RugbyRebels

That’s quite some volte-face. First we’re slagging off May for not letting Corbyn dictate terms of discussion and despite never having actually set out what his aims would be and now we’re saying that he shouldn’t ‘help’ at all despite calling for cross party talks for months and months.
The cult still runs strong.

He's not helping because of some stories in the press?

He should be helping because it's in the national interest, he's not helping because he thinks a nation in trouble makes it easier for him to claim power and he views the EU as the Imperialist capitalistic enemy

May as with Corbyn is equally culpable for establishing red lines after being crushed in the vote

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opin ... mpire.html

Just dropping this here no offence

Digby wrote:He's not helping because of some stories in the press?

He should be helping because it's in the national interest, he's not helping because he thinks a nation in trouble makes it easier for him to claim power and he views the EU as the Imperialist capitalistic enemy

May as with Corbyn is equally culpable for establishing red lines after being crushed in the vote

Simple really, take no deal off the table and then they can talk. May is too up herself to agree of course. She'd rather the country crashes and burns than compromise on her agenda. That's the kind of Tory arrogance that's going to ruin the country.

Mellsblue wrote:That’s quite some volte-face. First we’re slagging off May for not letting Corbyn dictate terms of discussion and despite never having actually set out what his aims would be and now we’re saying that he shouldn’t ‘help’ at all despite calling for cross party talks for months and months.
The cult still runs strong.

Like Zhivago said, take "no deal" off the table. Aside from that, it's blatantly obvious that May is now desperate and grasping, and considering May hadn't bothered reaching out to the opposition to begin with, shutting them out of the process, I still don't see why Corbyn should be obliged to go now that the due date is fast approaching like a runaway train.

Digby wrote:He's not helping because of some stories in the press?

Because that is exactly what I wrote, yes.

Zhivago wrote:

Digby wrote:He's not helping because of some stories in the press?

He should be helping because it's in the national interest, he's not helping because he thinks a nation in trouble makes it easier for him to claim power and he views the EU as the Imperialist capitalistic enemy

May as with Corbyn is equally culpable for establishing red lines after being crushed in the vote

Simple really, take no deal off the table and then they can talk. May is too up herself to agree of course. She'd rather the country crashes and burns than compromise on her agenda. That's the kind of Tory arrogance that's going to ruin the country.

And now, after two years, they still haven't got a fucking clue what to do, having huffed their own farts for the better part of the exit process, with the due date being just a matter of weeks away.

cashead wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:That’s quite some volte-face. First we’re slagging off May for not letting Corbyn dictate terms of discussion and despite never having actually set out what his aims would be and now we’re saying that he shouldn’t ‘help’ at all despite calling for cross party talks for months and months.
The cult still runs strong.

Like Zhivago said, take "no deal" off the table. Aside from that, it's blatantly obvious that May is now desperate and grasping, and considering May hadn't bothered reaching out to the opposition to begin with, shutting them out of the process, I still don't see why Corbyn should be obliged to go now that the due date is fast approaching like a runaway train.

Quite beyond the fact no deal is the default legal standing, as voted in by parliament, and is therefore not in May’s gift to take it off the table, why should she and why has nobody else demanded that she should?
Cable, Robertson, Cooper and Benn are all there. All are avowed Remainers but they’re all at the talks. How is everyone else wrong but Corbyn right?

Mellsblue wrote:

cashead wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:That’s quite some volte-face. First we’re slagging off May for not letting Corbyn dictate terms of discussion and despite never having actually set out what his aims would be and now we’re saying that he shouldn’t ‘help’ at all despite calling for cross party talks for months and months.
The cult still runs strong.

Like Zhivago said, take "no deal" off the table. Aside from that, it's blatantly obvious that May is now desperate and grasping, and considering May hadn't bothered reaching out to the opposition to begin with, shutting them out of the process, I still don't see why Corbyn should be obliged to go now that the due date is fast approaching like a runaway train.

Quite beyond the fact no deal is the default legal standing, as voted in by parliament, and is therefore not in May’s gift to take it off the table, why should she and why has nobody else demanded that she should?
Cable, Robertson, Cooper and Benn are all there. All are avowed Remainers but they’re all at the talks. How is everyone else wrong but Corbyn right?

Tell me where I said the ones that went were in the wrong. Go on, I'll wait.

cashead wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

cashead wrote: Like Zhivago said, take "no deal" off the table. Aside from that, it's blatantly obvious that May is now desperate and grasping, and considering May hadn't bothered reaching out to the opposition to begin with, shutting them out of the process, I still don't see why Corbyn should be obliged to go now that the due date is fast approaching like a runaway train.

Quite beyond the fact no deal is the default legal standing, as voted in by parliament, and is therefore not in May’s gift to take it off the table, why should she and why has nobody else demanded that she should?
Cable, Robertson, Cooper and Benn are all there. All are avowed Remainers but they’re all at the talks. How is everyone else wrong but Corbyn right?

Tell me where I said the ones that went were in the wrong. Go on, I'll wait.

Where did I say you said it? I won’t wait.

Mellsblue wrote:

cashead wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Quite beyond the fact no deal is the default legal standing, as voted in by parliament, and is therefore not in May’s gift to take it off the table, why should she and why has nobody else demanded that she should?
Cable, Robertson, Cooper and Benn are all there. All are avowed Remainers but they’re all at the talks. How is everyone else wrong but Corbyn right?

Tell me where I said the ones that went were in the wrong. Go on, I'll wait.

Where did I say you said it? I won’t wait.

Then why ask this: "How is everyone else wrong but Corbyn right?"

cashead wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

cashead wrote: Tell me where I said the ones that went were in the wrong. Go on, I'll wait.

Where did I say you said it? I won’t wait.

Then why ask this: "How is everyone else wrong but Corbyn right?"

Because everybody other than Corbyn has agreed to sit round a table without any silly demands, even those who actually want to stop Brexit. So Corbyn is in a group of one making demands yet it’s May’s fault he’s not there? Where is the logic in that. Even arch-Europhiles have agreed to the talks, for goodness sakes. Either all of them are wrong for not making pre-talk demands or Corbyn is wrong due to making a pre-talk demand.
At best May had called his bluff and he can’t back down. At worst, he’s actively avoiding declaring his Brexit position ......... yet again.

Mellsblue wrote:

cashead wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Where did I say you said it? I won’t wait.

Then why ask this: "How is everyone else wrong but Corbyn right?"

Because everybody other than Corbyn has agreed to sit round a table without any silly demands, even those who actually want to stop Brexit. So Corbyn is in a group of one making demands yet it’s May’s fault he’s not there? Where is the logic in that. Even arch-Europhiles have agreed to the talks, for goodness sakes. Either all of them are wrong for not making pre-talk demands or Corbyn is wrong due to making a pre-talk demand.
At best May had called his bluff and he can’t back down. At worst, he’s actively avoiding declaring his Brexit position ......... yet again.

New Labour are only there to make Corbyn look bad, they have no altruistic reasons.

Zhivago wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

cashead wrote: Then why ask this: "How is everyone else wrong but Corbyn right?"

Because everybody other than Corbyn has agreed to sit round a table without any silly demands, even those who actually want to stop Brexit. So Corbyn is in a group of one making demands yet it’s May’s fault he’s not there? Where is the logic in that. Even arch-Europhiles have agreed to the talks, for goodness sakes. Either all of them are wrong for not making pre-talk demands or Corbyn is wrong due to making a pre-talk demand.
At best May had called his bluff and he can’t back down. At worst, he’s actively avoiding declaring his Brexit position ......... yet again.

New Labour are only there to make Corbyn look bad, they have no altruistic reasons.

But Corbyn could be there, if he’d just accepted the offer in the first place. Are the SNP and Lib Dems there just to make Corbyn look bad, too?

Mellsblue wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Because everybody other than Corbyn has agreed to sit round a table without any silly demands, even those who actually want to stop Brexit. So Corbyn is in a group of one making demands yet it’s May’s fault he’s not there? Where is the logic in that. Even arch-Europhiles have agreed to the talks, for goodness sakes. Either all of them are wrong for not making pre-talk demands or Corbyn is wrong due to making a pre-talk demand.
At best May had called his bluff and he can’t back down. At worst, he’s actively avoiding declaring his Brexit position ......... yet again.

New Labour are only there to make Corbyn look bad, they have no altruistic reasons.

But Corbyn could be there, if he’d just accepted the offer in the first place. Are the SNP and Lib Dems there just to make Corbyn look bad, too?

What's the point? She won't compromise. We're heading to no deal and they're gonna try to blame Labour, cos that's what they do.

Other leaders have in talks asked for no deal to be taken off the table

On the two main leaders and given where we are they're both using red lines even before talks commence, so both are culpable

Digby wrote:Other leaders have in talks asked for no deal to be taken off the table

On the two main leaders and given where we are they're both using red lines even before talks commence, so both are culpable

If May doesn't take no deal off the table we'll have it one way or the other

Zhivago wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
New Labour are only there to make Corbyn look bad, they have no altruistic reasons.

But Corbyn could be there, if he’d just accepted the offer in the first place. Are the SNP and Lib Dems there just to make Corbyn look bad, too?

What's the point? She won't compromise. We're heading to no deal and they're gonna try to blame Labour, cos that's what they do.

I agree, I doubt she’ll compromise much but, again said so earlier, what’s that got to do with Corbyn putting up a redline when nobody else has. If you think she isn’t going to compromise enough join the talks and then declare that she’s not compromising enough and walk away. Don’t just set an unrealistic redline and sit outside the talks.

Digby wrote:Other leaders have in talks asked for no deal to be taken off the table

On the two main leaders and given where we are they're both using red lines even before talks commence, so both are culpable

‘in talks’ being the key phrase and, again, yes they’re both culpable. Don’t mistake my admonishment of Corbyn as a defence of May on anything other than this single point.

Zhivago wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
New Labour are only there to make Corbyn look bad, they have no altruistic reasons.

But Corbyn could be there, if he’d just accepted the offer in the first place. Are the SNP and Lib Dems there just to make Corbyn look bad, too?

What's the point? She won't compromise. We're heading to no deal and they're gonna try to blame Labour, cos that's what they do.

You’ve lost the plot. How are they going to try and blame Labour, Labour are at the table. Sure, Labour have set out ‘tests’ that are pure fantasy, have a front bench arguing about what Brexit they’d like and a leader who won’t actually commit in public to what he wants - not that the Conservatives have been any better - but the Conservatives are the party in power and they will get the blame. Corbyn knows this full well and watching them fall over, over something he actually supports, is his plan. It’s clever politics but it’s not the straight talking honest politics he promised.
This blind devotion to Corbyn is so strange. It’s like the most manical of Brexiteers or Remainers, the true Corbynite believers just think they are more virtuous than anyone else and their figurehead or beliefs are 100% correct 100% of the time.

David Allen Green has an idea to take no deal "off the table"

An MP should propose an amendment that in the event of:

(a) no withdrawal agreement is ratified by 28 March 2019; and

(b) there is no extension of the Article 50 period,

then HMG shall revoke the Article 50 notification before the EU treaties cease to apply to the UK.

You could even "future-proof" it by changing (b) to be for the day before any day on which the EU treaties are set to cease to apply to the UK.

Then it would work however many extensions of time there may be.

Looks like we'll at least get an extension
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... exit-block

Thank god not all parties are as self serving as the Conservatives.

All parties are to some degree self serving as they need to rally around some core principles and ignore some differences on many issues. But the Tories aren't tearing themselves apart as a party and voting en masse against their own leadership because they're self serving to the party

Digby wrote:All parties are to some degree self serving as they need to rally around some core principles and ignore some differences on many issues. But the Tories aren't tearing themselves apart as a party and voting en masse against their own leadership because they're self serving to the party

True, the Conservatives are much more self serving in an individual sense.

Everybody has been self-serving in this debacle. To say it’s solely the Conservatives is wholly one eyed and probably caused by believing too much propaganda.