|
|
Post by Dogburger on Jul 10, 2024 6:14:02 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jul 10, 2024 6:20:56 GMT
The fox is in the henhouse. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 10, 2024 7:26:25 GMT
I think everyone outside the deluded new labour bubble are aware that the close you get to the EU , the more rules you take on. Its rinse and repeat from these new labour clowns.. BRINO , and all the other guff that got proposed and rejected countless times post 2016. I was convinced starmer was going to win handsomely and take the uk back into the EU pre the election , now.......im not so sure he has the bottle on no mandate. Some of the hotheads like lammy are screaming about a reset , but starmer is very weak and cautious , especially with Farage sitting in parliament with him watching his every move. We just have to wait and see what starmer does. Im calling him out now.....shitebag. I see you are still spouting your ale house politics ^^ LOL ale house politics? no that's labour voters see 2 , who go down the pub with the brothers and sisters , talk revolution , and general cac. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 10, 2024 7:32:29 GMT
ive been posting on these political forums since the mid 2000s and Steves old forum since 2008 , where we were formerly members of as you know sheep. I well remember labours 2005 victory , and even in 2008 ,after the crash the forums and interwebby was full of them. On Facebook , twitter , social media and these old politics forums , labours supporters this time round are as rare as rocking horse shit. I find it really bizarre. Who the fuck voted them , and where are all the starmerites? I mean , I know they only got 2 / 10 of the electorate , a third of those that could be bothered , but where are they all? are they in hiding already , unable to take responsibility to what they have done? They are busy outnumbering the opposition, and laying down a better future for the UK and all who live here  you dont outnumber the opposition. 80 % of the electorate oppose labour , two thirds of the vote , and Farage won the election for starmer on the dodgy fptp system. He took four million tory votes , and 42 % of the voters voted right wing parties , while labour got what........33.7 %? In scotland , the independence voters stayed at home and allowed labour to fall into place. Practically the whole of scotland now , bar a few seats , are marginals on flimsy vote shares for labour. lowest mandate of any government in modern history on the second lowest turnout can only be described as a pyrrhic victory for no mandate starmer. Im thoroughly looking forward to him and his pathetic team being under the spotlight , and forced to make decisions for the first time , instead of carping nonsense from the sidelines. What happened with the council houses? first test........starmers falls flat on his face. How we laughed. I just pity the poor buggers who went out daft enough to believe starmers tripe on housing. Empty slogans , ill thought out policy , and weak governance. Time to batten down the hatches for another terrifying bout of new labour dramatics. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jul 10, 2024 9:18:56 GMT
Is it mutually beneficial to have a secret agreement that will pave the way for future rejoining? I would say it would certainly be viewed as such by both parties. Of course 'mutually beneficial' depends on viewpoint and what one believes as regards the EU and the UK, so it is not just moot it is dependant on the individual. Starmer tried to overturn the referendum and campaigned on that ticket. He now says he will not rejoin but we know how pledges and promises work in politics and the history of the EEC/EU is littered with statements misguiding the public and being duplicitous in intents. Would that be like the secret agreement the Tories had with corrupt bankers to impoverish the nation to protect bankers bonuses? The beauty of alleged "secret agreements" is that you never have to provide evidence they are real; because 99 times out of 100 they are not. All The Best Indeed however you have to collate the evidence albeit circumstantial. Starmer is an arch Remainer, tick. He has already stated that closer cooperation is both desirable and his intent, tick. I did not say a secret agreement was in place I was referring to whether or not that would be mutually beneficial from Starmers and the EUs perspective, tick. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 10, 2024 10:39:24 GMT
Would that be like the secret agreement the Tories had with corrupt bankers to impoverish the nation to protect bankers bonuses? The beauty of alleged "secret agreements" is that you never have to provide evidence they are real; because 99 times out of 100 they are not. All The Best Indeed however you have to collate the evidence albeit circumstantial. Starmer is an arch Remainer, tick. He has already stated that closer cooperation is both desirable and his intent, tick. I did not say a secret agreement was in place I was referring to whether or not that would be mutually beneficial from Starmers and the EUs perspective, tick. So you took, 2, 2, and 2, added them together and came up with not 6, and then made up a story that fitted your desired "facts" anyway. Starmer was an Remainer; but he has subsequently said that the EU Membership debate is over, and will not be revisited. Closer Cooperation in of of itself is neither a good thing, nor a bad thing. However, if it means reframing our relationship in a better manner that the incompetent Tories managed to get with their "Ready Baked Brexit Deal" then only an idiot would oppose it. A secret agreement is not beneficial to Starmer, not even remotely. For two reasons: 1) he has a big enough majority to do what he wants without secret deals hidden from the Electorate, and 2) Starmer needs, above all, the trust and support of the Electorate. The ONLY reason the Tories have lasted 14 years, despite showing that having already scrapped through the bottom of the barrel they can go lower, year after year, is because they had the goodwill of the electorate from "getting Brexit done". Starmer needs a similar level of goodwill to be able to deliver his program of reform, and despite me not agreeing with him on much, I don't see Starmer as possessing the level of ignorance and arrogance that Johnson displayed in unlawfully proroguing Parliament, nor that Truss displayed in her economically ignorant mini-budget. So, I just don't see Starmer making the monumental mistake of not only ignoring the electorate, but doing so behind their back that the existence of a secret deal would require. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 10, 2024 10:41:29 GMT
The fox is in the henhouse. Indeed; but I do point out that sane and rational people tend to think of that as a BAD thing. Do you? All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 10, 2024 11:02:38 GMT
Indeed however you have to collate the evidence albeit circumstantial. Starmer is an arch Remainer, tick. He has already stated that closer cooperation is both desirable and his intent, tick. I did not say a secret agreement was in place I was referring to whether or not that would be mutually beneficial from Starmers and the EUs perspective, tick. So you took, 2, 2, and 2, added them together and came up with not 6, and then made up a story that fitted your desired "facts" anyway. Starmer was an Remainer; but he has subsequently said that the EU Membership debate is over, and will not be revisited. Closer Cooperation in of of itself is neither a good thing, nor a bad thing. Well that depends on what you have to give away to achieve that closer cooperation. An example is Labours aim to have access to the EU Eurodac fingerprinting system that identifies migrants on the continent. The EU is willing for this to happen but only if the UK takes a share of the EU's asylum seekers.. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jul 10, 2024 11:10:02 GMT
Indeed however you have to collate the evidence albeit circumstantial. Starmer is an arch Remainer, tick. He has already stated that closer cooperation is both desirable and his intent, tick. I did not say a secret agreement was in place I was referring to whether or not that would be mutually beneficial from Starmers and the EUs perspective, tick. So you took, 2, 2, and 2, added them together and came up with not 6, and then made up a story that fitted your desired "facts" anyway. Starmer was an Remainer; but he has subsequently said that the EU Membership debate is over, and will not be revisited. Closer Cooperation in of of itself is neither a good thing, nor a bad thing. However, if it means reframing our relationship in a better manner that the incompetent Tories managed to get with their "Ready Baked Brexit Deal" then only an idiot would oppose it. A secret agreement is not beneficial to Starmer, not even remotely. For two reasons: 1) he has a big enough majority to do what he wants without secret deals hidden from the Electorate, and 2) Starmer needs, above all, the trust and support of the Electorate. The ONLY reason the Tories have lasted 14 years, despite showing that having already scrapped through the bottom of the barrel they can go lower, year after year, is because they had the goodwill of the electorate from "getting Brexit done". Starmer needs a similar level of goodwill to be able to deliver his program of reform, and despite me not agreeing with him on much, I don't see Starmer as possessing the level of ignorance and arrogance that Johnson displayed in unlawfully proroguing Parliament, nor that Truss displayed in her economically ignorant mini-budget. So, I just don't see Starmer making the monumental mistake of not only ignoring the electorate, but doing so behind their back that the existence of a secret deal would require. All The Best I was referring to what could be regarded as mutually beneficial which was see2's concept of what would transpire. 1) He has a big enough parliamentary majority but he is not fool enough to believe that that means he can do exactly as he pleases as you indicate in 2) and the rest of your post. I am not sure what else you are saying other than the Tories made a cock of it which I agree with. The point about a secret deal is that the end game is hidden but the process is open. A bit like Cameron's negotiations, the end game was to silence the anti EU part of his party for the time being. I believe Cameron and the EU were both aware that was the real issue and the negotiations were largely played out in public so that Cameron could claim a win. In the event the public were not fooled which was against expectations. The history of the EEC/EU is littered with secret deals and end games at odds with the process. It is the nature of the beast. These meetings at Davos where people can speak freely have been ongoing since the Bilderbergs were meeting as freely admitted by Denis Healey who said it gave people an opportunity to discuss things and plans off the record. We call these things secret deals. |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Jul 10, 2024 11:26:04 GMT
Why is Farage and his little group of 5 MPs attracting so much attention ?
What about the Greens with their 4 MPs, who actually have a few practical solutions to todays problems, or even the Lib Dems with their 72 MPs who preached a little bit of honesty with regards to funding our NHS.
Reform UK are at worst a thorn in the backside, mostly to the Tories, and at best are an irrelevance.
According to a poll out today, almost half of Tory party members want a merger with Reform UK, which means that half do not. The vile and nasty wing of the Tory Party, such people as Cruella Braverman and Mrs Patel will no doubt push for such a move.
One thing is certain, if the Tory Party lurches Right or does some kind of deal with Reform UK, they would lose at least as much support as they would gain, and be in the same position they currently find themselves in.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jul 10, 2024 11:50:34 GMT
Get real, fiddles. The Greens & Lib Dems, who both polled less than Reform.🤣
|
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jul 10, 2024 12:14:57 GMT
The fox is in the henhouse. Indeed; but I do point out that sane and rational people tend to think of that as a BAD thing. Do you? All The Best Who are you to say that the "sane and rational people tend to think that is a BAD thing"? |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jul 10, 2024 12:24:02 GMT
No it isn't. Either provide proof that Starmer is thinking about preparing the ground for rejoining the EU, or get real with your approach to debating matters. Is it mutually beneficial to have a secret agreement that will pave the way for future rejoining? I would say it would certainly be viewed as such by both parties. Of course 'mutually beneficial' depends on viewpoint and what one believes as regards the EU and the UK, so it is not just moot it is dependant on the individual. Starmer tried to overturn the referendum and campaigned on that ticket. He now says he will not rejoin but we know how pledges and promises work in politics and the history of the EEC/EU is littered with statements misguiding the public and being duplicitous in intents. Put your imagination away and try making some sensible points. Mutual in my post referred to being based upon mutual respect and mutual agreement on any changes made. Your distortion of my post is done for arguments sake. Starmer has moved on since his objections to Brexit, he now lives in the real world having accepted Brexit as a fact. --"In its determination to turn the page on Brexit, Labour has ruled out rejoining the EU single market or customs union. But it says it is still possible to remove trade barriers with the 27-nation bloc, to help companies, particularly smaller ones, which have struggled with higher costs and paperwork. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jul 10, 2024 12:28:57 GMT
I see you are still spouting your ale house politics ^^ LOL ale house politics? no that's labour voters see 2 , who go down the pub with the brothers and sisters , talk revolution , and general cac. There may be a tiny bit of old hat truth for Old Labour, you know the ones who tried to dominate before Blair removed 'Clause 4'. The more enlightened New Labour types just point out the Ale House banter of the lost, who have nothing better to do. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jul 10, 2024 12:31:15 GMT
Translation …we are moving back into the single market as slowly as it takes to make you believe we are not .
|
|
