RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:I voted Remain and would do again, but will happily argue against those on the fringe at either end. Yes the avid Remainers mostly voted to trigger article 50 but have sought to frustrate it by almost every other deed.

Avid leavers are just as much to blame and I’ve said that many times. I’ll apportion blame where I think it is deserved regardless of whether they are on my side or not. I’ve criticised the leader of my party on here only today.

I may come across as a stringent Leaver on here as it’s a stringent Remainer echo chamber and I want some balance, but when the Leavers did come on here and say that the EU is bias against the UK I was happy to argue against that.

Finally, I won’t be called blind by someone happy to use hyperbole such as ‘sell the country to Trump’, and certainly won’t be called blind about politics by someone who doesn’t know the difference between resigning as a whip and resigning the whip.

One can't do balance from the leave pov, you just sound like a lunatic.

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:I voted Remain and would do again, but will happily argue against those on the fringe at either end. Yes the avid Remainers mostly voted to trigger article 50 but have sought to frustrate it by almost every other deed.

Avid leavers are just as much to blame and I’ve said that many times. I’ll apportion blame where I think it is deserved regardless of whether they are on my side or not. I’ve criticised the leader of my party on here only today.

I may come across as a stringent Leaver on here as it’s a stringent Remainer echo chamber and I want some balance, but when the Leavers did come on here and say that the EU is bias against the UK I was happy to argue against that.

Finally, I won’t be called blind by someone happy to use hyperbole such as ‘sell the country to Trump’, and certainly won’t be called blind about politics by someone who doesn’t know the difference between resigning as a whip and resigning the whip.

One can't do balance from the leave pov, you just sound like a lunatic.

Thank you for proving why someone needed to play devils advocate for Leave on here.
Can’t you see that you’re as bad as the ERG or Farage, just dressed in blue and yellow rather than a red, white and blue.

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:I voted Remain and would do again, but will happily argue against those on the fringe at either end. Yes the avid Remainers mostly voted to trigger article 50 but have sought to frustrate it by almost every other deed.

Avid leavers are just as much to blame and I’ve said that many times. I’ll apportion blame where I think it is deserved regardless of whether they are on my side or not. I’ve criticised the leader of my party on here only today.

I may come across as a stringent Leaver on here as it’s a stringent Remainer echo chamber and I want some balance, but when the Leavers did come on here and say that the EU is bias against the UK I was happy to argue against that.

Finally, I won’t be called blind by someone happy to use hyperbole such as ‘sell the country to Trump’, and certainly won’t be called blind about politics by someone who doesn’t know the difference between resigning as a whip and resigning the whip.

One can't do balance from the leave pov, you just sound like a lunatic.

Thank you for proving why someone needed to play devils advocate for Leave on here.
Can’t you see that you’re as bad as the ERG or Farage, just dressed in blue and yellow rather than a red, white and blue.

I don't disagree people have a perfect right to vote in cretinous fashion, and absent of another referendum we have to honour the vote to leave (though given Brexit only means Brexit the very softest of Brexits would be sufficiently respectful). But it's not reasonable not to have something utterly stupid be called stupid, even if we have to do it, indeed we've spent billions of pounds on this campaign to be poorer already, and we'll spend billions more, and we've essentially closed down government whilst we do it with all sorts of chaos being wrought elsewhere.

And no, I can't see how I'm as bad as the ERG or Farage. I haven't lied to support a political movement that will wreak economic damage in return for providing none the of the solutions they claim it provides.

Put another way Mells if you're trying to provide balance it comes across like taking the side of climate change deniers in the global warming discussion. Leave (bar some very limited thinking on sovereignty which almost no actual Leaver even believes in anyway) has no objective basis for its claims and thus no objective reason to support it, it's entirely a subjective movement which like a religion requires faith to sustain it.

I'm not going to illegally seek to undermine the leave outcome, not even if we go full hard Brexit (though I'd strongly prefer that get a 2nd referendum and actual backing rather than being the default), but again it's there to be mocked, 'cause it is so fecking stupid

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Oh, yeah. She’s botched the sales pitch yet again. Though, why should we be worried about a sales pitch? These are our elected officials who run our nation. Geniuses, the lot. It reacts to everything that has been asked for. I’m not running through it again but it gives every faction something they want. MPs should be able to see past a non-existent sales pitch and take it a face value, ie it’s a compromise. Well, it’s more a capitulation but get my point.

I get that it gives a load away, and actually in that context makes it a really daft treaty, but she utterly does not learn. Its politics not logic, and steamrollering again is not good politics....you have to at least take loyalists with you ffs. The old WA was a better bet, i do think some ERG might have cracked, along with some leave constituent labourites. Now she has screwed the pooch with at least half the tory mp's.

Yep. It’s another f**k up. She was never suited to be leader and only became one because all her leadership rivals shot themselves in the foot one by one. She doesn’t learn from her lessons and her communication skills are dismal - great stories emerging about how she failed to tell anybody that Leadsom called to say she was resigning hence the initial public reaction from no10 that Leadsom’s resignation was a hostile act before having to row back.
BUT, people have been demanding she compromises, that she gives parliament more power. This wab does exactly that and still all sides shoot it down. What the f**k more do they want?
WAB 3 was defeated, she couldn’t bring it back. Not that it had a chance of winning a vote, regardless. It was only a few weeks ago you were telling me that the militant ERG numbers were in the late tens. What could she have done to persuade most of those and a few leaver Labs without losing a few off the Remain end of the ledger?
It’s a f**king mess and I’m starting to think we deserve a no deal Brexit. Luckily we’ve a bunch of clever clogs in parliament who will guide us through the choppy waters.
On the plus side, at least we can put to bed the notion that if only govt had compromised and given parliament greater say it all would’ve been, to stick with the boating theme, plain sailing.

Pretty irrelevant now, but I do think a good chunk of Labour leave constituency MPs were likely to crack after the local elections- John Mann said north of 25 could be persuaded to back WA3. I understand what you say about the compromises offered subsequently, but its all about the maths and a combination of a second referendum and customs union was absolutely mad imo, especially when she hadn't backed it off with Labour; though Labour will not back anything in the form of whipping their MPs proposed by this govt....they just want an election. Moot now though, but still buggered if I can see any way forward.

Diggers, I get it, you think it's a terrible idea etc etc but I'm not really defending the concept of leaving, other than there are some upsides, albeit limited ones and nowhere near in quality or quantity of staying, and that a halfway house is the worst of both worlds.

It's more this idea that you must be thick, inbred or racist to want to leave, or that it is all the ERG or the govts/Mays fault, or that it will inevitably lead to us being America/Singapore light, or that Brexiteers are Nazis at worst and racists at best (and yes I'd agree that a decent number of Leave voters are just racists/c**nts) or that it's ok to have a running total of deaths and celebrate when it theoretically meant that Remain would win a second ref or the premis that there were and are no lies coming from the Remain side. I could go on.

When I discuss Brexit in situations where most people are overwhelmingly ardent Leavers, I defend Remainers as staunchly from their insults and accusations as I defend Leave voters on here and I point the finger of blame at ardent Brexiteer MPs as much as I point the finger of blame at ardent Remainer MPs whilst on here. I've had my fair share of rows with ERG supporters whilst at Conservative meetings. I also have great discussions with many people who just want to get on with it whilst understanding that a second ref will solve nothing and no deal Brexit is madness.

In short, I think 30% of the country have been swallowed down the Brexit vortex and the rest of us have to watch you trade insults whilst nothing is achieved.

Just think, if we'd all accepted the referendum result we might out of the EU and negotiating the closest trade deal in the world, have continued joint initiatives, such as Erasmus, whilst also dealing with the myriad of other issues parliament should be dealing with, and the changes to everyday life would be almost imperceptible.

Mellsblue wrote:Diggers, I get it, you think it's a terrible idea etc etc but I'm not really defending the concept of leaving, other than there are some upsides, albeit limited ones and nowhere near in quality or quantity of staying, and that a halfway house is the worst of both worlds.

It's more this idea that you must be thick, inbred or racist to want to leave, or that it is all the ERG or the govts/Mays fault, or that it will inevitably lead to us being America/Singapore light, or that Brexiteers are Nazis at worst and racists at best (and yes I'd agree that a decent number of Leave voters are just racists/c**nts) or that it's ok to have a running total of deaths and celebrate when it theoretically meant that Remain would win a second ref or the premis that there were and are no lies coming from the Remain side. I could go on.

When I discuss Brexit in situations where most people are overwhelmingly ardent Leavers, I defend Remainers as staunchly from their insults and accusations as I defend Leave voters on here and I point the finger of blame at ardent Brexiteer MPs as much as I point the finger of blame at ardent Remainer MPs whilst on here. I've had my fair share of rows with ERG supporters whilst at Conservative meetings. I also have great discussions with many people who just want to get on with it whilst understanding that a second ref will solve nothing and no deal Brexit is madness.

In short, I think 30% of the country have been swallowed down the Brexit vortex and the rest of us have to watch you trade insults whilst nothing is achieved.

Just think, if we'd all accepted the referendum result we might out of the EU and negotiating the closest trade deal in the world, have continued joint initiatives, such as Erasmus, whilst also dealing with the myriad of other issues parliament should be dealing with, and the changes to everyday life would be almost imperceptible.

Fck you and your reasonableness. You have to agree, not debate.

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote: I get that it gives a load away, and actually in that context makes it a really daft treaty, but she utterly does not learn. Its politics not logic, and steamrollering again is not good politics....you have to at least take loyalists with you ffs. The old WA was a better bet, i do think some ERG might have cracked, along with some leave constituent labourites. Now she has screwed the pooch with at least half the tory mp's.

Yep. It’s another f**k up. She was never suited to be leader and only became one because all her leadership rivals shot themselves in the foot one by one. She doesn’t learn from her lessons and her communication skills are dismal - great stories emerging about how she failed to tell anybody that Leadsom called to say she was resigning hence the initial public reaction from no10 that Leadsom’s resignation was a hostile act before having to row back.
BUT, people have been demanding she compromises, that she gives parliament more power. This wab does exactly that and still all sides shoot it down. What the f**k more do they want?
WAB 3 was defeated, she couldn’t bring it back. Not that it had a chance of winning a vote, regardless. It was only a few weeks ago you were telling me that the militant ERG numbers were in the late tens. What could she have done to persuade most of those and a few leaver Labs without losing a few off the Remain end of the ledger?
It’s a f**king mess and I’m starting to think we deserve a no deal Brexit. Luckily we’ve a bunch of clever clogs in parliament who will guide us through the choppy waters.
On the plus side, at least we can put to bed the notion that if only govt had compromised and given parliament greater say it all would’ve been, to stick with the boating theme, plain sailing.

Pretty irrelevant now, but I do think a good chunk of Labour leave constituency MPs were likely to crack after the local elections- John Mann said north of 25 could be persuaded to back WA3. I understand what you say about the compromises offered subsequently, but its all about the maths and a combination of a second referendum and customs union was absolutely mad imo, especially when she hadn't backed it off with Labour; though Labour will not back anything in the form of whipping their MPs proposed by this govt....they just want an election. Moot now though, but still buggered if I can see any way forward.

All true. Second ref, parliamentary power and CU was a last, desperate shot but it's what large chunks of parliament have been asking for. That it was immediately blown out of the water by the Labour leadership is on them, not her. (For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not absolving her of all blame)
Mann may have provided 25 Lab Leavers but how many Con Brexiteers would she lose off the other side? More than 25, I would guess.
I can't see away forward. We need to rely on the Cons to vote for a sensible Leader of the party and parliament accepting Brexit is going to happen and that they need to come to an agreement. Evidence suggests none of that will happen.

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Diggers, I get it, you think it's a terrible idea etc etc but I'm not really defending the concept of leaving, other than there are some upsides, albeit limited ones and nowhere near in quality or quantity of staying, and that a halfway house is the worst of both worlds.

It's more this idea that you must be thick, inbred or racist to want to leave, or that it is all the ERG or the govts/Mays fault, or that it will inevitably lead to us being America/Singapore light, or that Brexiteers are Nazis at worst and racists at best (and yes I'd agree that a decent number of Leave voters are just racists/c**nts) or that it's ok to have a running total of deaths and celebrate when it theoretically meant that Remain would win a second ref or the premis that there were and are no lies coming from the Remain side. I could go on.

When I discuss Brexit in situations where most people are overwhelmingly ardent Leavers, I defend Remainers as staunchly from their insults and accusations as I defend Leave voters on here and I point the finger of blame at ardent Brexiteer MPs as much as I point the finger of blame at ardent Remainer MPs whilst on here. I've had my fair share of rows with ERG supporters whilst at Conservative meetings. I also have great discussions with many people who just want to get on with it whilst understanding that a second ref will solve nothing and no deal Brexit is madness.

In short, I think 30% of the country have been swallowed down the Brexit vortex and the rest of us have to watch you trade insults whilst nothing is achieved.

Just think, if we'd all accepted the referendum result we might out of the EU and negotiating the closest trade deal in the world, have continued joint initiatives, such as Erasmus, whilst also dealing with the myriad of other issues parliament should be dealing with, and the changes to everyday life would be almost imperceptible.

Fck you and your reasonableness. You have to agree, not debate.

That's more like it you liberal elite, Remainer scum.

twitchy wrote:

Ha. This made me giggle.

Donnell is offering his pearls of wisdom as to what went wrong. I bet May is really looking forward to the state visit from the clown circus now.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Yep. It’s another f**k up. She was never suited to be leader and only became one because all her leadership rivals shot themselves in the foot one by one. She doesn’t learn from her lessons and her communication skills are dismal - great stories emerging about how she failed to tell anybody that Leadsom called to say she was resigning hence the initial public reaction from no10 that Leadsom’s resignation was a hostile act before having to row back.
BUT, people have been demanding she compromises, that she gives parliament more power. This wab does exactly that and still all sides shoot it down. What the f**k more do they want?
WAB 3 was defeated, she couldn’t bring it back. Not that it had a chance of winning a vote, regardless. It was only a few weeks ago you were telling me that the militant ERG numbers were in the late tens. What could she have done to persuade most of those and a few leaver Labs without losing a few off the Remain end of the ledger?
It’s a f**king mess and I’m starting to think we deserve a no deal Brexit. Luckily we’ve a bunch of clever clogs in parliament who will guide us through the choppy waters.
On the plus side, at least we can put to bed the notion that if only govt had compromised and given parliament greater say it all would’ve been, to stick with the boating theme, plain sailing.

Pretty irrelevant now, but I do think a good chunk of Labour leave constituency MPs were likely to crack after the local elections- John Mann said north of 25 could be persuaded to back WA3. I understand what you say about the compromises offered subsequently, but its all about the maths and a combination of a second referendum and customs union was absolutely mad imo, especially when she hadn't backed it off with Labour; though Labour will not back anything in the form of whipping their MPs proposed by this govt....they just want an election. Moot now though, but still buggered if I can see any way forward.

All true. Second ref, parliamentary power and CU was a last, desperate shot but it's what large chunks of parliament have been asking for. That it was immediately blown out of the water by the Labour leadership is on them, not her. (For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not absolving her of all blame)
Mann may have provided 25 Lab Leavers but how many Con Brexiteers would she lose off the other side? More than 25, I would guess.
I can't see away forward. We need to rely on the Cons to vote for a sensible Leader of the party and parliament accepting Brexit is going to happen and that they need to come to an agreement. Evidence suggests none of that will happen.

My point was that 25 plus Labour leavers may have gone for WA3 without change, and ditto a couple more ERG'ers without losing any. It could have been close enough to make a minor shift to WA get through. We will never know. My key point remains though, with the parliamentary maths, she should have been 'socialising' and selling from day 1, rather than presenting fait accompli after fait accompli....the latest one being apparently totally unaware that Labour would say sod off, even if that's obvious to us. That said, Caroline Lucas actually said something I agree with for the first time ever..'While May was almost uniquely ill-equipped to be negotiator we needed, truth is she was given impossible job '. The tactical blunders she made time after time is what has really sunk her, but probably only a earlier than she would have sunk anyway

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote: Pretty irrelevant now, but I do think a good chunk of Labour leave constituency MPs were likely to crack after the local elections- John Mann said north of 25 could be persuaded to back WA3. I understand what you say about the compromises offered subsequently, but its all about the maths and a combination of a second referendum and customs union was absolutely mad imo, especially when she hadn't backed it off with Labour; though Labour will not back anything in the form of whipping their MPs proposed by this govt....they just want an election. Moot now though, but still buggered if I can see any way forward.

All true. Second ref, parliamentary power and CU was a last, desperate shot but it's what large chunks of parliament have been asking for. That it was immediately blown out of the water by the Labour leadership is on them, not her. (For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not absolving her of all blame)
Mann may have provided 25 Lab Leavers but how many Con Brexiteers would she lose off the other side? More than 25, I would guess.
I can't see away forward. We need to rely on the Cons to vote for a sensible Leader of the party and parliament accepting Brexit is going to happen and that they need to come to an agreement. Evidence suggests none of that will happen.

My point was that 25 plus Labour leavers may have gone for WA3 without change, and ditto a couple more ERG'ers without losing any. It could have been close enough to make a minor shift to WA get through. We will never know. My key point remains though, with the parliamentary maths, she should have been 'socialising' and selling from day 1, rather than presenting fait accompli after fait accompli....the latest one being apparently totally unaware that Labour would say sod off, even if that's obvious to us. That said, Caroline Lucas actually said something I agree with for the first time ever..'While May was almost uniquely ill-equipped to be negotiator we needed, truth is she was given impossible job '. The tactical blunders she made time after time is what has really sunk her, but probably only a earlier than she would have sunk anyway

Ah, I see. Sorry, I miss understood*. Bercow wouldn't let WA3 back, I think. It needed to be substantially different.
I'll agree all day long that she is wholly unsuitable to be a political leader, especially so in a hung parliament. I thought her becoming leader was a mistake from day one.
I agree both on your point re Caroline Lucas and with what she says.

*now I’ve re-read, that should say misread. You clearly put WA3!

morepork wrote:Donnell is offering his pearls of wisdom as to what went wrong. I bet May is really looking forward to the state visit from the clown circus now.

Just when you thought your week couldn’t get any worse......

Conservative leader timetable:
Nominations close during w/c 10th June.
Final two by end of June (hopefully).
Member vote before 24th July.

Mellsblue wrote:Conservative leader timetable:
Nominations close during w/c 10th June.
Final two by end of June (hopefully).
Member vote before 24th July.

Parliament goes on their well-earned summer holidays after that, cause bless their little souls, they're tired lambs. And then back in September with only 2 months left till B day, no time left for an election or a referendum or anything beyond further futile parliamentary prolixity. To top it off, we'll likely be blessed with the blond-haired twat in charge who thinks himself the second coming of Churchill and who will spin our inevitable No Deal triumph till it's polished and any consequences the results of the previous administration or those nasty Europeans.

I can think of worse uses of our precious deadline time than a Conservative leadership contest, but not very many.

Puja

Is Boris likely?

Puja wrote:I can think of worse uses of our precious deadline time than a Conservative leadership contest, but not very many.

I'm struggling here - could you name some?

morepork wrote:Is Boris likely?

He's actually being talked up as the (no laughing at the back) "reasonable" choice. The leadership contest is in two parts - first the big list of candidates are whittled down to two by the MPs, and then those two are voted on by the party membership. Boris has the Leave credentials of being part of the campaign, he's supported by the Victorian demographic of Rees-Mogg, but he's seen as more sensible (I'm serious, stop laughing) than frothing loonies like Francois or Raab, so there's a good chance that he'll be seen as a palatable Leave option. If he makes it to the final two, then the party membership are heavily Eurosceptic and "anti P-C" so they're very fond of him. He's got a disturbingly good chance.

Mind, who else is there? I remember looking at the candidates last time and thinking May was the best of a bad bunch and look how terrible she turned out. Now that honoured of "least-worst" probably goes to Amber Rudd, although she'll never win.

Which Tyler wrote:

Puja wrote:I can think of worse uses of our precious deadline time than a Conservative leadership contest, but not very many.

I'm struggling here - could you name some?

Sticking with May and continually voting on iterations of her withdrawal agreement.

Puja

If Boris gets to the final two he’ll win it. I think most of the parliamentary party realise they need a Leaver and he is the most palatable. It will depend on his manifesto. MP’s will accept him wanting Brexit as long as no deal isn’t plan A and the rest of his policies appeal to the liberal, one nation Conservative end of the party. He already has Mercer, who is seen as a rising star, and from what I’ve heard he also has Tugendhat, another rising star and chair of the foreign affairs committee, Gove has been saying nice things about him and it’s rumoured Morgan will be his other ‘big beast’. He also has the happy knack of winning, which is the ultimate aphrodisiac for a Conservative.

Many many think that Boris would be a reasonable bet given that he doesn’t really believe in anything other than himself and could potentially deviate from being a true Brexiteers if he got into office.

I don’t think any of the remainers have a chance.

Sandydragon wrote:I don’t think any of the remainers have a chance.

If the party members are given two Remainers it could all be over and I’d have to buy some sandals a pair of white socks and join the Lib Dems.

Sandydragon wrote:Many many think that Boris would be a reasonable bet given that he doesn’t really believe in anything other than himself and could potentially deviate from being a true Brexiteers if he got into office.

I don’t think any of the remainers have a chance.

I've seen those articles and I think they're wishful thinking. The theory that Boris might cancel Brexit/call a second referendum with a heavy heart runs on the idea that he'd value saving the country and being a saviour, which I think is misunderstanding the Boris self-preservation drive - he'll prioritise his political career over the well-being of the country, every day of the week.

I can see one remainer going through to the final two to offer "balance", but they'd be murdered by the members' vote.

Puja

Mellsblue wrote:Diggers, I get it, you think it's a terrible idea etc etc but I'm not really defending the concept of leaving, other than there are some upsides, albeit limited ones and nowhere near in quality or quantity of staying, and that a halfway house is the worst of both worlds.

It's more this idea that you must be thick, inbred or racist to want to leave, or that it is all the ERG or the govts/Mays fault, or that it will inevitably lead to us being America/Singapore light, or that Brexiteers are Nazis at worst and racists at best (and yes I'd agree that a decent number of Leave voters are just racists/c**nts) or that it's ok to have a running total of deaths and celebrate when it theoretically meant that Remain would win a second ref or the premis that there were and are no lies coming from the Remain side. I could go on.

When I discuss Brexit in situations where most people are overwhelmingly ardent Leavers, I defend Remainers as staunchly from their insults and accusations as I defend Leave voters on here and I point the finger of blame at ardent Brexiteer MPs as much as I point the finger of blame at ardent Remainer MPs whilst on here. I've had my fair share of rows with ERG supporters whilst at Conservative meetings. I also have great discussions with many people who just want to get on with it whilst understanding that a second ref will solve nothing and no deal Brexit is madness.

In short, I think 30% of the country have been swallowed down the Brexit vortex and the rest of us have to watch you trade insults whilst nothing is achieved.

Just think, if we'd all accepted the referendum result we might out of the EU and negotiating the closest trade deal in the world, have continued joint initiatives, such as Erasmus, whilst also dealing with the myriad of other issues parliament should be dealing with, and the changes to everyday life would be almost imperceptible.

Here's the thing, you state very simply we need to accept the referendum and that a halfway house is the worst of both worlds, which I disagree with, if I accept the referendum it's with the conclusion we should remain in the single market and customs union to minimise the damage of what is a very stupid decision, and technically I'm fine with that as we'd still be leaving the EU. So accepting the referendum is a very different thing depending on one's biases

Why you want to defend someone who's been busy being so stupid (and/or racist) I don't know, but if that's how you get your kicks so be it.