Brexit slowly becoming a Farce.

[Fullerene]

2 hours ago, Detournement said:

I would say it's vital to be dogmatic at the moment.

Nothing less than major government intervention is going to slow down widening inequality never mind reversing it. Labour needs a leader who can handle constant attacks when implementing redistributive policies. Corbyn has shown he is not going to back down.

Again I agree with you but that leader is not Corbyn.  Yes, all those other things are wonderful but Brexit has an urgency that overrides everything else.  His attitude to the EU is the same as it was 40 years ago yet he refuses to admit it.  How do you demonstrate leadership while being so duplicitous on a matter like this? 

[oldbitterandgrumpy]

4 minutes ago, zidane's child said:

I just meant by him still wanting Brexit and pushing ahead with it if he was in government.

That will appeal to the gammon types who want blue passports and our own trade deals etc etc.

I don't think the gammon types are that open minded. Even if they were, things would just trundle on . . . 

[DA Baracus]

If you put Theresa May in a black robe she'd look a lot like Emperor Palpatine. Her horrible old mad puss does look like it's been force lightninged to f**k after a fight with Mace Windu.

Like Palpatine she almost certainly enjoys the death of black people as well, given she's a Tory and Tories are well to the right of Palpatine.

Plus she dances like her entirely husk of a body is being fired by excruciating blasts of force lightning.

Also she's mad in to having an Empire.

Edited December 27, 2018 by DA Baracus

[John Lambies Doos]

Your Yougov pals.
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/labour-risks-falling-behind-the-lib-dems-if-it-pushes-through-brexit-1-5820736

Commissioned by the 'peoples vote campaign', nothing to see here!

[DA Baracus]

Rees-Mogg would be Grand Moff Tarkin, an old outdated racist.

[DA Baracus]

Corbyn would be the shit, irrelevant captain of the Enterprise from the TV show Enterprise given he seems like he's always in the wrong show.

And is shit and irrelevant.

[John Lambies Doos]

If you put Theresa May in a black robe she'd look a lot like Emperor Palpatine. Her horrible old mad puss does look like it's been force lightninged to f**k after a fight with Mace Windu.
Like Palpatine she almost certainly enjoys the death of black people as well, given she's a Tory and Tories are well to the right of Palpatine.
Plus she dances like her entirely husk of a body is being fired by excruciating blasts of force lightning.
Also she's mad in to having an Empire.

Are you really suggesting that May is an equal to Palpatine?

[DA Baracus]

5 minutes ago, John Lambies Doos said:

35 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

If you put Theresa May in a black robe she'd look a lot like Emperor Palpatine. Her horrible old mad puss does look like it's been force lightninged to f**k after a fight with Mace Windu.
Like Palpatine she almost certainly enjoys the death of black people as well, given she's a Tory and Tories are well to the right of Palpatine.
Plus she dances like her entirely husk of a body is being fired by excruciating blasts of force lightning.
Also she's mad in to having an Empire.

Are you really suggesting that May is an equal to Palpatine?

Of course not. She aspires to it but she won't get anywhere near. She couldn't even lead the Trade Federation.

f**k, she'd struggle to run Mos Eisley cantina, although she is experienced in dealing with hives of scum and villainy.

[oldbitterandgrumpy]

2 hours ago, MixuFixit said:

Inclined to disagree with this. Newspapers cultivate their audience more than the audience cultivates the newspaper. It is much stabler as a business to build demand for your product than to respond to the whims of shifting opinion. Otherwise why would a succession of prime ministers for 40 years have been only to happy to have 1-1 meetings with Rupert Murdoch?

See also Nigel Farage and the general tendency for Question Time to tack far harder to the right than reflects the views of the general population. Are they simply responding to public interest, or are they in fact pushing that Overton window every time they have him on?

 

Well . . . aye and no . . . Do papers cultivate their audience?  I don't think so. They want to sell papers, so they print  stuff their readers want to read. They don't have to capture the gammon market, because that's basically their business model, preach to the converted. The Daily Mail has recently taken a softer tone on Brexit. The reader's response?   Whinge, Moan. Shout . . . whatever . . . their minds are not for changing. 

[welshbairn]

1 hour ago, DA Baracus said:

Of course not. She aspires to it but she won't get anywhere near. She couldn't even lead the Trade Federation.

f**k, she'd struggle to run Mos Eisley cantina, although she is experienced in dealing with hives of scum and villainy.

My theory is that she crawled her way to power the Stalin and John Major way by sounding non  threatening but quietly mastering the procedural stuff, and finding enough people who didn't hate her. Her only passion is crushing immigrants. 

[oldbitterandgrumpy]

2 hours ago, MixuFixit said:

Inclined to disagree with this. Newspapers cultivate their audience more than the audience cultivates the newspaper. It is much stabler as a business to build demand for your product than to respond to the whims of shifting opinion. Otherwise why would a succession of prime ministers for 40 years have been only to happy to have 1-1 meetings with Rupert Murdoch?

See also Nigel Farage and the general tendency for Question Time to tack far harder to the right than reflects the views of the general population. Are they simply responding to public interest, or are they in fact pushing that Overton window every time they have him on?

 

The bold bit above. They don't. Newspapers (and sadly they are still relevant) are struggling to stay in business. They play to the crowd, preach to the converted . . . it's what any established newspaper does. They know their market and they go for it. The middle market ones really go for it. They're shooting fish in a barrel. They print some xenophobic shit about Poles or Pakistanis getting benefits and their readers lap it up. 

And, I'll agree, it is much stabler to build demand for your product, but it's newspapers we're talking about. They don't actually have a product, unless they react to their readers. 

[Granny Danger]

Corbyn calling for an early recall of Parliament knowing full well he won’t get it and at the same time failing to commit to what he will do.

His supporters must be cringing with embarrassment and/or getting really pissed off at his ineptitude.

 

[ICTJohnboy]

 

7 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Corbyn calling for an early recall of Parliament knowing full well he won’t get it and at the same time failing to commit to what he will do.

His supporters must be cringing with embarrassment and/or getting really pissed off at his ineptitude.

 

His reluctance to discuss the biggest issue facing the UK in a generation is utterly pathetic, and is making his party unelectable.

Having said that, I would vote labour if Keir Starmer was leader,and Diane Abbot was removed from the shadow cabinet.

[Fullerene]

9 hours ago, oldbitterandgrumpy said:

Well . . . aye and no . . . Do papers cultivate their audience?  I don't think so. They want to sell papers, so they print  stuff their readers want to read. They don't have to capture the gammon market, because that's basically their business model, preach to the converted. The Daily Mail has recently taken a softer tone on Brexit. The reader's response?   Whinge, Moan. Shout . . . whatever . . . their minds are not for changing. 

Newspapers tend to reinforce the opinions of their readers - otherwise their readers would desert them.

However they also form opinions for their readers on those subjects where their readers have none.  So, yes, the Daily Mail can stop rowing so hard against the EU and it doesn't matter - the mood and direction has been set, so the  hatred of the EU can continue without much assistance from the Daily Mail.

What gets me is why anyone should have had strong opinions about the EU in the first place.  It was set up to create a level playing field so that 6 countries, and now 28, could trade easily with each other as well as with other countries in the world.  Yes, it has its good points and its bad points but not to the extent of "let's have nothing to do with it".

UK newspapers are far less influence on the EU than they have with any UK government.  It was in their interest to whip up hostility to the EU and that goes a long way to explaining where we are now.

[zidane's child]

4 hours ago, Granny Danger said:

 

His supporters must be cringing with embarrassment and/or getting really pissed off at his ineptitude.

 

Yip I am - very much ticking a box with this.

[ICTJohnboy]

23 hours ago, WATTOO said:

The tabloid press surely have to take the majority of the blame ??

 

Just heard Ken Clarke on the BBC 1 o'clock news making that very point and mentioning that so much of what was reported by the tabloids was not only untruthful but inflammatory. 

I suspect that more tabloids are read here in Englandshire than in Scotland.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, ICTJohnboy said:

 

Just heard Ken Clarke on the BBC 1 o'clock news making that very point and mentioning that so much of what was reported by the tabloids was not only untruthful but inflammatory. 

I suspect that more tabloids are read here in Englandshire than in Scotland.

No doubt we'll find out in years to come that it was actually the Russians / Chinese / North Koreans who had infiltrated us at the highest levels of journalism and that this was all part of a big plot to destroy the Great British Empire (oops, I've obviously been reading the Mail recently and still believe we're a powerful nation).................

[harry94]

 
His reluctance to discuss the biggest issue facing the UK in a generation is utterly pathetic, and is making his party unelectable.
Having said that, I would vote labour if Keir Starmer was leader,and Diane Abbot was removed from the shadow cabinet.

But the EU is bad for Corbyn because it'll be slightly harder to bring a tiny proportion of services into public ownership when Labour win a majority government. That makes it well worthwhile for the biggest job losses in a generation and more poverty.

I sympathise with Corbyn and I admire that he is really commited to his cause but it's pretty horrific that they are reasoning with economic destruction and scared to articulate a proper defence.

[FlyerTon]

British government to spend more than £100m on chartering ferries, in the case of a no deal Brexit:

"The contingency plans allow for almost 4,000 more lorries a week to come and go from other ports, including Plymouth, Poole, and Portsmouth"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46704522

[Romeo]

I'm sure the Government calling a major incident now after 200 people tried to cross the channel has nothing to do with May trying to get her brexit deal through.

Especially since this has been going on for a while.