Brooks wrote:

"Worried about crime and national security" is also kind of a xenophobic dogwhistle. I'm not sure I especially blame Labour for not engaging with this!

He could have given it a ‘tough on the causes of crime’ spin. Getting people off drugs, replacing youth services to give them something to do, invest in poor communities where most crimes happen. I dunno. That part is saying ‘there’s a weakness here, let’s make up a policy and tailor you message to address it.’ Which is a pretty uninspiring, machine politics approach that is incredibly transparent when most politicians try and pull it off.

Best approach is to not think we (the left) can solve it over a weekend.
At the very least the new Queen's Speach should be heard first.

Slow down. Listen, observe, communicate.

He did indeed.
They sure did a number on him and I think he lost some of that in this election.

The man was second guessing if he was allowed to say if he would watch the Queen on xmas day or not for God sake.

I think he would now agree with what I said though.

I didn’t see Corbyn in a single high-viz jacket during the whole election. The man’s clueless.

I might actually sign up as a member this time. This leadership election is much more interesting to me than the Youthquake Corbyn appointment when I didnt bother.

Just to dwell on this for a bit, look at this tweet from Toby Young:

https://mobile.twitter.com/toadmeister/status/1205863316918349824

Never mind that it was a single still, other photos prove that, and even though the guy ran as a stalking horse, he himself said Corbyn was kind to him.


https://twitter.com/ZamWaz/status/1205953777288798208?s=20

This is the world we live in, with nasty, angry, pleb hating pieces of work like Toby Young get to portray Corbyn as a hate filled...fascist. and get applauded.

I would like to draw breath long enough, just a smidgen of a second long enough, to see justice done in this country.

I fully agree. Fuck Palestinians anyhow, they're fucked irregardless. Fuck the left / corbynites becoming actual antisemites as a response to the last two years' smears (which I very much fear, just look at the tropes we've had in this forum - at least 2 or 3 instances that I remember)

But still, it smarts that this guy should have to eat all this shit. He's just a principled, slightly intellectually limited egalitarian. Poor fuck.

Yup.
Proper pulled through the grinder.

So if we have no deal at the end of the year we will have no deal at all.

My suspicion is that it should be okay but if you can you should probably start stocking up on baked beans etc.

I really don't understand this new approach - we're back to no deal being on the table and more uncertain futures?

Fuck sake, I really thought the one good thing about a majority government was the end of this bullshit. Sterling has dropped back down again. The UK could have another year where you lose investment. It's crazy. The Tories don't seem to know the difference between public posturing and actually deal negotiation.

Is it not that the wa is more less sorted but the deal being talked about is all the other stuff (which, sure, that won't take more than a year to do properly)? Do we not have that at least.?

Maybe Boris will kick off the WA, tell the public we have 'got brexit done'...then the actual negotiation with the EU is "can we go quietly back to how it was, but with a special exclusion for Brits from the new tax dodger rules?"

mistercrayon wrote:

So if we have no deal at the end of the year we will have no deal at all. My suspicion is that it should be okay but if you can you should probably start stocking up on baked beans etc.

Yeah I would love to get some insight into your suspicion that it should be okay, that's one for the ages there.

First and foremost: the leaving date has been "enshrined" in law several times already, and un-enshrined just as quickly as the dates approached. This is merely a Bohnson-esque statement of intent, designed to reassure all the keen brexiteers that this time it's going to happen for real, and to get ahead of their inevitable realisation that 31st Jan is just the start of the withdrawal process.

Bohnson faces a three-way Hobbesian choice:

1) Extend transition so that an actual sensible deal, across all areas, can be agreed with EU27.
Pros: economy survives, friendly relationship with most important trading partner, shows other potential trading partners that we're not lunatics and can be trusted, only actually sensible Brexit route
Cons: you've been saying for ever that the transition cannot be extended beyond 2020, you have trust issues already, and the ex-Labour who voted for you may not be so keen next time once you start trying to explain the complexities of a trade deal with them. Most sensible commentators agree that this process could take more than an entire parliament to resolve...How will that go down in the new Tory Heartlands?

2) Get deal done in one year.
Pros: Fulfils your promise
Cons: Only possible way to achieve this is a complete surrender on EU terms: fisheries access, almost total regulatory alignment, ECHR questions, on and on, each one worse for making people believe we've actually left the EU and are not mere vassals.

3) Don't get deal done, don't extend transition.
Pros: Fulfils promise, also what Cummins wants, so he'll maybe fuck off and start making real money in defence procurement and leave you alone at 5am
Cons: most experts agree that this would be at least initially devastating to the UK economy, would undoubtedly hasten the UK's break up meaning you, the successor to Churchill, led a government making the UK history (not in the good story way), could lead to the collapse of your government I mean really fuck knows

hunk wrote:

The Tories are taking the hard Brexit stance because they want to be out of the EU before the end of next year. Trump only has 1 year left and that's kind of the deadline they have for negotiating a favourable deal with the US. As Trump's re-election is uncertain that's the timetable the Tories are going for. For now at least.

Trump is getting re-elected. I'm not basing that on him winning over voters more on the dems losing them.

Trump doesn't need a majority vote, aye.
He just needs to hold on to the Midwest 'deplorables' and the EC guarantees another term. This is the biggest flaw in the US system by far and the Dems should not underestimate it.

Can the republicans do a repeat of 2016? In the US they control print (tabloids), TV (fox!) and online (social media). There's a very strong chance they can repeat the result of 2016. Groundhog Day.....