If their credibilty equated to degrees kelvin you could operate superconductors in their underwear.
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
I agree. Many inside the H o C, from all political parties, have been exposed for what they are, what they represent and how competent they are. It's not a pretty sight.
Well today was supposed to be a landmark day. The day we put the Great back into Great Britain (I know flecc), the day our leaders launched us into the wider world, the day we were supposed to be spellbound by the prosperity, investment and new found wealth as it was divided evenly and fairly amongst us all.
Instead, today is our country's equivalent of standing in the fruit and veg section at Waitrose and performing a very loud & very strained stuttering wet fart with a smidgen of follow through and a ghastly after stench. An odour which smells like something straight out of the gates of Hell. Observers (the world) will be looking at us not knowing whether to fold double laughing or to be sick.
Unfortunately the duty of dealing with the heavily soiled Brexit undergarments now falls to us all. I'm sorry I voted leave.
Last edited:
I agree with the sentiments of this. But it isn't at all lost on me that if it weren't for our disunited corrupt hoc disagreeing with may and each other we could either have found ourselves deep down a catastrophic hard Brexit (it may have taken two or three generations to get out of, at catastrophic cost); or in a ultra right wing erg reality that would have, culturally, taken us back to a pre ww2 world in which Germany won. so, on balance, I am, in this much less than perfect world, developing a grudging gratitude to out corrupt mp's
Apparently, the Scots are to blame for this Brexit mess.
According to Edwina Currie speaking on Radio Scotland this morning we wouldn't be in this mess if more Scots had voted to remain.
It seems that 62% in favour of remaining wasn't enough for her.
I don't know why she singled out the Scots, surely her comment applies to the whole UK.
According to Edwina Currie speaking on Radio Scotland this morning we wouldn't be in this mess if more Scots had voted to remain.
It seems that 62% in favour of remaining wasn't enough for her.
I don't know why she singled out the Scots, surely her comment applies to the whole UK.
I think we, posters on here, underestimate JC a bit.
He has managed so far to:
a. stall brexit
b. give remainers some space and a chance to cancel A50
c. give a discreet hand to the people's vote campaign
d. hold most Labour MPs together
e. tone down John McDonnell's economic policy
while appearing indecisive, he is still a very shrewd operator.
All that would have happened without Corbyn. There is little evidence to attribute any of that to his actions, well lack of them.
Had he bad a credible and constant opinion on remaining, and actually opposed the government, worded his manifesto to represent an opposition rather than trying to hedge his bets we could have had an actual definitive position on countries wishes. Instead he has represented no one and plans on inheriting power rather than earning it. Result however, IMHO, is he appears incapable of making a decision, wishy washy at best. Opposing May in silly issues, refusing to speak and and then rushing off to meet EU.
A gifted Labour states person would be in number 10 by now. Fortunately for Tories and unfortunately for country we have Corbyn, marxist McDonnel and Diane Abbott. I, m sorry but the 3 of them are utterly unelctable.
No, brexit cannot be stalled without JC's help.
He is eurosceptic but definitely not a brexiteer.
As for one Diane Abbott, you can wheel out a few tories like Grayling, David Davis and Raab.
Absolutely, and what I've been saying for ages. His apparent indecisiveness is part of his art, the product of many years experience in politics.
Zlatan disagrees with you on this as he does with me, but he's never understood subtlety.
.
I think her point was that Scotland's turnout was low and that remainers who didn't vote should have done so.
Watching his performance most weeks for the last couple of years at PMQs I do't get that impression at all. He does not seem to be able to think on his feet when it really matters. If he asks a question and May gives an honest answer to the question that he was not expecting, which basically means her govt had got something wrong, it completely throws him.
He will just carry on reading the prepared questions that his advisors have given him even though the initial question had already been answered completely. You see the faces of some of the brighter labour MPs in the background at this moment. You can almost read their minds they are thinking how on earth did we end up with this light weight as our leader.
Any half decent opposition leader should have been wiping the floor every week for the last couple of years due to the mess she has made of everything, but that has not been the case. Last time I looked Labour and the Tories were about neck and neck in the polls, and May had a higher rating than Corbin, which if you think about it, it absolutely unbelievable.
Andrew Neil made a good point last night on the late night politics show. I was fairly surprised when he said it as I always assumed he was fairly right wing. I cant remember his exact quote but it was his reason for the rise of Populism in Europe and far right parties over there and Brexit over here.
He said for the last 40 years or so Capital had been getting richer and richer and labour had stagnated or even got poorer. I agree with this if a tiny proportion of the population are acquiring all the wealth and a big proportion of the population are not getting anywhere, or even becoming poorer then sooner or later people are willing to take a chance on people that propose simple solutions to complex problems.
He said for the last 40 years or so Capital had been getting richer and richer and labour had stagnated or even got poorer. I agree with this if a tiny proportion of the population are acquiring all the wealth and a big proportion of the population are not getting anywhere, or even becoming poorer then sooner or later people are willing to take a chance on people that propose simple solutions to complex problems.
I thought that Frank Luntz was brilliant. His take on populism, from when he was campaigning for Ross Perot to present day, was very convincing.
"it's a nice way to get elected but not a good way to do your work".
does it ring any bell, I wonder.
"Eurosceptic but not brexiteer" sums him up, but he wants to leave EU, has never supported any EU initiatives, openly opposing many and expects voters to understand that.
He has exactly same none stance on defence.
Its exactly why he is unelectable before we even go into his financial stance.
Factions of his own party call him a remainer, whilst he is known to be biggest EU sceptic in parliament, against his own MPs???
Tories are in a mess but nothing like Labour.
Flecc might see his policy as subtle. I see it as confused,at best he, s trying to appeal to everyone unfortunately he ends up appealing to none. Apart from flecc. Be honest Woosh
A)Would you vote for him.?
B) Would you want him PM?
yes, I agree that he wants to leave the EU but not cause damage to the economy.
On that, he has my support and I think he may whip Labour MPs to vote for the WA later today.
That will extend A50 to 22-May and rule out no deal.
Still enough time to deal with the future relationship or even cancel A50 and start allover again.
Corbyn is as thick as mince. His indecision is because of a lack of brain power. He's an accidental leader. He lacks in every department apart from growing marrows and making friends with terrorists.
Feel a bit like a sommelier, but could i recomend to the thread that we dont feed this noxious troll until it comes up with something worth responding to?