blandy

That's true. But if you're in somewhere that recieves a lot of, say, seasonal or all year round , low paid EU workers, then unless the extra money the Nation recieves from those EU workers is directed back to that area, not, say London Cross-rail, then the benefit isn't seen, but the pressures on the NHS, school places, housing etc in that area are felt, with no action or money spent to improve life for the people (immigrants and locals) there. That's been a big failing.

What I was thinking, (as a lay-idiot) is that it gives Johnsona get out along the following lines - because Parliament passed this amendment to the bill telling him to ask for an extension, and that the amendment requires parliament to hold a debate and vote on May's agreement (as might be amended by MPs - for example to include staying in the CU, or whatever) "I, Boris Johnson bring forward this debate and vote to today, nth October so that parliament/I the PM can say to my EU colleagues "this is what we want, this passed a parliamentary vote, so it will go through if you give it to me, now" and then the EU will do some words about Political agreement will yes, indeeed cater for most of those desires, and Johnson's got his get out of jail card there. I'm a numpty, though, so I could be completely barking up the wrong tree.

I bet it does (unless there's an election). Post or pre the mid October EU summit - Johnson could come back, and say "this (the DWA, plus whatever froth tweaks are garnished around it) is what's available. Vote on it, to leave the EU by the 31st October, like we promised."

I have a more cynical take. Mine is that the "accidental" lack of tellers at the count of the vote on the Kinnock amendment (bring back May's deal for another looking at and vote) was utterly deliberate. Once that was in the Bill to go to the Lords, that was going to be extensively filibustered, the ned to filibuster it went away. They did a bit of filibustering so as not to arouse suspiscion, but that's all. By a mix of accident and cunning once the accident happened, Johnson has got his escape route now. All the election stuff, the stop/allow no deal stuff - he doesn't need it any more for the core aim of his plan - get a deal, of some sort, back to the Commons to be voted on, go through and then call an election. It's not foolproof of course, the commons might again reject the May deal, then he's be up poo creek again, but his bet, I reckon was always that if he got something for them to vote on, they'd cave. If no deal is blocked, then there's the risk that May's dela can also be blocked with less risk by the rest of the MPs and Johnson sent back to ask for a better deal. Which is sort of where we were when he took over. Snakes and ladders, with an awful lot of snakes in cabinet.

There’s all kinds of risks. I’m not for a minute saying I think he’s right, or whatever, just how I think he’s behaving. He’s an absolute word removed.

That's saved Johnson, utterly suits his aims and skewers Labour and the remainers. Clearly deliberate. Johnson has his parachute. I think he's always wanted to put a tweaked May deal to a vote and win it based on pressuring the EU with the no deal rubbish, and pressuring MPs with the election threat. He messed all that up, both of those by not having a clue about the EU and the proroguing which hacked off the MPs so badly. He needed get-out, and that's it. Handed to him by Kinnock's amendment and then some shenanigans and quick thinking by (presumably) his advisor(s). Utterly dodgy, in character and it'll most likely work in the long term, unless the Lords get rid of that amendment, which I wonder if they will - suspect not. Johnson will stay in Gov't, or if there's an election post a "deal" Brexit, then he'll win. Prior to a deal Brexit, he'd get a beasting.

He's just lashing out, isn't he?

He and his Danish wife lived and worked in Switzerland. When she wanted to progress in Danish politics, she said they had a family home in Denmark (as you would) on her website. Personally I think you're looking at the actions (in this instance) of the wife and pointing at him. The Kids thing - yeah exactly. Plenty to go at him for.

I'm unsure if that's sarcastic or genuine, and if sarcastic, aimed at me or Corbyn? Just in case, what I mean is that when you combine his genuine feelings about injustice and posho tories wrecking things, with a strategic approach that has been thought through for him, by people who are actually good at that stuff, rather than him having to think on his feet (which he's terrible at) or rely on the "advice" of his closest advisors (which keeps getting him into trouble), then he can come across pretty well, as he has done the past 2 days.

There's plenty to go at him for, but that's not one of them.

He's not picking his nose and eating it, he was removing, cleaning and re-installing his brain.

Not so sure about that. The Everton game crowd was announced as 41,922 and although the seats for us lot were "Sold Out", the full attendance including all exec seats, boxes, media etc. looked to have quite a few unsold empty seats that might take it just over 42K.

Two days in a row, he's done well. I think it helps when he's able to talk about things he's genuine about, when combined with having a strategy thought up for him not by his closer advisers, but by wiser ones from the wider party. And then that compared with Johnson's lying, evasion and bull makes Corbyn look a decent performer.

They don't need to relegate it to an hour long current affairs niche programme - it's on the News and in all the papers every day!

You might be right, but the way I look at it is the more "hard Brexit" the tories go, the lower the number of MPs they'll get, because while they will pick up votes from throbbers, they'll lose them from people who are OK with a soft Brexit, but who don't want the massive damage of no deal, or who vote tory normally, despite being pro EU. Or basically, "hard Brexiters" have always and will always be a small minority, so going for their votes will cost more than it gains.

I wonder a bit about this. The tories, it seems are going for a "UKIP" look. Anyone non-UKIPy will be purged. To me that doesn't bode well for their election prospects. Also, Labour is still, currently, "a Leave party", though a mightlily confused one, at that. They say that they want to do a negotiation with the EU, reach a new "softer" deal, then hold a referendum on that deal - Labour Brexit v Remain. Would they support their own deal, or would they support remain? Well they're not going to oppose their own negotiated deal...so they are still heading down an avenue that is "Leave". I know FPTP, but you can't but wonder that even if they abandon their ludicrous position and go with what their members and vast majority of their voter s want and change to "Remain", whether they will be trusted. There's a huge gap in the market for genuine remain parties. A fractured Tory party, a Labour party with a befuddled, non-credible policy on the key issue of the election being called - the outcome of the election could be both the tories and Labour getting a shoeing, and the more minor parties gaining a fair bit, resulting in a minority government, much smaller minority than now, Johnson gone, Corbyn gone, throbbers gone and a sort of vote by vote basis alignment of smaller parties and a new labour leader. Because if Labour's vote share and number of MPs goes down, he'd have to go. Counting on Corbyn is and always has been (IMO) utter folly. But each to their own, etc. we all see things differently.

They are, both nobbled, yes and self deservedly so. I don't see that he's hamstrung by the wishes of the folk he was wanting to bring back into the fold, at all,. I do accept that there are plenty of former or current and from his perspective hopefully futureLabour a voters in some areas who feel that the way the country has worked has failed them, and they blame the EU for that, and so voted Leave. BUT, this doesn't hamstring him. What it does, if he wants their votes is oblige him instead of going "they blame the EU, therefore I must keep them onside by also blaming the EU" and therefore trying to hold two opposing positions at one, to do something along the lines of what Caroline Lucas did - attempt to listen and to persuade these prospective voters, indeed all prospective voters of what his view of the reality is - that they are not lacking in employment or benefits or wages or housing or NHS or etc. because of the EU, but because of how successive Governements in the UK have ignored them, taken them for granted, failed to decentralise the UK and the way most, or too much money gets spent on London, and that it's not fruit pickers and plumbers from Poland that have held them back, but the actions of the last few Gov'ts in not supporting areas of influx with commensurate funding for housing, hospitals and the rest. Yes, that wasn't going to be a quick process, but he's been in his potting shed dithering for 3 years. Time wasted. "the rich man's media has made sure they've stayed confused" Do these angry people read the Telegraph, Mail, Sun and express a lot, and get their views from those papers? if they do, why were they allegedly former Labour voters at all?They are loathesome rags, though.

I can't think of any party leader who has lost 2 elections ever staying on. I can'teven think of one apart from Corbyn who's stayed on after losing a single election. The normal thing to do is resign if you lose an election. I understand reasons why Corbyn didn't, tbf.

Never change, Snowy. This place just wouldn't be the same if people could simply commend another poster for critical thinking, without someone else divining it as a "line of attack".

No, that wasn't quite my point. The first part yes. To my reading @HanoiVillan had taken the twitter thread, looked at it and determined that a number of the assumptions and arguments made in it were essentially "leaps of faith" that didn't have the strength to support the conclusions reached, and that perhaps the tweeter's own views on Brexit might have influenced, one way or another, the logical argument the tweeter was laying out. It's one of the things with social media, that many people (and I've done it myself) see a tweet, or series of them, and click "like" or "retweet" and move on to the next "outrage", their biases re-inforced, their positions fortified. But sometimes, as HV pointed out, the case behind the message being put out is weaker than strident tweets appear to imply. So my gentle compliment to HV was kind of "Yeah, you don't often see people doing what you did and examining the case in more detail with a sceptical eye, have a (VT) like" HV is not the only person to do it, but it's rarer than we/I'd like isn't it? Surely you've only got to look at all the responses to his tweet to see that so many responders to it had not used the same level of critical thinking as HV, so many had seemingly missed, or not taken into account in their own responses that the tweeter had dismissed the potential other avenues of explanation with a 'I don't think much of that" and "not convinced of that" and didn't have as strong an argument as they were then extrapolating to demand this that and the other "be done about it". The second part, you say my point was " whereas everyone else was accepting the content of the thread because it was 'written by someone with a particular position on Brexit'. - No, absolutely not. I think I said, without going back to check, HV's approach was "rare" [on Brexit]. To me I think there's almost no reasoning left in most of the coverage we get, online, TV, radio, newspapers... and of course by the actual proponents of Brexit (now at whatever cost).

Yes, plenty in his tweets and retweets. This is veering off topic somewhat, though. Have a look for yourself, you can answer your own question.

No . My mistake. Looks like two different anti-Brexit Marc Owen Joneses.

From his use of the hashtag #StoptheCoup in the quoted tweet and then from his blog "life is tinged with anger and depression at the Brexit vote .... I had hoped that we would remain."

Knee burn black toe

Have a massive like for using your own (excellent) brain and not just accepting what's written by someone with a particular position on Brexit. Critical thinking is largely absent from all the to-ing and fro-ing on the whole thing.