Brexit Thread

I don't live in the UK, so my knowledge in this situation is very limited. And I visited England before the Brexit.
I met a guy from England recently. He is half English half Filipino. He told me that racism increased ever since the Brexit. He was punched at a sidewalk by a random pedestrian, for example.

On the other hand, Theresa May's administration is very different from Trump's, which is contrary to what a lot of the Brexit supporters believe. For example, many of the Brexit supporters have no idea who Steve Bannon is. This I got the impression from the Brexit supporters I met.

Labour doesn't need to shift to "The Right" it needs to shift to "The Centre".

Corbyn enjoyed some initial popularity due to being seen as "honest" and a "decent bloke" but after the faff that was "Train Gate" he's lost that advantage. His leadership is just poor, he tries to drag people with him rather than lead then and when they refuse to follow he doesn't punish them or resign, he just gives a grumpy interview about how he's saying AND he was right. He should have resigned after failing to convince Labour to back disarmament, or he should have accepted the decision of the party.

Nope, just gave a grumpy TV interview.

For God's sake, his son is being employed by his shadow Chancellor, which is Nepotism! At least Nepotistic Tories have the decency to just send Toby to work quietly in Agriculture for a few years, not station him at one remove from your own department!

Look - Theresa May is not popular, she wasn't the leader at the last election, she's further to the Right than Cameron and - bluntly - she's not very likeable. Despite all those disadvantages she has Corbyn beat coming and going.

Without a credible opposition: what reason does may have to restrain herself? Would it be beetter or worse that she did?

An excellent question - one would like to argue that her own morality should restrain her in some ways but morality doesn't always stop you making poorly thought out choices.

I used to think anyone would be better than another Blair, I still do for the position of majority government, but I fear that I am starting to wonder if I was wrong in my assessment for the position of effective opposition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

Labour doesn't need to shift to "The Right" it needs to shift to "The Centre".

Corbyn enjoyed some initial popularity due to being seen as "honest" and a "decent bloke" but after the faff that was "Train Gate" he's lost that advantage. His leadership is just poor, he tries to drag people with him rather than lead then and when they refuse to follow he doesn't punish them or resign, he just gives a grumpy interview about how he's saying AND he was right. He should have resigned after failing to convince Labour to back disarmament, or he should have accepted the decision of the party.

Nope, just gave a grumpy TV interview.

For God's sake, his son is being employed by his shadow Chancellor, which is Nepotism! At least Nepotistic Tories have the decency to just send Toby to work quietly in Agriculture for a few years, not station him at one remove from your own department!

Look - Theresa May is not popular, she wasn't the leader at the last election, she's further to the Right than Cameron and - bluntly - she's not very likeable. Despite all those disadvantages she has Corbyn beat coming and going.

---

Right now, Labour needs someone competent. Even halfway competent would be far better than the current leader (Blair was ridiculously competent). See the horror stories from people who've worked with Corbyn and have resigned as they found his incompetence intolerable. See Corbyn refusing 9am meetings during the referendum campaign because they were far too early (one of his aides described the 11am Virgin train as early). If this were a real world job, Corbyn would have been fired for incompetence, slacking, and everything else, not long after they'd applied the Peter Principle to him. But this isn't the real world, so Momentum keeps him in the highly paid job of leader of the oppo, despite doing neither of the job descriptions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Council ‘shock’ at Growth Deal announcement

What was that I said?

If the country mice are so confident about life outside the EU, then they should accept whatever the UK government hands out to them rather than ask for assurances, including any loss of investment as the price to be paid for reasserting national sovereignty. As with the cited example of Liverpool, back in the days before the EU took an interest in promoting regional identities, the UK government were free to carry out a policy of starving regions that were deemed to be politically undesirable or irrelevant. That kind of policymaking was, of course, what estranged Scotland from England, with the Scots deemed to be a suitable test bed for policies that the UK government wanted to try out on a limited scope before introducing them to England. With the Europeans out of the equation, the UK government is free to resume this strategy, free from any worry that the EU may make up for what they deliberately set out to deprive the regions of.

Serves them right.

---

Well, who'd have thought it, apart from everyone? Indeed, an turkyow a-wruk ragleva dhe nadilek*, as I believe they in that part of the country...

*the turkeys voted for Christmas

Its almost as if they expect the remaining 2-3 years of eu funding to cover the need of the next 3 years, or something.

The repeated calls for Corbyn to resign for a difference of opinion are quite amusing given he has very recently crushed his opponents in leadership contests not once but twice, given that maybe it is not actually him who has the problem.

I tried to look it up and I'm guessing what you are referring to is the fact that it didn't get enough support to get voted on or are my search engine skills just lacking...?

One place they did have a vote on it was Scotland, Scottish Labour went 70-30, quite relevant given our discussion earlier.

Labour barring something dramatic are not going to win the next election, whether it was Corbyn, David Milliband or whoever, a shift over to the right, or what some on the right might call the centre though, will just continue to lose Labour votes in the long term it would be a killer for them.

I'm not saying there aren't any votes that can be picked up by moving to the right just that they result in a net loss of votes. Now if the Tories start to lose it a bit that could start to change a bit, lots of votes would still be lost, maybe even still a net loss overall but the numbers might work if they come in the right places. Although I do wonder what that fuelling the smaller parties could mean long term.

Although to be perfectly honest if it meant another Blair I'd rather not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

The repeated calls for Corbyn to resign for a difference of opinion are quite amusing given he has very recently crushed his opponents in leadership contests not once but twice, given that maybe it is not actually him who has the problem.

I tried to look it up and I'm guessing what you are referring to is the fact that it didn't get enough support to get voted on or are my search engine skills just lacking...?

One place they did have a vote on it was Scotland, Scottish Labour went 70-30, quite relevant given our discussion earlier.

Labour barring something dramatic are not going to win the next election, whether it was Corbyn, David Milliband or whoever, a shift over to the right, or what some on the right might call the centre though, will just continue to lose Labour votes in the long term it would be a killer for them.

I'm not saying there aren't any votes that can be picked up by moving to the right just that they result in a net loss of votes. Now if the Tories start to lose it a bit that could start to change a bit, lots of votes would still be lost, maybe even still a net loss overall but the numbers might work if they come in the right places. Although I do wonder what that fuelling the smaller parties could mean long term.

Although to be perfectly honest if it meant another Blair I'd rather not.

---

Corbyn is Far-Left, there's a lot of Left to go before you even get to the Centre, let alone the Right.

Labour should be able to win the next election, if they don't it's down to the Labour Leadership. It's important to recognise that.

Here - don't take my word for it: https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ot-good-enough

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

Corbyn is Far-Left, there's a lot of Left to go before you even get to the Centre, let alone the Right.

Labour should be able to win the next election, if they don't it's down to the Labour Leadership. It's important to recognise that.

Here - don't take my word for it: https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ot-good-enough

---

Even apart from where he is on the political spectrum, Corbyn is staggeringly incompetent. I've posted enough stories from people who've worked with him, and they were dismissed as coming from sources that were too close to him and thus biased and invalid. Leadership and the economy are usually the two key issues that decide an election. Every economic expert who has worked with Corbyn and McDonnell has quit, with stories of aimlessness and a leadership that has no interest in what they say (or indeed in the subject of Britain's economy). A number of shadow cabinet ministers have reported agreeing policy positions with Corbyn, then having him unilaterally contradict them on air shortly afterwards. And there's more if you care to go into it (I've already mentioned how Corbyn's team regards a 9am start as far too early). Oh, and have I mentioned his unwillingness to meet anyone who isn't in his inner circle?

Watch or read a seminar on leadership and management. Then check just how many of the boxes Corbyn not only fails to tick, but actively does the opposite of. Unable to get on top of his brief, unprofessional, little interest in areas outside his pet topics, inability to delegate, and more. And that's just assessing his effectiveness as leader, without looking at his past (which, from all reports, was the decisive factor in losing Copeland).

Sorry I am supposed to take the word off some angry little man who writes for the Guardian?!

They would claim black is white if they could somehow make out the Corbyn is to blame for it.

I also question why you have wrote that Labour could win the next election but if they don't it will be down to the leadership and then said don't take my word for it and linked an article...

Where it never actually says Labour can win the next election...

It points out that many of Corbyn's left wing polices are popular (something you demand he move away from)

It points out that his rival in the last leadership election would have probably done even worse

It even argues for replacing Corbyn with someone similarly left wing...

If Labour moved one iota to the right they might gain votes what I am referring to is a massive lurch back rightwards under a Blairite.

The Lords pull in the reins.

http://news.sky.com/story/government...lords-10786634

I wonder were there any cases the Lords balked such important decisions? I mean since their power became rather ceremonial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Even apart from where he is on the political spectrum, Corbyn is staggeringly incompetent. I've posted enough stories from people who've worked with him, and they were dismissed as coming from sources that were too close to him and thus biased and invalid.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

Sorry I am supposed to take the word off some angry little man who writes for the Guardian?!

---

Owen Jones was one of the original inner circle, having associated with McDonnell (and thus Corbyn) since the 1980s.

I wrote this last year about another Corbyn supporter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

I wonder if all Corbyn supporters are like this, in how they equate difference in opinion with treason, and dismiss dissent because dissent is by definition biased. AFAIK an echo chamber exists because different opinions are either shut out, or are dismissed because said difference defines it as discreditable, thus ensuring that only opinions one agrees with are deemed creditable, resulting in only said opinions being admitted to any "discussion" (which exist only for the purpose of reinforcing one's opinion).

---

Compare with this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

They would claim black is white if they could somehow make out the Corbyn is to blame for it.

I also question why you have wrote that Labour could win the next election but if they don't it will be down to the leadership and then said don't take my word for it and linked an article...

Where it never actually says Labour can win the next election...

It points out that many of Corbyn's left wing polices are popular (something you demand he move away from)

It points out that his rival in the last leadership election would have probably done even worse

It even argues for replacing Corbyn with someone similarly left wing...

If Labour moved one iota to the right they might gain votes what I am referring to is a massive lurch back rightwards under a Blairite.

---

There are so many flaws here I don't even know where to begin...

Okay so firstly. What PFH claimed regarding Owen Jones, that Labour could gain more votes by moving to the right isn't even claimed by Owen Jones (or at least not in the article linked)

Being close to Corbyn, or having been close to Corbyn previously does not qualify him as some expert in election predictions, especially when changing one of the variables (moving Labour to the right) quite frankly people who are actually experts in the field of predicting elections get plenty of things wrong without changing variables...

So why does this man's predictions (which he didn't actually make) have to be taken as gospel?!

Which is a slightly different way of asking why do I have to take his word for it.

Maybe lets try a hypothetical, instead I am a committed Blairite but I still don't believe Labour will win the next election by moving right (which I assume isn't a contradiction) and I won't take Owen Jones word on it....

Does that then make me a Corbyn supporter who see's dissent as treason?

The logic fails on so many levels.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

If Labour moved one iota to the right they might gain votes what I am referring to is a massive lurch back rightwards under a Blairite.

---

Nobody is suggesting that.

Clement Atlee was less Left-Wing than Corbyn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

Nobody is suggesting that.

Clement Atlee was more Left-Wing than Corbyn.

---

Attlee was competent. His portion of the cabinet was up to the task of running a Total War. Attlee also had a past outside politics, with a real job and everything. Corbyn is utterly incompetent, and he doesn't even know he is, as he's spent his entire adult life in politics. The last time Corbyn had a paying job outside politics was when he was a teenager (some fifty years ago).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

There are so many flaws here I don't even know where to begin...

Okay so firstly. What PFH claimed regarding Owen Jones, that Labour could gain more votes by moving to the right isn't even claimed by Owen Jones (or at least not in the article linked)

Being close to Corbyn, or having been close to Corbyn previously does not qualify him as some expert in election predictions, especially when changing one of the variables (moving Labour to the right) quite frankly people who are actually experts in the field of predicting elections get plenty of things wrong without changing variables...

So why does this man's predictions (which he didn't actually make) have to be taken as gospel?!

Which is a slightly different way of asking why do I have to take his word for it.

Maybe lets try a hypothetical, instead I am a committed Blairite but I still don't believe Labour will win the next election by moving right (which I assume isn't a contradiction) and I won't take Owen Jones word on it....

Does that then make me a Corbyn supporter who see's dissent as treason?

The logic fails on so many levels.....

---

Being close to Corbyn gives him a close up view of how well (or otherwise) Corbyn works (or doesn't). An awful lot of stories coming from people who've worked with Corbyn since he's become leader, who've since become disillusioned with his utter lack of basic competence, such as you'd expect from a local branch manager, never mind the Leader of the Opposition (who's being paid a six figure salary by the taxpayer for doing this job). I refer you to his former economic advisers, his former shadow cabinet ministers, his former campaign managers, etc, all of them with stories of how he isn't fit to run a shop, let alone the Official Opposition.

That still doesn't add up to his word being gospel regarding Labour electoral fortunes should they move to the right....

Knowing Corbyn or having worked with Corbyn isn't a skill set which makes you an expert at knowing how people will vote.

All indications are that Labour is less popular when headed by Corbyn than otherwise, or when headed by any previous leader in recent memory.

Face it - Labour has been out of power for almost seven years and the parties fortunes are still sinking, and every time the party moves further to the Left it gets worse. Yes, Corbyn has attracted a lot of political anoraks, at the expense of the general public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

That still doesn't add up to his word being gospel regarding Labour electoral fortunes should they move to the right....

Knowing Corbyn or having worked with Corbyn isn't a skill set which makes you an expert at knowing how people will vote.

---

You reckon people will vote for an incompetent as Prime Minister, with John McDonnell, Emily Thornberry and Diane Abbott as the other three top jobs in government?

You reckon people will vote for a Blairite?

In the present day that is, not back in the late 90's.

There's a reason they all got defeated at the leadership elections, because outside of a thin margin of people such as Pannonian the majority of people who cheerlead for the Blairites are usually Tory voters, its completely pointless making a huge surge to the right under a new Blair for the sake of pleasing a group of people who mostly aren't going to vote for you anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

You reckon people will vote for a Blairite?

In the present day that is, not back in the late 90's.

There's a reason they all got defeated at the leadership elections, because outside of a thin margin of people such as Pannonian the majority of people who cheerlead for the Blairites are usually Tory voters, its completely pointless making a huge surge to the right under a new Blair for the sake of pleasing a group of people who mostly aren't going to vote for you anyway.

---

I'd happily vote for a left winger if they were competent. I won't vote for someone who's even less competent at managerial work than I am, and I'm not exactly a high powered chief executive. Every manager I've worked under has been far, far better at their job than Corbyn has been at his. If Corbyn were my manager, I'd complain to his superior about his utter lack of competence at his job, making mine unnecessarily harder. If Corbyn were my manager, I'd complain to his superior about his lack of professionalism and work ethic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

All indications are that Labour is less popular when headed by Corbyn than otherwise, or when headed by any previous leader in recent memory.

Face it - Labour has been out of power for almost seven years and the parties fortunes are still sinking, and every time the party moves further to the Left it gets worse. Yes, Corbyn has attracted a lot of political anoraks, at the expense of the general public.

---

Labour are more trusted on the NHS than the Tories. Nothing unusual about that, as it's Labour's natural territory. Add the leaders into the mix, and May's Tories are more trusted than Corbyn's Labour on the NHS. Polled on whether they think Corbyn is doing a good job, Corbyn is net negative in every single demographic. Even among Labour voters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

You reckon people will vote for a Blairite?

In the present day that is, not back in the late 90's.

There's a reason they all got defeated at the leadership elections, because outside of a thin margin of people such as Pannonian the majority of people who cheerlead for the Blairites are usually Tory voters, its completely pointless making a huge surge to the right under a new Blair for the sake of pleasing a group of people who mostly aren't going to vote for you anyway.

---

"The Labour Party" aren't "The People". They're a small section of the people. Labour has picked up a lot of far-Left Socialists, even some Trots in Momentum. Yes, Party membership has gone up but it's still a tiny fraction of the electorate.

"If Corbyn were my manager, I'd complain to his superior about his utter lack of competence at his job, making mine unnecessarily harder. If Corbyn were my manager, I'd complain to his superior about his lack of professionalism and work ethic." And if you had my manager as his superior, she would tell you to shut-up, stop complaining and work as a team player. And if you are not happy with it, take it or leave (put-up or shut-up, I think it is)...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

"If Corbyn were my manager, I'd complain to his superior about his utter lack of competence at his job, making mine unnecessarily harder. If Corbyn were my manager, I'd complain to his superior about his lack of professionalism and work ethic." And if you had my manager as his superior, she would tell you to shut-up, stop complaining and work as a team player. And if you are not happy with it, take it or leave (put-up or shut-up, I think it is)...

---

Are we talking about Jeremy Corbyn here, the most rebellious MP still in Parliament, who has voted against the Labour party on 500+ occasions? The guy who challenged the then current Labour leader (and Prime Minister) less than a year after the British people had elected them to government with a huge Commons majority?

During my brief stint as a manager, I made sure I was first to the office, the last to leave, supported my subordinates to the best of my ability, and wherever there were gaps, I worked my arse off to cover them. It didn't mean I was any good, but my work ethic already meant I showed far more leadership quality than Corbyn has done. The Corbyn who doesn't start work until far later than your average worker, takes zero responsibility, and regularly undermines his subordinates. And this guy is being paid a six figure salary by the taxpayer for this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

During my brief stint as a manager, I made sure I was first to the office, the last to leave, supported my subordinates to the best of my ability, and wherever there were gaps, I worked my arse off to cover them.

---

Perhaps that is why it was so brief. You were too soft to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

Perhaps that is why it was so brief. You were too soft to them.

---

I believed in doing my job and implementing corporate policy to the best of my ability, however limited that may be. I did not pretend to do the job whilst doing less than the minimum expected (9am was far too early for him, when others were starting work at 6am), and jumping at the chance to implement the opposite of agreed on policy, as Corbyn has done. However bad I may have been, at least I knew my failings, and at least I was hard working. Corbyn fails at every aspect of leadership, and were this anything other than politics, he'd have been fired long ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

I believed in doing my job and implementing corporate policy to the best of my ability, however limited that may be. I did not pretend to do the job whilst doing less than the minimum expected (9am was far too early for him, when others were starting work at 6am), and jumping at the chance to implement the opposite of agreed on policy, as Corbyn has done. However bad I may have been, at least I knew my failings, and at least I was hard working. Corbyn fails at every aspect of leadership, and were this anything other than politics, he'd have been fired long ago.

---

However despicable Corbyn's work ethics/moral code might be, we are here discussing Corbyn as one of the leading societal figures, not you. Perhaps he has done something right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

However despicable Corbyn's work ethics/moral code might be, we are here discussing Corbyn as one of the leading societal figures, not you. Perhaps he has done something right?

---

He's in politics. In every other area of life, one's performance is judged by objective metrics. As I've demonstrated, Corbyn supporters define their metrics by the conclusion they wish to draw. They want their man to be in control of the Labour party. So that's what they've got.