Fun and games with ballot papers

[Serial_Apologist]

I'm glad that we spent that hour watching Series 5 Episode 8 of 'Upstairs Downstairs', in which the politics were decidedly more adult.
Our local Labour candidate has distributed a promise-filled leaflet well in advance of the announcement of his party's manifesto, so he either knows more than I suspect he does or may have to arrange a hasty issue of an amended version - a rather good (or do I mean bad?) example of the cack-handed way in which this campaign is generally being fought. I understand that there was some laughter and jeering during last night's debate - let's hope the electorate's mood doesn't end up being expressed more forcefully than that.

Sometimes justified, sometimes not. Examples of jeering people standing up for their principles has a long pedigree.

[Dave2002]

Did Corbyn say how he would vote in a second referendum ?
I heard that he fudged it (again)

I don't think he fudged it - but he has been misrepresented by the press. I'm not even a great fan of JC, but to read the papers you'd get a very biased view.

Instead of "Boris bumbles, fluffs and dissembles" as headlines, we get things like "Corbyn dodges Brexit questions 9 times ...."

Boris had a few good answers, but mostly it was rubbish, and there were probably a fair number of "mistruths" and unwarranted promises. Corbyn was fairly boring, but not obviously lying.

Somewhat surprisingly Jo Swinson seemed really committed and enthusiastic, and Nigel Farage was really rather lucid.

I don't believe that much of the press is unbiased - in fact almost all of it is totally incorrect, and the reporting is a disgrace - but perhaps the great British public believe all the rubbish which they are fed with and "told" to believe.

[gradus]

Mr C also said that a second Scexit vote wouldn't come in the early years of a Labour govt - presumably a little later then?

[Dave2002]

Mr C also said that a second Scexit vote wouldn't come in the early years of a Labour govt - presumably a little later then?

That's for you to interpret. If I say I'm not going to drive to the shops tomorrow, the corollary is not that I'm going to drive to the shops the day after tomorrow, or indeed ever.

[teamsaint]

Some media talk that Corbyn did well ( 60/40).

His position on Brexit is perfectly logical, and many remainers see the logic in taking an actual deal, ( tory or labour) back to the people. The need to be “ right “ worries me.

[jayne lee wilson]

Though I watch many such programmes, I was shocked at how badly Etchingham handled this one. When Johnson kept avoiding the question, throwing the Brexit choices back at Corbyn, she didn't always insist on Johnson's answer - most damaging re Lying/Keeping Promises, when she asked him about October 31 etc, but didn't press for answer following more of those evasions....NUMBER ONE RULE for any political interview: never allow the politician to avoid the answer. Just compare Emily Maitlis on Newsnight, excellent night after night...

Since Johnson now swears, with yet more hubris, on 31/1/20, this was to say the least a point worth pressing...
Corbyn's Brexit policy is of course a sound one, though he might do well to find a way of stating his own preference, whilst keeping that promise to offer "the people" the new choice via referendum II....

But it remains shocking just how much this appalling PM is allowed to get away with, as Peter Oborne makes admirably clear...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/18/boris-johnson-lying-media

[MrGongGong]

His position on Brexit is perfectly logical,.

Yeah right

(probably good for someone with shares in Sudocrem)

[muzzer]

The suggestion that “Brexit” can be “done” or that a “deal” means anything other than a decade of uncompetitive uncertainty and economic hardship for all but the mega rich is pure folly. And that’s the best that either side can promise. The fact that we are where we are does not make where we are acceptable. The only constant throughout this entire process has been the ignorance on all sides of the nature and complexity of the UK’s connection to the EU, and the apparent wish of Britain to jump off a cliff. A wish wholly of its own making and from which it has been actively discouraged by the EU, quite apart from the lessons of history. I remain yours, Disgusted of North London.

[LMcD]

The suggestion that “Brexit” can be “done” or that a “deal” means anything other than a decade of uncompetitive uncertainty and economic hardship for all but the mega rich is pure folly. And that’s the best that either side can promise. The fact that we are where we are does not make where we are acceptable. The only constant throughout this entire process has been the ignorance on all sides of the nature and complexity of the UK’s connection to the EU, and the apparent wish of Britain to jump off a cliff. A wish wholly of its own making and from which it has been actively discouraged by the EU, quite apart from the lessons of history. I remain yours, Disgusted of North London.

(Read 'Suffolk' for 'North London')

[teamsaint]

Yeah right

(probably good for someone with shares in Sudocrem)

Great post.

[Joseph K]

The suggestion that “Brexit” can be “done” or that a “deal” means anything other than a decade of uncompetitive uncertainty and economic hardship for all but the mega rich is pure folly. And that’s the best that either side can promise. The fact that we are where we are does not make where we are acceptable. The only constant throughout this entire process has been the ignorance on all sides of the nature and complexity of the UK’s connection to the EU, and the apparent wish of Britain to jump off a cliff. A wish wholly of its own making and from which it has been actively discouraged by the EU, quite apart from the lessons of history. I remain yours, Disgusted of North London.

Sounds very much like the austerity imposed upon us by the Tories/Lib Dems, or by the EU on Greece...

[teamsaint]

Sounds very much like the austerity imposed upon us by the Tories/Lib Dems, or by the EU on Greece...

Nobody much wants to discuss the economic effects of EU policy, especially tarriffs , on the developing world, EU legislation that works against smaller businesses, the complexities and issues around CAP, effects of EU grants on small land owners in Africa, etc etc. All just stuff that gets bundled into the box marked “ regrettable imperfections”, I’m afraid.

[gradus]

That's for you to interpret. If I say I'm not going to drive to the shops tomorrow, the corollary is not that I'm going to drive to the shops the day after tomorrow, or indeed ever.

Whatever it meant, it was not a refusal of the idea of a second Scottish referendum, so cannot support the conclusion that he will not at some point agree to it, assuming of course he returns to office.

[Serial_Apologist]

Though I watch many such programmes, I was shocked at how badly Etchingham handled this one. When Johnson kept avoiding the question, throwing the Brexit choices back at Corbyn, she didn't always insist on Johnson's answer - most damaging re Lying/Keeping Promises, when she asked him about October 31 etc, but didn't press for answer following more of those evasions....NUMBER ONE RULE for any political interview: never allow the politician to avoid the answer. Just compare Emily Maitlis on Newsnight, excellent night after night...

Since Johnson now swears, with yet more hubris, on 31/1/20, this was to say the least a point worth pressing...
Corbyn's Brexit policy is of course a sound one, though he might do well to find a way of stating his own preference, whilst keeping that promise to offer "the people" the new choice via referendum II....

But it remains shocking just how much this appalling PM is allowed to get away with, as Peter Oborne makes admirably clear...
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...on-lying-media

I agree with everything there, apart from that Corbyn should state his preference for Remain or Brexit. It may seem impossible to be more nuanaced than that on so apparently binary a question, but like for many on the Left, staying in or getting out is a choice between two almost equally non-acceptable models of capitalism: rule by a globalised economy of megalopic business conglomerates, or a return to a shrunken inter-nation state form of rivalry of the sort that led to two world wars, and would now destroy civilisation completely. So he has to wangle his way around Labour's erstwhile voters who have become Little Englanders, and the truth that given that his policy agenda would conflict with EU rules about "unfair competition" would mean political self-emasculation. He can go for a different, softer deal than May's or Johnson's; if this is rejected by the EU negotiators he can turn to the electorate and in all honesty say "Well, there you have it". Remaining at least offers two advantages: that environmental, consumer and workers' rights would not be sacrificed in the "national interest"; and the possibility through building a united left front across sister parties in Europe, at some stage, of EU reform in the direction of more genuine democracy, less control by the Commission determing political issues to be effected a priori, and political reliance on Neo-liberal economics, and whatever that word is which describes member states being allowed to determine their own policies unless all democratically agree to the contrary over some particular issue: is it "subordinacy"?

[Serial_Apologist]

Nobody much wants to discuss the economic effects of EU policy, especially tarriffs , on the developing world, EU legislation that works against smaller businesses, the complexities and issues around CAP, effects of EU grants on small land owners in Africa, etc etc. All just stuff that gets bundled into the box marked “ regrettable imperfections”, I’m afraid.

All that too - well said, TS.