooner rather than later.

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:32 pm
by bluebellnutter
Winegums wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:16 am
I've never promoted his solution as great, I've simply said that hard brexit is bad
Corbyn's proposal IS Hard Brexit.

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:50 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Yep. Outside the single market. A service economy.

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:31 pm
by visage
Its entirely possible that any post election coalition would be predicated on Corbyn leaving.

So the cult would be faced with binning the Tories or losing Corbyn. And I'm not convinced that they wouldnt retain Corbyn.

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:52 pm
by bluebellnutter
So, Winegums, which would you prefer in a hypothetical post-election scenario;

1. A Labour-led coalition Government with the SNP and Lib Dems which revoked Article 50 and removed Corbyn as Labour leader (to be replaced by Thornberry or Starmer).
2. A Tory Government but Corbyn still gets to be Labour leader of the opposition?

Those are the only two options on the table. Pick one.

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:06 pm
by crabcakes_windermere
visage wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:31 pm
Its entirely possible that any post election coalition would be predicated on Corbyn leaving.

So the cult would be faced with binning the Tories or losing Corbyn. And I'm not convinced that they wouldnt retain Corbyn.
I'm guessing Corbyn would go for minority government, preferring to be utterly hamstrung and unable to do much but not having to change the habit of a lifetime and learn to compromise.

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 6:47 pm
by Winegums
bluebellnutter wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:52 pm
So, Winegums, which would you prefer in a hypothetical post-election scenario;

1. A Labour-led coalition Government with the SNP and Lib Dems which revoked Article 50 and removed Corbyn as Labour leader (to be replaced by Thornberry or Starmer).
2. A Tory Government but Corbyn still gets to be Labour leader of the opposition?

Those are the only two options on the table. Pick one.
Obviously the first one. I'm apprehensive about both leadership options you've put on the table, but Labour in power and no a50 is pretty good by me.

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:34 pm
by crabcakes_windermere
One thing I’ve been wondering is why there doesn’t seem to be any plan in place as to who comes next. If this parliament goes to term Corbyn will be 73 at the 2022 election - and if it doesn’t and there’s a GE soon he’ll be 75+ at the end of the next one, where there’s a chance of him being PM.

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:38 pm
by Boiler
Why am I getting the image of Nixon's head in a jar, as in Futurama....?

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:53 pm
by Winegums
Age is just a number, and I don't think someone should stand down just because of it unless it impacts their actual performance. e.g. America has a man with some stage of dementia who is still dottering through senior office.

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:02 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
crabcakes_windermere wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:34 pm
One thing I’ve been wondering is why there doesn’t seem to be any plan in place as to who comes next. If this parliament goes to term Corbyn will be 73 at the 2022 election - and if it doesn’t and there’s a GE soon he’ll be 75+ at the end of the next one, where there’s a chance of him being PM.
Isn't Long-Bailey being lined up as the successor?

Re: Labour, Generally.

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:17 pm
by Abernathy
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:02 pm
crabcakes_windermere wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:34 pm
One thing I’ve been wondering is why there doesn’t seem to be any plan in place as to who comes next. If this parliament goes to term Corbyn will be 73 at the 2022 election - and if it doesn’t and there’s a GE soon he’ll be 75+ at the end of the next one, where there’s a chance of him being PM.
Isn't Long-Bailey being lined up as the successor?
So it is rumoured, from time to time. But it is also rumoured that the chosen one is Laura Pidcock, Angela Rayner, or even Kat Smith. All are Momentum-approved as MG substitutes.

I'm afraid I rate none of them, least of all RLB. If you're looking for Labour's first woman leader, keep your eye on Bridget Phillipson.