RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Which Tyler wrote: Quitting the party as well
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49623737

There must be other moderate tories aghast at what's happened to their party. How many will have the courage of their conditions, and how many will keep their head down and support their team?

It was truly weird that she and Hancock had stayed mute, it cannot possibly be something they agree with. I was even a little worried about Amber until now

Rudd hadn’t stayed mute. She was very vocal about it.

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:
It was truly weird that she and Hancock had stayed mute, it cannot possibly be something they agree with. I was even a little worried about Amber until now

Rudd hadn’t stayed mute. She was very vocal about it.

in the last 7 days I heard nothing until today from her. which left she'd gone mad, was hanging around for the worst time to put the knife in, or was going to claim things would be worse if she left

in the event she's just gone, and quite down key in fashion it was too

Which Tyler wrote:Hopefully, the media having noticed and published (and us spreading) this means that it won't happen; but...

Anyone protesting today - stay safe.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 95161.html

Brexit: Far-right groups threaten to riot at London protests as Boris Johnson warned over language
‘It’s time to f*** s*** up,’ extremists threaten after parliament moves to block no-deal Brexit

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Rudd hadn’t stayed mute. She was very vocal about it.

in the last 7 days I heard nothing until today from her. which left she'd gone mad, was hanging around for the worst time to put the knife in, or was going to claim things would be worse if she left

in the event she's just gone, and quite down key in fashion it was too

We’ll, if you hadn’t heard it can’t have happened. Down key fashion..... sounds good given all the hyperbole and grandstanding that’s sadly become the norm.

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:
in the last 7 days I heard nothing until today from her. which left she'd gone mad, was hanging around for the worst time to put the knife in, or was going to claim things would be worse if she left

in the event she's just gone, and quite down key in fashion it was too

We’ll, if you hadn’t heard it can’t have happened. Down key fashion..... sounds good given all the hyperbole and grandstanding that’s sadly become the norm.

I don't see any way Amber Rudd was making even minorly significant comments in public and it's not going to get reported on

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: We’ll, if you hadn’t heard it can’t have happened. Down key fashion..... sounds good given all the hyperbole and grandstanding that’s sadly become the norm.

I don't see any way Amber Rudd was making even minorly significant comments in public and it's not going to get reported on

From what I’ve heard from a close political ally of hers, when Ruth Davidson quit she told cabinet exactly what she thought and has been working to curb ERG excesses since day 1 of the Johnson govt. She’s also tried to concentrate on a very important portfolio and rightly wanted that to not be overshadowed by arguments with the idiots at no10 and the ERG. Imagine wanting to give primacy to the day job rather fixate solely on Brexit.
There are ways of exerting political influence without recourse to the media. Especially when sat around the same (cabinet office) table as those she’d like to influence.

Banquo wrote:If there was an election on the 15th, what’s the verdict? or as more likely post an extension, what then?

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:
I don't see any way Amber Rudd was making even minorly significant comments in public and it's not going to get reported on

From what I’ve heard from a close political ally of hers, when Ruth Davidson quit she told cabinet exactly what she thought and has been working to curb ERG excesses since day 1 of the Johnson govt. She’s also tried to concentrate on a very important portfolio and rightly wanted that to not be overshadowed by arguments with the idiots at no10 and the ERG. Imagine wanting to give primacy to the day job rather fixate solely on Brexit.
There are ways of exerting political influence without recourse to the media. Especially when sat around the same (cabinet office) table as those she’d like to influence.

I have no problems she wanted to concentrate on an important job, I can understand given her affiliation to the party taking Boris at his word he'd seek a deal. I didn't understand her staying quiet once Boris had decided to close Parliament and then fired 21 colleagues, it simply didn't stack up with anything I'd ever heard from her that that was a situation she could accept, and it turns out she couldn't. Whether she took a few days to consult with friends and/or wanted to let Jo go first I don't know, it was just a bit weird she and Hancock were possibly staying put. Amber has gone now, which just leaves one wondering how the blazes Hancock is rationalising his continuation in cabinet, maybe he has come to Damascus as with Niki Morgan, the rest of the cabinet I either know little to nothing about or consider self serving as with Boris or insane so I doubt anyone else goes, the remainder have well and truly taken the red pill

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: From what I’ve heard from a close political ally of hers, when Ruth Davidson quit she told cabinet exactly what she thought and has been working to curb ERG excesses since day 1 of the Johnson govt. She’s also tried to concentrate on a very important portfolio and rightly wanted that to not be overshadowed by arguments with the idiots at no10 and the ERG. Imagine wanting to give primacy to the day job rather fixate solely on Brexit.
There are ways of exerting political influence without recourse to the media. Especially when sat around the same (cabinet office) table as those she’d like to influence.

I have no problems she wanted to concentrate on an important job, I can understand given her affiliation to the party taking Boris at his word he'd seek a deal. I didn't understand her staying quiet once Boris had decided to close Parliament and then fired 21 colleagues, it simply didn't stack up with anything I'd ever heard from her that that was a situation she could accept, and it turns out she couldn't. Whether she took a few days to consult with friends and/or wanted to let Jo go first I don't know, it was just a bit weird she and Hancock were possibly staying put. Amber has gone now, which just leaves one wondering how the blazes Hancock is rationalising his continuation in cabinet, maybe he has come to Damascus as with Niki Morgan, the rest of the cabinet I either know little to nothing about or consider self serving as with Boris or insane so I doubt anyone else goes, the remainder have well and truly taken the red pill

She obviously had her reasons for staying quiet in public, getting on with the day job and trying to influence behind the scenes. From what I know of her, this is usually how she operates. I’m surprised Morgan hasn’t piped up more or quit, not so Hancock. He has as much ambition as Johnson. I’m sure Rudd will now say more in public. She’s no longer under cabinet collective responsibility, remember when that used to be a thing, so may feel she can speak freely.
All that said, it’s one less sensible voice at the table. The echo chambers that pervade social media may now be entering no10. Good luck everyone.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:If there was an election on the 15th, what’s the verdict? or as more likely post an extension, what then?

No idea. Couldn't tell you if we're firing a few dozen members of staff or not, simply not the faintest idea where we stand on being able to continue on any number of contracts, and that situation must replicate in varying ways across so many businesses one almost has to laugh, or cry, though perhaps we're better off leaving the crying once again to Alexander

I assume as regards parliament we will end up with another election, with team Boris and Farage abandoning all talk of the Single Market, the Lib Dems, the SNP going full on 2nd referendum, and Labour coming up with a dreary fudge. All of which probably doesn't change the arithmetic of parliament much. I'm also assuming we get an extension as I can't even see Boris wanting to pull the pin with so much preparation still to do even if he has his heart set on no deal. The EU aren't going to refuse an extension, they will not want to get tagged with the failure to do so, Macron will posture but can't really want to pull the pin himself either.

The wild cards are Orban and Morawiecki

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:If there was an election on the 15th, what’s the verdict? or as more likely post an extension, what then?

No idea. Couldn't tell you if we're firing a few dozen members of staff or not, simply not the faintest idea where we stand on being able to continue on any number of contracts, and that situation must replicate in varying ways across so many businesses one almost has to laugh, or cry, though perhaps we're better off leaving the crying once again to Alexander

I assume as regards parliament we will end up with another election, with team Boris and Farage abandoning all talk of the Single Market, the Lib Dems, the SNP going full on 2nd referendum, and Labour coming up with a dreary fudge. All of which probably doesn't change the arithmetic of parliament much. I'm also assuming we get an extension as I can't even see Boris wanting to pull the pin with so much preparation still to do even if he has his heart set on no deal. The EU aren't going to refuse an extension, they will not want to get tagged with the failure to do so, Macron will posture but can't really want to pull the pin himself either.

The wild cards are Orban and Morawiecki

In the same boat business wise as it happens.
I was hoping someone might have some insight or guesswork on likely political outcomes in two election scenarios, but thanks for the...um...insight

Son of Mathonwy wrote:The Tory independents ought to join the lib Dems - Clarke's been more aligned with their policies than his (former) party's for years. But tribal loyalty (and hatred, no doubt) stops them. Maybe they will in time, as with the ChUKers, if they still have political ambitions.

The real shame would be if they give up on politics. Which is no doubt what BJ and Farage would prefer.

Digby wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:The Tory independents ought to join the lib Dems - Clarke's been more aligned with their policies than his (former) party's for years. But tribal loyalty (and hatred, no doubt) stops them. Maybe they will in time, as with the ChUKers, if they still have political ambitions.

The real shame would be if they give up on politics. Which is no doubt what BJ and Farage would prefer.

The lefty part of the Lib Dems is way off kilter for someone like Clarke, it's not an easy fit beyond the single issue. Bell joining the Lib Dems I cannot see lasting. Though myself I'll not worry if the Lib Dems get dragged a little to the right

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:The Tory independents ought to join the lib Dems - Clarke's been more aligned with their policies than his (former) party's for years. But tribal loyalty (and hatred, no doubt) stops them. Maybe they will in time, as with the ChUKers, if they still have political ambitions.

The real shame would be if they give up on politics. Which is no doubt what BJ and Farage would prefer.

The lefty part of the Lib Dems is way off kilter for someone like Clarke, it's not an easy fit beyond the single issue. Bell joining the Lib Dems I cannot see lasting. Though myself I'll not worry if the Lib Dems get dragged a little to the right

Bell?
Lot of Labour MPs quietly quitting or switching, no doubt because they are about to be Momentum'd.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
The lefty part of the Lib Dems is way off kilter for someone like Clarke, it's not an easy fit beyond the single issue. Bell joining the Lib Dems I cannot see lasting. Though myself I'll not worry if the Lib Dems get dragged a little to the right

Bell?
Lot of Labour MPs quietly quitting or switching, no doubt because they are about to be Momentum'd.

Bell is a bit weird when I meant Lee (the chap who walked across the Commons to sit down next to Jo Swinson)

And yep, Labour as with the Tories are going for a purge, this wouldn't be such a mess if Labour were a viable option to vote for

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: Bell?
Lot of Labour MPs quietly quitting or switching, no doubt because they are about to be Momentum'd.

Bell is a bit weird when I meant Lee (the chap who walked across the Commons to sit down next to Jo Swinson)

And yep, Labour as with the Tories are going for a purge, this wouldn't be such a mess if Labour were a viable option to vote for

quite. Centre ground needs something credible to emerge.

Angela Smith has gone to the LDs.

Sandydragon wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
Bell is a bit weird when I meant Lee (the chap who walked across the Commons to sit down next to Jo Swinson)

And yep, Labour as with the Tories are going for a purge, this wouldn't be such a mess if Labour were a viable option to vote for

quite. Centre ground needs something credible to emerge.

Angela Smith has gone to the LDs.

The Lib Dem’s wasted so many years under Cable who was Mr Anonymous.

Mellsblue wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:I know this is Rugby Rebels but I’m not getting into an argument over the meaning of plenty
I don’t think the softest of soft Brexits would satisfy Leavers, you do. Unless one of US decides to study for a doctorate on the subject I doubt we’ll find out the truth!

Damn, I thought we could have got at least a couple more pages out of that.

A soft Brexit won't satisfy all leavers but it might well satisfy enough of them.

I’m up for giving it a go!!

I’m sure it will. I think something along the lines of Common Market 2.0 would be acceptable. It is pretty much what the official Leave campaign stood on and gets you out of most of the mechanisms and institutions that piss people off, ie the ones I listed when showing WT I didn’t think Norway = brino. My disagreement with you was that you couldn’t leave the EU but stay in the CU, SM, CAP, CFP etc etc and please most/enough/plenty Leavers. Another good thing about Common Market 2.0 is that it keeps freedom of movement which is the thing that seems to have emotionally affected people the most. Stom is rightly worried about it and it’s causing my mother in law (and therefore my wife and therefore me), and all the other expats she knows in France, a lot of stress.

Before anyone picks me up on the fact that I’ve argued there should be no need for compromise. I still believe that if you lose a vote (which I did) then you lose, and I still believe that Canada++ would be closest to what Leave campaigned on. Admittedly, there is ambiguity on whether that included staying in the SM depending on who you listened to!! However, if Canada++ isn’t acceptable, and it may have now been ruled out unilaterally and seemingly out of nowhere by Macron, and freedom of movement is, rightly, such a big concern then I think Common Market 2.0 should tick enough of the boxes for Leavers. Plus, as mentioned above, there were those such as Hannan who said that Brexit didn’t mean leaving the SM. Though, a lot of Leavers think he’s an idiot and thoroughly wrong on every other point he makes!

Al that must gives us at least enough for another page

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Banquo wrote: quite. Centre ground needs something credible to emerge.

Angela Smith has gone to the LDs.

The Lib Dem’s wasted so many years under Cable who was Mr Anonymous.

In fairness they were bu55ered for many of those years by being 'tainted' from Govt with the Tories, and really wasn't it Farron i/c for a lot of their rehab time, Cable wasn't even an MP from 15-17 and not leader til after the 17 election.....and under him they have actually done well in local elections etc; their role in reining in austerity overdrive and other stuff was overlooked in tuition fee-gate. Unfortunately Swinson is marmite.

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:
I have no problems she wanted to concentrate on an important job, I can understand given her affiliation to the party taking Boris at his word he'd seek a deal. I didn't understand her staying quiet once Boris had decided to close Parliament and then fired 21 colleagues, it simply didn't stack up with anything I'd ever heard from her that that was a situation she could accept, and it turns out she couldn't. Whether she took a few days to consult with friends and/or wanted to let Jo go first I don't know, it was just a bit weird she and Hancock were possibly staying put. Amber has gone now, which just leaves one wondering how the blazes Hancock is rationalising his continuation in cabinet, maybe he has come to Damascus as with Niki Morgan, the rest of the cabinet I either know little to nothing about or consider self serving as with Boris or insane so I doubt anyone else goes, the remainder have well and truly taken the red pill

She obviously had her reasons for staying quiet in public, getting on with the day job and trying to influence behind the scenes. From what I know of her, this is usually how she operates. I’m surprised Morgan hasn’t piped up more or quit, not so Hancock. He has as much ambition as Johnson. I’m sure Rudd will now say more in public. She’s no longer under cabinet collective responsibility, remember when that used to be a thing, so may feel she can speak freely.
All that said, it’s one less sensible voice at the table. The echo chambers that pervade social media may now be entering no10. Good luck everyone.

The reasons can't have been getting on with the day job really, 3-4 days more isn't going to do much. And Hancock can have as much ambition as he wants, he's going to need a lot of patience and maybe 2-3 general election losses before they wouldn't consider him too wet as a leader, and by then someone with charisma might have emerged

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Damn, I thought we could have got at least a couple more pages out of that.

A soft Brexit won't satisfy all leavers but it might well satisfy enough of them.

I’m up for giving it a go!!

I’m sure it will. I think something along the lines of Common Market 2.0 would be acceptable. It is pretty much what the official Leave campaign stood on and gets you out of most of the mechanisms and institutions that piss people off, ie the ones I listed when showing WT I didn’t think Norway = brino. My disagreement with you was that you couldn’t leave the EU but stay in the CU, SM, CAP, CFP etc etc and please most/enough/plenty Leavers. Another good thing about Common Market 2.0 is that it keeps freedom of movement which is the thing that seems to have emotionally affected people the most. Stom is rightly worried about it and it’s causing my mother in law (and therefore my wife and therefore me), and all the other expats she knows in France, a lot of stress.

Before anyone picks me up on the fact that I’ve argued there should be no need for compromise. I still believe that if you lose a vote (which I did) then you lose, and I still believe that Canada++ would be closest to what Leave campaigned on. Admittedly, there is ambiguity on whether that included staying in the SM depending on who you listened to!! However, if Canada++ isn’t acceptable, and it may have now been ruled out unilaterally and seemingly out of nowhere by Macron, and freedom of movement is, rightly, such a big concern then I think Common Market 2.0 should tick enough of the boxes for Leavers. Plus, as mentioned above, there were those such as Hannan who said that Brexit didn’t mean leaving the SM. Though, a lot of Leavers think he’s an idiot and thoroughly wrong on every other point he makes!

Al that must gives us at least enough for another page

To be honest, although my preferred soft Brexit would be what you call Brino, I guess joining EFTA would be fairly acceptable... other than the Northern Ireland issue - I don't know enough about the issue to know if anything other than the CU and hence open border would keep the Good Friday Agreement functioning (clearly May was unable to find such a solution).

On the matter of compromise, consider this, the curry house analogy:

29 people are planning to go out for an office celebration. They take a vote on whether or not to go to the local Indian restaurant. The result is 15 for and 14 against (that's 52:48 ). So Indian it is.

On approaching the restaurant, the holder of the social fund announces that, as money is tight everyone will have to have the same meal. So the question is, what should the meal be?

In particular, would it be reasonable to order 29 servings of extra strength vindaloo?
The 14 who were against curry would almost certainly not like this but indeed how many of the 15 would in all honesty prefer a mild dish? Indeed who knows how many, if any, of the group would actually like the strongest possible curry, since no one was ever asked this?

Surely, I would argue, it is more likely to be acceptable to the majority if a mild curry is chosen.

(To take the analogy further, onto other issues:
After they are told they must all have the same dish, someone says, "Hold on. Do we really want to have a curry after all (now that we appreciate the details of the idea)? Would anyone fancy a pizza instead, next door? Can we have another show of hands, just to make sure what we really want before it's too late?")

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: She obviously had her reasons for staying quiet in public, getting on with the day job and trying to influence behind the scenes. From what I know of her, this is usually how she operates. I’m surprised Morgan hasn’t piped up more or quit, not so Hancock. He has as much ambition as Johnson. I’m sure Rudd will now say more in public. She’s no longer under cabinet collective responsibility, remember when that used to be a thing, so may feel she can speak freely.
All that said, it’s one less sensible voice at the table. The echo chambers that pervade social media may now be entering no10. Good luck everyone.

The reasons can't have been getting on with the day job really, 3-4 days more isn't going to do much. And Hancock can have as much ambition as he wants, he's going to need a lot of patience and maybe 2-3 general election losses before they wouldn't consider him too wet as a leader, and by then someone with charisma might have emerged

May be she spent the last 3/4 days trying to get the whip reinstated for Clarke et al. Who knows. That said, there was nothing in the media so she must’ve just been sat in her office playing minesweeper.

Mellsblue wrote:I know the current political class isn’t the sharpest but we surely don’t need to dumb it down that much.
Ive aired my views on whether compromise should be required but I’ll go with this.....if Remain had won 52:48 I’m pretty certain they (we) wouldn’t have said “You know what, it’s so close let’s compromise. We’ll leave the EU and join EFTA”.